I failed chemistry and injured my meniscus.

"When I'm going to the theater, I don't want to have to schlep from a different area for dining to another area for theater."

I totally agree.

When I'm going to the theater, I don't want to have to schlep from a different area for dining to another area for theater."

Unless you are staying in the Theater District, you have to come from some place else.

Yes, we do come from someplace else, but we're not eating in that someplace else area. So, for us to eat in a different area would mean two someplace elses!
Further, when we're going out for dinner and theater (or lunch and theater), it's just not same "night out" (or "day out") if we have to go through the bother of transporting ourselves between the two activities.

Also keep in mind that while locals may be familiar with the subways and buses and their schedules, visitors may not be. To recommend that a tourist leave a hotel in "somewhere else" in a different section of town, travel to another "somewhere else" such as the East Village for a "meal elsewhere that is incrementally not as good but expontentially cheaper", and then travel to the theatre district is adding 1) travel time and expense and 2) stress about making it back to the theatre before curtain call.

I've eaten pre-theatre meals near Herald Square and in the UWS and run into complications that made me worry about making the show in time. It's far less stressful - and far more enjoyable FOR SOME - to eat dinner within a few blocks. I've had to get up and leave the table (when dining with two Fodorites) in order to make my show - but I was only a couple of blocks away. All of the above can be stressful. Some opt to leave travel time (using subways or cabs) out of the equation - and there's nothing wrong with that. Even IF that's not the option someone else, tourist or local, may take.

starrs, I totally agree with what you say. I thought about adding similar comments, but I got lazy.....So, I'm glad you brought up the "rush-worry-stressful" factor. And,who needs it when you're for a night (or day) on the town?

There are plenty of restaurants in the West Village, SOHO, Tribeca, Chelsea, and the Meat Packing District where many of CIAONY selections are listed above all of which are on the westside and just a couple of subway stops to the Theater District, a straight shot cab ride, bus ride, or even a walk away if you are in Chelsea.

" And,who needs it when you're for a night (or day) on the town?"

Not me! :-)

Nothing is worse than the indigestion after your meal when there's a snafu and you are worried that you are going to miss a show that you spent $$$ for. And for me, and I'm only speaking for myself, the show is more important than the meal before.

As someone pointed out upthread, there's a time for the fine dining experience and there's a time for a pre-theatre meal. Given that there ARE some good choices within a few blocks of Broadway shows, it's a great option that many of us choose.

Aduchamp1, we'll never agree on this point for one very obvious reason : starrs and I feel that it's definitely possible to have a good meal in the theater district and you don't!

By the way there is no such thing as a guaranteed "short cab ride" from Soho or West Village to most Broadway theatres at 7:00 or 7:30 at night. Many people have sat in cabs in stopped traffic and missed shows for that very reason, or finally hopped out of the cab and run the last 10 blocks or so to try to get to the theatre when the taxis can't get anywhere. Starrs is absolutely right. For many of us the $200 or so we spent on a couple tickets for a show is a LOT more important than traveling to a distant spot and getting indigestion worrying about getting there in rush hour traffic then trying to get back in the gridlock at Broadway curtain time. And when there really are a lot of good options that are a block or two walk from the theatre -- with no indigestion -- well, the choice is obvious -- to most of us who actually do that.

Even in my own small city, when I go to the theatre I always prefer eating near the theatre rather than dining in another area and then worrying about traffic, parking, or other complications getting to the curtain on time.

Auduchamp, if you lived in the Upper West Side and you were going to some event on the upper East side, how likely would you be to select a restaurant in Soho before that event? Yet that's what you're suggesting when someone is staying at the Marquis and seeing a show two blocks away -- it is total insanity to go to Soho just to eat and then come back to the same place you started to see the show -- unless there is some earthshattering reason to go to a specific restaurant.

There are fine places on the UES and the UWS so one need not go to Soho just to eat.

Neo recommended DB Moderne, for which I have read good things and have enjoyed his Boulud Cafe. But for the uninitiated, the basic burger and fries is $32 as opposed to his burger with truffles for either $75 or $150.

So while everyone's stomach is contorted by the tribualtions of transportation, I do not want to spend other people's money or give them recommendations without caveats or watch their stomach turn when the check comes.

BTW, I see there are tens of restuarants on Ninth Ave. that are never recommended besides the Napkin Burger. Has anyone tried any of these estanlishments?

Please read my first paragraph from 10:09 this morning.

This is what actually happened tonight: Our plan was to take the subway downtown to Astor Place, walk a few blocks to the restaurant and then walk a block to the theater. The train was so crowded (uptown) that we couldn't get on (and believe me, I have no problem wedging myself like a sardine in a can). After a wait for the next train, we learned it was not making local stops south of Grand Central. We decided to get off at Union Square and cab it. Unfortunately the train didn't move between stations for 15 minutes! When we finally got to US, it was raining hard, very windy and of course, no cabs. We were late; we walked to Third and luckily got a cab. Our friends were waiting and all worked out okay. Moral of the story: I will always dine NEAR a theatre!

"BTW, I see there are tens of restuarants on Ninth Ave. that are never recommended besides the Napkin Burger. Has anyone tried any of these estanlishments?"

Short memory. I've recommended one in the last week - and you questioned me about it.

"There are fine places on the UES and the UWS so one need not go to Soho just to eat." Precisely -- so it's time to realize that the same thing applies to midtown. There ARE fine places to eat there as well so one doesn't need to go to Soho to eat when one is in midtown, and is going to see a show in midtown.

The "basic" burger at dbModerne is NOT a basic burger, by any stretch of imagination. Stuffed with fois gras and shredded short ribs, it's perhaps the most exotic and wonderful burger I've ever eaten -- spectacular -- although it really shouldn't even be called a burger.

Ninth Avenue? Film Center Cafe, Marseille, Room Service (Thai), Zen Palate, Hell's Kitchen, Chimichurri Grill, Five Napkin Burger, Island Burgers (now that's a great BASIC burger but you can't get french fries), Eatery, Rice and Beans, Uncle Nick's -- these are all places I'd happily eat at any time and can afford to eat at most any time.

CPG -- welcome to the club. I've been there and done that. That's exactly the sort of thing we were talking about!

""There are fine places on the UES and the UWS so one need not go to Soho just to eat." Precisely -- so it's time to realize that the same thing applies to midtown. There ARE fine places to eat there as well so one doesn't need to go to Soho to eat when one is in midtown, and is going to see a show in midtown."
Amen.

"That's exactly the sort of thing we were talking about!"
Amen and amen.

It's <i>almost </i> a consensus on this thread. So far, anyway ;)

So, is dining in the theater district a necessary evil then, but with some peaks among many valleys?

I really should go up there some times and see if anything floats my boat.

I just can't come up with a good answer to the question: What incentive does the owner of a restaurant in that area have to consistently provide a New-York-City-quality meal to such a consistently transient, and somewhat captive, clientele?

No, ciaony, what some of us are trying to say is that dining in the theater district does not have to be a necessary evil. You just have to choose wisely! We've been doing just that for years!

"I just can't come up with a good answer to the question: What incentive does the owner of a restaurant in that area have to consistently provide a New-York-City-quality meal to such a consistently transient, and somewhat captive, clientele?"

I have no idea where that concept is coming from. You can't expect a "good answer" to a question that is based on something that isn't the case. There are MORE actual residents in the area from 42nd Street to 54th Street and from 7th Avenue to 10th Avenue than in MANY parts of the city. Its density of RESIDENTS is actually higher than most anywhere in Soho, the Meatpacking, or the Village I'm willing to bet. Have you seen the size of some of those expensive high rise condos and apartment buildings? Sure there are a lot of tourists in that area (but even then, many of them are repeat customers and every good restaurant owner knows his business will grow with GOOD word of mouth, not just getting people in once and giving them a bad meal). But beyond that -- when I eat at most of those 9th Avenue places for example -- it's quite clear that the majority of the people there are from the "neighborhood" and are regular customers. I can't believe anyone could live in New York City and not know that midtown West has one of the highest concentrations of residents in Manhattan. And it's growing. Have you seen what's happened on 42nd Street from 7th Avenue to the Hudson? HUGE new condos and apartment buildings, and a couple more on 8th Avenue in the mid 40's. Do you honestly think those tens of thousands of people won't support a huge number of "local" restaurants in their own neighborhoods?

Using that philosophy, ciaony, there must be no good restaurants in the Union Square area of San Francisco, or the River North area of Chicago or certainly in the French Quarter in New Orleans. The fact is that MANY tourists really are foodies and not all a bunch of farmers who thrive on MacDonalds. The idea that if an area has a lot of tourists no one will pay attention to good food is just plain outdated and ludicrous.

All this talk of dining pre-theater in SoHo or on the Upper East or West Sides misses the point. No one is his right mind would venture that far away and hope to avoid any potential traffic or transit problems when headed to a theater.

I think, when most people ask on these forums where they can eat (or dine) "in the theater district," they are unnecessarily restricting themselves to an area a mere few blocks from whichever theater they're headed for. Were they to broaden their search by several more blocks to a larger area, say, north as far as 59th Street and east as far as Sixth or Fifth--still a reasonable walk or one or two subway stops to most theaters--they'd find many places of significantly higher quality than most, if not all, of the places "in the theater district" as most people think of it.

Many, many places--not "in the theater district"--offer pre-theater, prix-fixe dinners. Who are these offerings intended for if not for theater- or concert-goers? Every one of these places understands that people have curtains to make, and they all make every effort to get people on their way in plenty of time. For example, we had an 8:00 concert this past Wednesday at Carnegie Hall. The server at Milos on West 55th asked if we had theater plans. I told her that we did, adding that we'd like to be on our way by about 7:30 (we had a 5:30 reservation). If she hadn't asked, I would have made it clear at the outset what our schedule needed to be. We didn't in the least feel rushed, but she made sure that our dinner ended on time. (A tip, by the way: When presented with the bill--ask for it, if necessary--have your credit card(s) ready to hand to the server; it saves an extra round-trip for her, and speeds your departure.)

I agree with the sentiment that a night out at the theater or a concert is about the play or the music, but that doesn't mean one must sacrifice the opportunity to dine well and at a reasonable (by NYC standards) cost, even if that means walking several more blocks than one might originally have planned. Midtown West is full of great restaurants. Why settle for a mediocre one "in the theater district"?

Actually, Warren, we have tried some of the Ninth Avenue places pre-Carnegie Hall. We've never returned to a single one of them.

In short, you get what you pay for. They're relatively inexpensive, but they're absolutely jammed, with, for the most part, mediocre food, inattentive service (probably related to the number of diners relative to the number of servers--why do you think they're so cheap?), and luncheonette-like decor.

For a few dollars more and, perhaps a slightly longer walk to the theater or Carnegie, you can do a hell of a lot better.