I've got a theory about Poppy which I'm hoping you can either confirm or deny. The theory goes something like this: Men hate/dislike/roll their eyes at the place, and women love it/like it/are intrigued by it/find it fun.
Now, I'm already about to throw a wrench into my own simplistic assumption by telling you that I do not love Poppy, and I am a woman. But then again it's entirely possible, and maybe even probable, that I like to eat more like your typical man than your typical woman. I don't know if this is true (more studies must be done, surely), but it's possible.
Anyhoo, my review of Poppy is up on the Seattle Mag website now, and I hope you'll read it to get a more rounded, broad idea of what I think of the place.
But if I were forced to sum up my reason for not loving it, it'd come down to this: I like to get lost in a dish I enjoy. I like for there to be enough of something warm, stewy, meaty, savory and so on for me to actually feel satisfied after eating it. I love a big bowl of pho, a hearty cauldron of ramen, but size isn't all that matters--we can all get our fill of a rich, hearty chili or an intensely clammy chowder in a thick cup of the stuff. I just like to take my time, taste it a bunch of times, really get to know my food.
At Poppy I was frustrated by all the little dishes that neither added real value nor enhanced the other dishes. But mostly I was frustrated by the tiny portions at the heart of the thalis, because, when they were good, I just wanted to get lost in them, and I couldn't. Have you ever been to a mediocre (or even worse) restaurant, eaten a full meal, but left feeling like you just didn't scratch the itch? You're belly was full but you were far from satisfied?
So Poppy doesn't curl my toes. What about you?