It’s been a big year and change for Oro. They opened in the summer of 2023 and at the end of the year were named the Restaurant of the Year by the Star Tribune. This spring they were on the shortlist for a James Beard Award for Best New Restaurant (in the entire country). And just last month they landed on the 2024 edition of the New York Times‘ The Restaurant List, which they describe as a list of “[O]ur 50 favorite places in America right now”. It was already not easy to get prime time dinner reservations in Oro’s small dining room and now it’s going to be that much harder. Thankfully, I had made reservations for our next dinner there not too long after our second visit in July (the first was last November). And so this past weekend we ate there for the second time this year. Did we enjoy the dinner as much as we had the the first two? Read on to find out.

Okay, I will dispel the suspense right away: no, we did not. This is not to say that we did not enjoy it. The food was quite good on this occasion as well, even though there were fewer big highs than at the previous meals. The problems lay elsewhere: with the mechanics of the meal and the service. I had noted issues at our first meal with the pacing of the meal: on that occasion, larger plates came out before starters and then others came out before we’d finished the first lot, overwhelming the table. And the entire meal had whizzed by at a very rapid rate. A lot of this had improved at the second dinner in July but there were still issues with plates not being cleared before new dishes showed up and so forth. I’d expected that by the third meal, more than a year after they opened this would all have been ironed out, but that was, unfortunately, not the case.

I’m leading this review with these details because they seem to me to be at odds with the high standards of the restaurant’s food, and also with the price point. Those who follow my reviews know that I am not a diva about service. The servers at Oro are unfailingly friendly and welcoming and very good at describing the food. All of that is good. But a restaurant of this ambition needs to have a smoother, more consistent handoff from the kitchen to the front-of-house. Here’s how our experience fell short on this occasion:

We were once again a party of four, though this time we took our boys—who are big aficionados of Mexican food—with us. We placed our drink orders first and then—keeping our past experiences with sequencing in mind—a preliminary order of things from just the Botanas and Tacos sections. The boys’ Mexican Cokes showed up right away, followed very quickly by the Tostaditas de Atun but there was no sign of our cocktails. These eventually showed up 15 minutes later. When the tacos arrived we ordered four larger dishes from the Platos and Masa sections. Three of these showed up together after an appropriate amount of time but there was no sign of the fourth. Our server—who had not been reliably present for most of the meal—eventually showed up to ask if there was anything else we needed. We asked for one more taco and inquired about the fourth larger dish. He seemed confused and said he would check. It eventually arrived with the taco. My guess is he’d not got the order into the kitchen (there had been another confusion at the time of ordering); or perhaps the kitchen lost sight of it: either way, if we’d been eating not as a family but as four adults getting their own entrees, this would have meant one person not getting their food till 15 minutes after everyone else.

I’ll note also that despite the fact that we were sharing dishes, plates were never replaced between savoury courses; and once again, new dishes arrived with empty plates from the previous rounds still occupying the table. Food and drink spills were never wiped either: indeed, our server set a dessert plate down right next to a spill in front of one of the boys but never came back to take care of it. The food itself was quite good, as I noted before. But the experience of the meal as a meal was jagged as a result of all of the above.

Alright, with that out of the way, what did we drink and eat? I’ve noted the boys’ Mexican Cokes. The missus got the Palomita Ajena, a very nice take on the Paloma, and enjoyed it very much. My Sin Cara (Michoacan rum, mint, hoja santa etc.) was fine but I sort of wished I was drinking the El Cantarito again. On the smaller plates front, we all loved the Tostaditas de Atun (with ahi, black garlic mojo, papaya puree etc.). They come three to an order and we rued not having taken our server up on the offer to add on a fourth for the four of us (we hadn’t been sure, you see, that the boys would want one each). We also got four tacos in the first round: Lengua, Pollo al Pastor, Carnitas and Pescado. Of these, the missus and I thought the pescado was the standout. The lengua was very good as well though the tongue had been braised to such an extent that it didn’t have any of the spring/snap that gives it character (this did not, however, prevent the older boy from asking for a second order). The carnitas we could all have taken or left. The pollo al pastor the boys described as “mid” and I was forced to agree. I am referring in all these cases to the main protein. The tortillas were very good, as expected, as were the other toppings.

The larger plates we had few criticisms of. The Sope de Pulpo (with the masa stained black with squid ink) and the Camarones a la Diabla were quite tasty. I will note that despite the name the latter didn’t really have much heat to it. As to whether that’s due to this being a refined take or a concession to Minnesotan palates, I don’t know. I do know that I loved the corn bisque it was all sitting on top of—I hailed a passing server to ask for a spoon so none of it went to waste—and that I would also have been happy to eat a bowl of just the yuca-masa gnocchi in that bisque. The two other dishes we liked even more: the Quesadilla de Huitlacoche was dynamite (and here too the fermented corn salad served alongside was almost the star of the plate); the Huarache with mushrooms and requeson was likewise excellent when it arrived (this was the late-arriving dish), especially with the tomato-serrano salsa slathered on to provide a counterpoint to the rich, and richly applied, requeson.

And so to dessert. With the boys’ tree nut allergies, the choice of dessert was simple: the Flan de Mamey and the Tamal de Fresa. All four of us loved the flan (and the boys loved the ice cream it came with even more). The family was not quite as enthused about the sweet tamal but for me it was right in line with North Indian semolina halwas and I was very happy to eat most of it by myself.

For a look at what we ate and drank, launch the slideshow below. Scroll down to see how much it all cost and to see what’s coming next on the restaurant report front.

The total with tax and included 18% service charge, plus a bit extra to take it up to 20% (I may have had reservations about the service but I’m not an asshole), came to $255 or just about $64/head. That’s quite a bit less than the $96/head at our dinner in July but keep in mind that was with four adults and featured both more food and more alcohol. For the food we ate, $64/head is extremely good value. I continue to recommend them highly (you may remember that I had them ranked very high in my Twin Cities Fine Dining Rotation). I just hope that by the time we get to our fourth dinner there (probably not till early next year) the service will be closer to the level of the food.

Alright, what’s next on the restaurant report front? I hope to get one California report out over the weekend. I’m not entirely sure what next week’s Twin Cities report will cover. We recently went back to 112 Eatery with a gang of old friends and this weekend we are scheduled to return to Grand Szechuan with another cohort. So probably one of those (I also have meals at Andale and House of Curry in the backlog but might want to go back to both before posting those reports). Let’s see how it goes.