Restaurant Review: Zada Kabab
3013 S. Figueroa Street
Overall Rating: 3/5
Situated on Figueroa Street near La Taquiza is Zada Kabab. Zada Kabab serves Mediterranean cuisine. The food is well made and it is overall a pretty solid restaurant. Those who like Mediterranean food should like Zada Kabab.
Prices: Moderate
Typical dishes run around 10 dollars. Pita and Hummus is one of the cheaper options, at 5 dollars. Fountain drinks and bottled drinks cost about as much as any place would charge.
Variety: 5/5
Zada Kabab offers all that you would expect from a Mediterranean place. There are lamb, beef, chicken, and shrimp kebabs as well as combination platters. Kebabs come with rice and a side salad, fries, or can be ordered à la carte. They offer some desserts that I have never been intrigued enough to try. The fountain drink selections are plentiful, and they have Calypso Lemonade among their bottled drink offerings.
Quality: 4/5
Food is always cooked to order. If you do not have around 10-15 minutes to wait, they accept advance phone orders. The meat is always lean and tasty, but it’s occasionally overcooked. The hummus is as reasonably good as you can expect from a place like this. This is one of the healthier local options.
Portion Size: 3/5
I sometimes feel somewhat cheated by the quantity of food compared to the price. It is less than other similar places that I have visited, but not significantly less.
Cleanliness: 4/5
The restaurant is usually pretty clean. I haven’t ran into significant problems yet.
Service: 2.5/5
This place may have changed management – currently the service is significantly worse than before. The manager is a nice guy and tries hard, but often times he does not listen closely to your order. It was also significantly understaffed during my previous visit, with only the manager working despite it not being close to closing time.
Decor/Ambience: 3/5
It is nothing special, but it is not bad.
Film Review: Green Lantern
Green Lantern
Rating: PG 13
Run Time: 1 hour 45 minutes
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 24%
Overview: The string of super hero movies continues with Green Lantern. Martin Campbell (Casino Royale, Edge of Darkness) directs the film. Ryan Reynolds stars as Hal Jordan, the first human Green Lantern. Blake Lively appears as his friend/love interest Carol Ferris. Peter Sarsgaard plays Dr. Hector Hammond, one of the villains of the movie, and Mark Strong plays Sinestro, Hal’s mentor and future nemesis.
Expectations: Campbell did a terrific job with Casino Royale and GoldenEye. An actor that appears mostly in comedy playing a super hero whose primary color is green was already done unsuccessfully (The Green Hornet), but this can be different. Ryan Reynolds is very handsome and is in peak physical shape. Although he is known for comedy, Reynolds has the look of a superhero. Reviews for Green Lantern have been mostly negative. Movies that are that low on Rotten Tomatoes’ Tomato Meter typically are pretty bad. Even great pure action movies tend to need 40% positive minimum to be watchable. This is more than a pure action movie, so it cannot thrive on action alone. With that in mind, my expectations entering the movie are minimum at best.
Synopsis: The Green Lantern Corps have served as guardians of the universe for generations. Each individual Green Lantern has a ring that gives them powers to fight evil. A new threat called Parallax emerges that has already taken down many Lanterns. Abin Sur, a powerful Lantern that previously defeated Parallax, is fatally wounded by it and crash lands on Earth. As he dies, Abin Sur’s ring chooses Hal Jordan as the next Lantern. Hal is a fearless and cocky test pilot who has not had many responsibilities up to this point. Many stalwart Lanterns strongly disapprove of Jordan’s selection. The movie follows Jordan’s development as a Lantern and his ultimate confrontation with Parallax.
Strengths:
The visuals of this movie were very well done. It is worth the extra money to see it in 3D. The producers do not waste a dime of the film’s astronomical $200 million budget to make the visuals incredible. Parallax is menacing and intimidating, a strong villain that vanquishes many Lanterns.
Peter Sarsgaard gave a great performance as Dr. Hector Hammond. He had the believable eccentricity and quietness that makes it inevitable that he becomes a villain. His eerie voice was perfect for the part.
The film is fairly heavy on expository details, as is necessary in an origin story. These details make the film accessible to a wide audience, and it can be understood by the casual fan or even those who like superhero movies but do not know anything about Green Lantern.
Different from previous superhero movies, the post credits scene happened before the black-background credits rolled. This was welcomed and saved some time.
Weaknesses:
The interactions between Reynolds and Lively felt both awkward and strained. They never had the chemistry that is needed for the protagonist and his love interest to actually make the audience care about their relationship.
While Parallax looked very threatening, he was abstract and not really developed. His origins were somewhat intriguing, but more attention was given to Hammond than Parallax, leaving a disjointed feeling. Parallax seemed like a background character when he was supposed to be a central villain.
The treatment of Hammond could have been done better. The villain has a few ho-hum fight scenes with Jordan. During their last fight scene, Hammond is not soundly defeated, but Parallax interrupts the fight and kills Hammond, claiming that he has failed. This proved rather confusing.
The creation of the yellow ring and Sinestro’s inevitable transformation into a villain is important to this series, but it was handled rather poorly. The film consistently treated Sinestro as a mentor and a leader for the Corps. His curiosity of using the yellow power of fear is appropriate, given his fear that Parallax will destroy the Lantern’s home base of Oa, but it seemed rather unwise of the guardians to try to harness the power of fear again, after a previous unsuccessful attempt [This is explained in the movie]. Sinestro puts on the yellow ring in the post-credits scene, and this seems completely random. The audience is not even given hints that Sinestro would value power over justice or allow his fear to overtake him.
Jordan baits Hammond towards the end by giving him the ring. Hammond uses the ring to blast a hole through a wall, but then fails to blast Jordan. As Jordan explains, “You have to be chosen.” If this is the case, why was Hammond able to use the ring in the first place?
Verdict:
This was a definite disappointment after Nolan’s Batman, the Iron Mans, Thor, and X-Men First Class returned faith into the superhero movie. It does the minimum for a superhero movie, a hero fights a villain and gets the girl with super powers that are well done by special effects, but beyond this the movie really fails to impress. It really is something to behold that a good director who previously directed successful action-oriented movies teamed up with A-list stars fails to turn out a good product.
D
Restaurant Review: Kitchen 24
1608 N. Cahuenga Blvd
www.kitchen24.infoOverall Rating: 4/5
Late at night, when nothing else seemed open, I stumbled onto this quaint spot in the heart of Hollywood after typing in 24 hours into Google Maps. My expectations were far exceeded and the experience was remarkable enough for me to be a return customer if ever in the area. This is an ideal spot if you have the munchies after clubbing at one of the nearby spots.
Prices: Moderately Cheap
Menu items hover around $10. Desserts and drinks seemed to be reasonably priced.
Variety: 3/5
While an over-wrought menu is bad for the kitchen and overall quality, this menu felt underdeveloped. The menu features soups, salads, sandwiches, burgers, and breakfast items. There is a very wide selection of alcohol and alcoholic drinks.
Quality: 5/5
Their claims that they prepare everything in house with organic ingredients is very believable. The food is flavorful and well-prepared. Presentation is top notch and could easily have been pulled from one of the finer restaurants further west. None of the food seems overly saturated with fat.
Portion Size: 4/5
Portions are proportional to the price and are capable of satisfying your appetite.
Cleanliness: 4/5
Tables, silverware, and cups all looked clean. The bathroom was in surprisingly good shape, considering the location. I noticed a few things on the floors underneath the tables, but it wasn’t terrible.
Service: 4/5
Service is pretty good here. The server was knowledgeable about the menu and very friendly. No major complaints.
Decor/Ambience: 5/5
The restaurant design is very modern and luxurious. This contrasts nicely with a slightly more relaxed atmosphere than expected.
Film Review: Super 8
Super 8
Rating: PG 13
Run Time: 1 hours 51 minutes
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 83%
Overview: Writer/director JJ Abrams collaborates with producer Steven Speilberg on this latest summer blockbuster. The film stars Joel Courtney (first major role), Elle Fanning (younger sister of Dakota), Amanda Michalka (Disney Channel), and Kyle Chandler (Friday Night Lights).
Expectations: I typically do not favor sci-fi movies. Abrams is a solid director, but the cast doesn’t particularly impress me. Nevertheless, reviews have been consistently strong, making this movie “Certified Fresh” on Rotten Tomatoes. Previews have been very interesting, and I expect a good movie.
Synopsis: In a quiet community in the late 70′s, a group of kids is trying to make a super 8 film. Their filming gets interrupted by a pickup truck that derails a train. Citizens of the town begin disappearing and many other strange occurrences begin shortly after this incident. The film follows the investigation into these events.
Strengths:
The things that first stuck out to me were the visuals. The set expertly captured a late 70′s small town charm, back before electronics dominated all forms of life. Special effects were not overused, but they were done well and added a lot to the movie. The monster looks frightening but is changed to be less so to establish it as a truly sympathetic character. The train crash and other action scenes were visually dazzling and well executed.
JJ Abrams brought out the best in a young, mostly unproven cast. The main characters were well developed, and Courtney and Fanning brought their characters to life. Courtney’s ability to evoke emotion without overacting is notable, and this should be a break-out role for him. Supporting characters all added to the story and the group of friends worked as well together as the goonies.
The humorous moments in the film helped ease tension and all worked well. The finished product of Charles’s film is shown over the credits and is charmingly quirky.
Weaknesses:
Super 8‘s story is not for everybody. Some critics take issue with its similarities with films such as The Goonies and other Speilberg films. The pacing of the story sometimes felt slow. Abrams’s treatment of the creature is one of the main weaknesses of the story. While he adds originality, given that sci-fi films typically portray the monster as an objective evil, his treatment felt inconsistent. The monster destroys and kills with neither provocation nor remorse for much of the movie.
Verdict:
The story clearly shows many Speilbergian influences. While this is true, the film never felt like it was completely ripped off from any of Speilberg’s best works. Abrams’s main objective was to create a 1979 feeling. With all of the many adaptations, sequels, prequels, and the like roaming around Hollywood, one can hardly complain about this film lacking originality. The story remains robust despite its flaws, and it’s worth seeing for a nice nostalgic experience.
B
Film Review: X-Men: First Class
X-Men: First Class
Rating: PG 13
Run Time: 2 hours 11 minutes
Overview: Matthew Vaughn, director of Kick-Ass, directs this film that tells the story about the early years of Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr/Magneto. James McAvoy (Atonement, The Last King of Scotland) and Michael Fassbender (Inglorious Basterds) play the two leads respectively. Bryan Singer, director of the first two X-Men films, returns as a producer and a writer of the story, off which the screenplay is based.
Expectations: My enthusiasm for prequels typically is minimal. Although Hugh Jackman makes a cameo, this film serves more as a reboot than a prequel to the first X-Men movie. Reviews have been overwhelmingly positive (87% on Rotten Tomatoes at the time of this writing). My expectations are high and the film should hopefully not disappoint.
Synopsis: The film details the early years of many of the X-Men, focusing on Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr/Magneto. Charles grows up intrigued by mutants, eventually studying genetics at Oxford University. Magneto’s childhood is destroyed by the Nazi occupation of Poland, and he is driven by a desire for vengeance against Nazi scientist Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon). The Cold War rages in the backdrop. The story centers around Shaw and his “Hellfire Club” attempting to force the two powers into war. Charles and Erik, along with their newly recruited mutants, must stop Shaw and avert a third world war.
Strengths:
The entire cast gives strong performances. McAvoy is a charming and benevolent Xavier. Fassbender plays a strong Magneto and manages to captivate the audience with his strong screen presence. Kevin Bacon makes a good villain and easily causes the audience to hate him.
The movie was well-written and directed. The story was paced perfectly, giving adequate information without causing boredom. It is robust but does not feel too over-written. The attempts at humor worked and gave relief amidst rising tension.
Weaknesses:
My biggest issue with the film is its failure to explore the origin and development of Magneto’s views on humans. This is fairly important to establish, as it is the conflict that drives Magneto and Professor X apart. This also proves interesting, given that the Nazis tortured Magneto’s family because of perceived inferiority.
The film seemed overly eager to emphasize that it indeed is the first in the series. A lot of information was included that could better be reserved for future movies, given that there will be a sequel. The devolution of Erik and Xavier’s friendship felt rushed. Comic book fans and those who watched the previous three movies know that Mystique eventually is on Magneto’s side, but she did not need to join him by the end of the movie. Her romance with Beast felt like an unnecessary plot device.
Continuity issues with facts established by the previous three films arise. This is not overly problematic, as First Class does not serve as a prequel in the same sense that the Star Wars prequels served. Comic book fans may be confused by the inclusion of Havok. Havok is the younger brother of Cyclops, and it would appear more appropriate to include Corsair (their father) instead.
The score of the film was forgettable. It did not accentuate the film, like a good score should. The theme of the X-Men cartoon of the 90s sounds as terrific today as it did back then, and there was no reason to not include it.
Verdict: The issues with the film are fairly minor. Those who evaluate it in context with the rest of the X-Men universe may have issues with not exploring the reasons for Magneto’s resentment toward humans. The furious pace and amount of information covered is not a real issue with this movie, but it may prove problematic for the sequel(s). The movie should please all those in its target audience. Those without a knowledge of the X-Men mythos can still enjoy this movie as a well-made action movie.
B
Film Review: The Phantom of the Opera
The Phantom of the Opera
Rating: PG 13
Runtime: 2 hours 23 minutes
Available on Netflix Instant Watch: No
Overview: In 2004, Andrew Lloyd Webber collaborated with director Joel Schumacher to bring Phantom of the Opera to the silver screen. Before he was immortalized as King Leonidas, Gerard Butler plays the Phantom. 16 year old (at the time) Emmy Rossum plays Christine. Patrick Wilson, one of the few stage veterans, plays Raoul.
Synopsis: Christine Daae is a chorus girl at the Paris Opera House. She has been receiving voice lessons from the mysterious “opera ghost,” (the Phantom) a disfigured musical genius who has fallen in love with her. Raoul, the new patron of the Opera house, is a childhood sweetheart of Christine. The film centers around the love triangle among the three.
Strengths: Lloyd Webber’s involvement in the production ensured that the film would remain faithful to the source material. The film does not cut anything from the musical, and it adds a scene at the end. Patrick Wilson has a good voice and gives one of the best Raoul performances that I’ve ever seen. Jennifer Ellison gave one of the better Meg performances that I’ve seen. Sets and costumes are as stunning as ever when moved to the silver screen.
Weaknesses:
The casting of Gerard Butler was a terrible choice. Gerard is a handsome guy with good acting abilities, but he does not have the singing ability required for the part of the Phantom. Good acting skills are essential, but the Phantom’s singing is just as important to make him work as a character.
The make-up artists did a terrible job with the Phantom’s disfigurement. While the stage show makes his face look destroyed, Butler merely looked like he had bad sunburn when he wasn’t wearing the mask. Rossum has a nice soft voice, but it did not have the requisite power that the part of Christine requires. Acting for film does differ from acting for stage, but singing ability should have been a prerequisite for all of the leads.
For those familiar with the original source material, Andrew Lloyd Webber’s lack of artistic integrity is frustrating. While the film was based on his musical, his musical was based on a novel by Gaston Leroux. The last scene ignores an important plot point that is established at the end of the novel. Andrew Lloyd Webber has supported Butler’s singing, claiming that this is how he envisioned the Phantom sounding. This is an affront to Michael Crawford, the original Phantom on West End and Broadway, as well as further showing his lack of artistic integrity. Leroux describes the Phantom’s voice as being “angelic,” and Butler’s voice is anything but.
Verdict: The film was reasonably well-done. Gerard Butler was the only one who did not give a passable performance. The lack of artistic integrity at the end was annoying but not a significant fault. Butler’s casting is the biggest fault in this film, and it is significant. The power of the songs are lowered by his inability to hit the high notes, and one of the best endings in musicals is severely hampered by Butler screaming the last notes.
D+
Restaurant Review: Denny’s
821 West Jefferson Boulevard
www.dennys.com
Overall Rating: 1/5
Following my review of the best restaurant I’ve ever been to is the worst restaurant. Open 24 hours, Denny’s provides a wide variety of foods for pretty cheap prices. You should not expect a fine dining experience at Denny’s, but this particular Denny’s defies explanation. It is consistently the worst restaurant I’ve ever dined at, and should never be your option, even as a USC student, unless it is very late, you do not want Subway, and you do not have transportation. Late night dining options are plentiful in other parts of Los Angeles, and even a long drive is worth it for late night munchies.
Prices: Cheap
With the introduction of the 2 4 6 8 menu, Denny’s is one of the most affordable sit-down restaurants. A 15% student discount is available (as long as you don’t order from the 2 4 6 8 menu). 8 dollar dishes on the 2 4 6 8 menu include a soft drink.
Variety: 4/5
Denny’s offers a good variety of food. There are burgers and sandwiches, breakfast favorites, seafood, salads, and more.
Quality: 1/5
Ingredients are predictably cheap. Food is cooked very poorly. Grilled foods are often tasteless, while fried foods are sometimes overfried. Country fried steaks come in frozen and taste almost microwaved. Ground beef is never drained and is consequentially disgustingly greasy.
Portion Size: 3/5
Food should be sufficient to satisfy any appetite, given the exorbiant amount of calories. Portions are usually fair, but sometimes can be terrible. For example, the 3 Dips with Chips comes with very few chips.
Cleanliness: 1/5
The restaurant is consistently very dirty. Tables often remain unbussed despite them having a busser on the clock. Tables sometimes feel really sticky. The bathroom is rarely clean. Floors consistently have crumbs on them. I do not want to know how they keep the kitchen.
Service: 0.5/5
Service is shockingly bad. With the exception of 2 trips, all of my experiences have been overwhelmingly negative. Servers typically make three total trips to your table – one to take your order, one to bring your food, and one to give you your check (very shortly after they give you your food). Complaints fall on deaf ears to a management that does not care about customers.
Decor/Ambience: 1.25/5
Trojan memorabila line the walls but still do not make up for the rest of the restaurant. The restaurant looks very run-down. Booths are very old and many have holes. This place does not have the charm of many diners or of even other Denny’s that I have been to.
Restaurant Review: Mastro’s Steakhouse
246 North Canon Drive
www.mastrosrestaurants.com
Overall Rating: 5/5
Situated in the heart of the Hills lies Mastro’s Steakhouse. I first heard about Mastro’s from a newspaper article on the wall of Taylor’s Steakhouse. While Taylor’s was rated as one of the best, Mastro’s was rated as the best steakhouse in the Greater Los Angeles Area. I was slightly disappointed by the fact that it is part of a corporation, but ingoing expectations were still high. Through terrific food, great service, and an incredible atmosphere, Mastro’s Steakhouse met all of my expectations and lived up to the hype.
Prices: Expensive
Steaks come a la carte at around $50 per. Sides are to be shared, and they go up to $34 for the lobster mashed potatoes. Wine ranges from cheaper varieties to expensive ones that are over $100 a bottle. Desert starts at $10.
Variety: 5/5
Mastro’s offers all of the different cuts of steak that you expect a steakhouse to offer. Mastro’s also offers seafood and lamb. Sides range from traditional favorites such as Mac & Cheese to one of Mastro’s specialities: Lobster Mashed Potatoes. Dessert features Mastro’s Warm Butter Cake, cheesecake, and crème brûlée. Many alcoholic and nonalcoholic drinks are offered.
Quality: 5/5
Ingredients are all fresh and high quality. Cuts of meat always are as lean as expected. Sides are made with as much care as entrees. The lobster in the lobster mashed potatoes was legitimate pieces of lobster (as opposed to crayfish that some places try to call lobster).
Portion Size: 5/5
The food was more than sufficient to satisfy my huge appetite. All cuts of steak are fairly big, with the biggest being a 48 oz porterhouse. One side was more than enough for two people to share.
Cleanliness: 5/5
Dining area and all of the areas visible to the public are kept immaculate.
Service: 5/5
Servers are both professional and friendly. The server was able to answer every question about the menu and give insight on the various cuts of beef. The server’s assistant made sure my cup was never empty. I never found myself waiting for the server to do something for me. A manager stopped by to ensure everything was fine.
Decor/Ambience: 5/5
The restaurant’s design is everything that is expected from a fine-dining restaurant. Lights are dimmed but lighting is more than sufficient. Dressy attire is the norm, as expected. Live music is provided from a pretty talented musician.
Restaurant Review: Fatburger
3026 South Figueroa Street
www.fatburger.com
Overall Rating: 4/5
Fatburger is on the intersection of Figueroa and 31st. It offers burgers, fries, onion rings, and shakes. The quality of the food makes this an exceptional place for burgers.
Prices: Moderate
Combos will run you around 8 to 9 dollars. Bacon, eggs, chili, and cheese can be added onto the burger for an upcharge. Shakes cost about as much as they do at any restaurant.
Variety: 4/5
In addition to beef patties, Fatburger offers turkey, chicken, and veggie patties. Burgers are garnished with onions, lettuce, tomato, relish, pickles, ketchup, and mustard. Grilled onions can be ordered instead of the regular onions. Burgers can be chargrilled (recommended) instead of cooked on the flat top grill. Sides include onion rings, fat (steak) fries, and skinny fries. Seasoned salt is available to garnish the fries.
Quality: 5/5
Ingredients are all fresh. Burgers are not frozen, and taste as good as ground beef can taste. I have not tasted the turkey, veggie, or chicken. Fries are good but not anything special.
Portion Size: 5/5
Burgers are 1/3 lb (Fat Burger) to 1.5 lbs (Triple X Challenge). If you can finish the Triple X Challenge, you get enshrined on their wall of fame. Even huge appetites can be satiated with the 1/2 lb King Burger combo.
Cleanliness: 5/5
Dining area is kept reasonably clean. Multiple visits yielded no real complaints.
Service: 2.5/5
Service is pretty average – not great or terrible.
Decor: 5/5
Fatburger creates a nostalgic atmosphere of burger stands of old (so I assume, since I wasn’t alive to be certain). The restaurant has a functional jukebox with alot of good music.
Restaurant Review: Hong Kong Express
Hong Kong Express
2604 S Vermont Ave
Los Angeles, CA 90007
(323) 732-1318
Overall Rating: 2/5
Hong Kong Express is located near Ralph’s. It is a Chinese take-out type of restaurant. The cheap prices and the generous portion sizes are nice, but the cleanliness of the restaurant and the quality of the food make it not worth while. It is worth paying the extra money to eat at Panda Express, if you want Chinese take-out.
Prices: Cheap
2 items and rice+noodles is 3.99. 3 items and rice+noodles is 4.49. These prices require your student ID occasionally, but sometimes they do not ask. As a caveat, these prices have been progressively going up from 3.50 for the 2 item combo last year. Quality increase has not matched the price increase.
Variety: 4/5
They offer dishes that you typically expect to find at a Chinese take-out restaurant. They occasionally vary their dishes, but they usually have the same dishes. They have fountain drinks available, as well as various canned and bottled drinks.
Quality: 1/5
Ingredients are cheap and noticably so. Food is very greasy and you can taste the unhealthy nature of it. They alarmingly do not throw out their food at the end of the night. Eating here can be risky, especially during slower times when they don’t need to cook fresh food that often.
Portion Size: 5/5
Portion sizes are very generous. I never feel cheated with the amount of food that I get.
Cleanliness: 1/5
The dining area is often very dirty. Floors are not swept enough throughout the day. Tables are often very dirty. They use the same serving spoon across many different dishes. The back area looks disorganized.
Service: 4/5
The people who work here are friendly. They can speak Spanish, Chinese, and English.
Decor: 1/5
The restaurant is dull and dirty looking. Chairs are very old. There is no a/c, and it gets very hot on hot days. Even if your place is far away, you want to get your meal to go.
