Four Seasons or the Ritz
Mar 10th, 2004, 02:14 AM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Four Seasons or the Ritz
I'm be spending a few days in boston and can stay at either the Four Seasons or either of the Ritz-Carlton hotels. Any guidance on which I should select? All seem to have some type of gym, although the R-C at Boston Common has access to a much larger gym. I'd be interested in nice casual resturants in the area. Also, does anyone know how much they charge for internet access in their rooms?
thanks.
thanks.
Mar 10th, 2004, 07:53 AM
#2
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 25,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
holidayqqq-
Even though all 3 hotels are close to each other, I prefer Four Seasons, followed by Ritz-Carlton on Arlington Street. Those 2 are the more "historic" hotels and the view is much nicer (facing Public Garden) when compared to the brand new Ritz @ Boston Common (facing Boston Common).
Having said that, I have never been inside any of the rooms.
There are tons of restaurants in that area, do you have a particular "cuisine" preference?
Also, if you don't get any more responses, try to post a brand new message with a title "Boston - Four Seasons or the Ritz" so that the Boston locals on this board will be more likely to read it.
Even though all 3 hotels are close to each other, I prefer Four Seasons, followed by Ritz-Carlton on Arlington Street. Those 2 are the more "historic" hotels and the view is much nicer (facing Public Garden) when compared to the brand new Ritz @ Boston Common (facing Boston Common).
Having said that, I have never been inside any of the rooms.
There are tons of restaurants in that area, do you have a particular "cuisine" preference?
Also, if you don't get any more responses, try to post a brand new message with a title "Boston - Four Seasons or the Ritz" so that the Boston locals on this board will be more likely to read it.
Mar 10th, 2004, 08:02 AM
#3
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 25,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
holidayqqq-
Also meant to say:
The immediate areas surrounding Four Seasons & R-C on Arlington St are more upscale than the R-C @ Boston Common.
However, if you plan on using the T a lot as transportation, R-C @ Boston Common will be better as it is within walking distance to T lines Red, Green & Orange.
Also meant to say:
The immediate areas surrounding Four Seasons & R-C on Arlington St are more upscale than the R-C @ Boston Common.
However, if you plan on using the T a lot as transportation, R-C @ Boston Common will be better as it is within walking distance to T lines Red, Green & Orange.
Mar 10th, 2004, 08:22 AM
#4
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't stayed at the Ritz Boston since its recent closure and renovation (the rooms were really in need as this is a very old hotel--the original Ritz Carlton in the chain). Rooms there are on the small side (I doubt they changed room dimensions) but location is tops. Very nice public areas. Lots of character and it fits Boston's history.
The Four Seasons is very close to the RC (great location also) but is much newer. Similar room design and decor as the majority of Four Seasons city hotels. Predictable. Service is unbeatable. Very polished. A little more formal feeling than some people like. Only downside I can think of is that many of the rooms face the backside of the hotel across ugly rooftops, while the Boston Common-facing rooms have great views.
The RC Boston Common is not even 2 years old. I haven't been inside it. Location appears to be its main downside and I've heard from others that it is a little generic feeling. Read some info in the Boston paper about financial issues with the hotel last year, but that wouldn't affect your stay now. I will say I've been to the Sports Club/LA fitness centers in other cities (the RC BC hotel is connected to the fitness center) and they're a really nice perk if you like burning off a few calories after enjoying a great meal.
Internet access at most RC's is $9.95/day.
The Four Seasons is very close to the RC (great location also) but is much newer. Similar room design and decor as the majority of Four Seasons city hotels. Predictable. Service is unbeatable. Very polished. A little more formal feeling than some people like. Only downside I can think of is that many of the rooms face the backside of the hotel across ugly rooftops, while the Boston Common-facing rooms have great views.
The RC Boston Common is not even 2 years old. I haven't been inside it. Location appears to be its main downside and I've heard from others that it is a little generic feeling. Read some info in the Boston paper about financial issues with the hotel last year, but that wouldn't affect your stay now. I will say I've been to the Sports Club/LA fitness centers in other cities (the RC BC hotel is connected to the fitness center) and they're a really nice perk if you like burning off a few calories after enjoying a great meal.
Internet access at most RC's is $9.95/day.
Mar 22nd, 2004, 11:09 AM
#5
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Ritz on Arlington: The location, the Dining Room, the Bar, and the Lounge for Afternoon Tea are all good enough on a stand-alone basis to be considered the best in Boston. Luckily, they are all in 1 hotel. The rooms are smallish, but are better appointed than the Four Seasons. The renovation a couple of years ago made an incredible difference.
2. Four Seasons: the most overpriced hotel in Boston, but it is still very good. The service is the stand-out here but the atmosphere is dull (except for the obscenely ugly decor in the lobby). Also...beware of renovations.
3. RC Boston Common could easily leap-frog the Four Seasons if you like modern decor instead of classical. Also, if health clubs matter...there is none better in all of Boston. The service here has been better than the other 2 at times, though I have heard different from my friends from time to time.
2. Four Seasons: the most overpriced hotel in Boston, but it is still very good. The service is the stand-out here but the atmosphere is dull (except for the obscenely ugly decor in the lobby). Also...beware of renovations.
3. RC Boston Common could easily leap-frog the Four Seasons if you like modern decor instead of classical. Also, if health clubs matter...there is none better in all of Boston. The service here has been better than the other 2 at times, though I have heard different from my friends from time to time.
Mar 23rd, 2004, 01:55 AM
#6
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd choose The Four Seasons, service is impeccable, both restaurants are superb, view is amazing.
Both new and old RC have some wrinkles to still work out. Old Ritz has similar spectacular views but it's old and I felt the service was efficient but cranky? or tired. New RC is slick and nice but somewhat of an outpost (closer to Downtown crossing and Chinatown) even though it's right on the other corner of the Common. If money's no object, I'd stay at the Four Seasons.
Both new and old RC have some wrinkles to still work out. Old Ritz has similar spectacular views but it's old and I felt the service was efficient but cranky? or tired. New RC is slick and nice but somewhat of an outpost (closer to Downtown crossing and Chinatown) even though it's right on the other corner of the Common. If money's no object, I'd stay at the Four Seasons.
