Where: Princes Wharf, 147 Quay Street, ph (09) 978 2020
Our meal: $433 for four entrees, four main courses, three desserts and one long black and five glasses of wine.
The wine: Wide-ranging list which includes the world's
favourites: French Champagne, Aussie shiraz and a Cloudy Bay sauvignon blanc for $16 a glass.
Verdict: Although it offers one of the best harbour views in the city, there's a sense of austerity about everything - from the decor to the food.
Out of 10
Food: 6
Service: 7
Value: 6
Ambience: 7
I always get a slight frisson of excitement when heading off for a meal at the Hilton. Smart hotels set my blood running and White, which lies at the very prow of the super-liner-shaped hotel on Princes Wharf, has one of the best views in Auckland.
So why was the place almost empty? By 7.30 on this Thursday evening there were just a few probable hotel guests, many of them with children in tow, scattered around White's large and rather sterile dining room. Maybe the economic downturn? Maybe not.
Meanwhile, we studied the menu, watched the flotilla of yachts fluttering like butterflies on the harbour, congratulated ourselves on getting the best table in the house and thought about a celebratory drink.
The wine list at White is an unusual mixture, containing few of my favourites, so I was compelled to ask our highly efficient waiter to recommend. She came up with two choices - a Te Whare gewurtztraminer and a Craggy Range riesling.
When both were too tart for my delicate tastebuds she informed me the riesling was the sweetest wine they had. So to the food. We tried four entrees, of which my Bluff oysters, tempura-style ($27) were voted best.
They arrived, just the six and not especially big, nor in an especially light batter, but divine. I know, cooking Bluff oysters is a sacrilege, but at $4.50 each (Clevedon/Pacific Oysters were $3.50) I wanted something I couldn't just spoon out of a pottle at home. And they were delicious, especially accompanied by warmed rice vinegar. The other three entrees were $22 each.
Suzanne's pepper-cured kingfish was also a winner, as was the quail, which was mostly boned and cooked tasty and tender. Brian's smoked duck salad was less successful. There was no salad to speak of, just the sliced duck fanned into a wheel and dribbled with a forgettable dressing.
Much worse, the delicacy of the duck flesh was overpowered by the taste of its own fat. And even though it was now 8.30pm, the restaurant was still almost empty. Over the entire evening we counted just eight tables occupied. Our main meals (all $39) were, if anything, more disappointing.
The loin of lamb was plain to the point of boring, and although I asked for medium rare while Suzanne wanted medium, there was no discernable difference between the two. The lamb arrived, swathed in a rather good gravy, sliced into three thick pieces and accompanied by a crisp kumara nest and braised eggplant. But this was nothing compared with Brian's seafood selection, which had been touted as the very best of the day specially selected and cooked by the chef.
It arrived looking the part on a wave of foam - probably the first time I've seen the point of foam at all, but it was all downhill after that. The white fish was dry and under-flavoured, the clams okay but tiny, everything in between was unmemorable - including the horseradish foam, which he pronounced tasteless. He was still hungry when he finished.
Much better was Eugene's Great Barrier Island grilled tuna, which our waiter had said was a good choice. She got that one right - it arrived still translucent it was so rare and fresh, with a delicious, seared top.
Our desserts were equally uneven. The icecream and sorbet assortment was okay but the sago pudding with caramelised pear was truly awful. Far from caramelised, the pear was raw, topped with warm caramel sauce and sprinkled with chopped nuts, while the sago pudding was cold, rubbery and tasteless.
We all agree it was the worst dessert served in a restaurant. Ever. Only the chocolate pudding, which came warm, cakey on the outside, oozing chocolate within and served with a swirl of fresh berries and gelato was a winner.
Overall, our meal provided the answer to our initial question. Why is the best-situated restaurant in town empty on a gorgeous autumn night? Because the food is, at best, workmanlike. There is little of the flair, passion or largesse you can expect when you're paying more than $100 a head.
Service is efficient but unhelpful. Looking back, our waiter obviously knew that the tuna was better than the chef's special and that the sago pudding was plain horrid.
I guess she couldn't have warned us, but surely horrid dishes are not an option in a 5-star hotel?
