Jazmine - South Meadows, Reno, NV
MENU:
D-
SERVICE:
C-
ATMOSPHERE:
B
VALUE:
D
RATING:
D
My finacee heard that Jazmine in south Reno was "really good" so on a monday night after returning from a vacation to the bay area we gave it shot. First off, this place has got have one of the most generic menues I've ever seen. There was literally not a sigle unique item on it. All the rolls were boring and typical featuring all the standard ingridients and arrangments. Even if you're a novice sushi fan or someone who likes to keep it on the tame side with their orders, there's still no real reason to visit Jazmine. Even the service was rather poor as we found ourselves waiting too long between rolls. One of the chefs was unable to make my Eastern Dragon Roll exta spicy like I asked, it was hardly spicy at all. The atmoshere is nice but nowhere near enough for me to recommend this place. Their are simply much better (and cheaper) options out there.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Friday, January 15, 2010
My Top Ten Favorite Game Franchises
(1) FINAL FANTASY
- FF9 (PS1)
- FF12 (PS2)
- FINAL FANTAYS TACTICS (PS1)
(2) ZELDA
- OCARINA OF TIME (N64)
- A LINK TO THE PAST (SNES) (GBA)
- TWILIGHT PRINCESS (Wii)
(3) CASTLEVANIA
- SYMPHONY OF THE NIGHT (PS1)
- SUPER CASTLEVANIA 5 (SUPER NES)
- ORDER OF ECCESIA (DS)
(4) MARIO
- SUPER MARIO BROTHERS 3 (NES)
- SUPER MARIO WORLD (SUPER NES)
- MARIO AND LUIGI: BOWSERS INSIDE STORY (DS)
(5) METAL GEAR
- METAL GEAT SOLID (PS1)
- SONS OF LIBERTY (PS3)
- SNAKE EATER (PS2)
(6) DRAGON QUEST
- DQ 8 (PS2)
- DQ3 (DS)
- DQ4 (DS)
(7) STREET FIGHTER
- SF II TURBO (ARCADE)
- SF 4 (PS3)
- MARVEL VS CAPCOM (ARCADE)
(8) RESIDENT EVIL
- RE 2 (PS1)
- RE 4 (GC)
- RE 3 (PS1)
(9) MORTAL KOMBAT
- MK II (ARCADE)
- MK (ARCADE)
- ULTIMATE MK III (ARCADE)
(10) BREATH OF FIRE
- BOF III (PS1)
- BOF 4 (PS1)
- BOF II (GBA)
- FF9 (PS1)
- FF12 (PS2)
- FINAL FANTAYS TACTICS (PS1)
(2) ZELDA
- OCARINA OF TIME (N64)
- A LINK TO THE PAST (SNES) (GBA)
- TWILIGHT PRINCESS (Wii)
(3) CASTLEVANIA
- SYMPHONY OF THE NIGHT (PS1)
- SUPER CASTLEVANIA 5 (SUPER NES)
- ORDER OF ECCESIA (DS)
(4) MARIO
- SUPER MARIO BROTHERS 3 (NES)
- SUPER MARIO WORLD (SUPER NES)
- MARIO AND LUIGI: BOWSERS INSIDE STORY (DS)
(5) METAL GEAR
- METAL GEAT SOLID (PS1)
- SONS OF LIBERTY (PS3)
- SNAKE EATER (PS2)
(6) DRAGON QUEST
- DQ 8 (PS2)
- DQ3 (DS)
- DQ4 (DS)
(7) STREET FIGHTER
- SF II TURBO (ARCADE)
- SF 4 (PS3)
- MARVEL VS CAPCOM (ARCADE)
(8) RESIDENT EVIL
- RE 2 (PS1)
- RE 4 (GC)
- RE 3 (PS1)
(9) MORTAL KOMBAT
- MK II (ARCADE)
- MK (ARCADE)
- ULTIMATE MK III (ARCADE)
(10) BREATH OF FIRE
- BOF III (PS1)
- BOF 4 (PS1)
- BOF II (GBA)
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Movies I've watched in 2010
(1)The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus (2009): A-
(2)The Young Victoria (2009): B+
(3)The Hurt Locker (2009) DVD: B+
(4)A Single Man (2009): B-
(5)The Wolfman: B
(6)Couples Retreat (2009) DVD: F
(7)Shutter Island: B+
(8)Alice in Wonderland: D
(9)Iron Man 2: C
(10)Date Night: F
(11)The Road (2009) DVD: A
(12)Bad Leutinant (2009) DVD: B+
(13)Prince of Persia: C-
(14)Daybreakers (2009) DVD: D
(15)Greenberg DVD: B-
(16)Inception: A
(17)Winters Bone:A
(18)Scott Pilgrim VS The World: B+
(19)The Other Guys: C+
(20)The Town: A
(21)The Social Network: A-
(22)Jackass 3D: C
(23)Paranormal Activity 2: B+
(2)The Young Victoria (2009): B+
(3)The Hurt Locker (2009) DVD: B+
(4)A Single Man (2009): B-
(5)The Wolfman: B
(6)Couples Retreat (2009) DVD: F
(7)Shutter Island: B+
(8)Alice in Wonderland: D
(9)Iron Man 2: C
(10)Date Night: F
(11)The Road (2009) DVD: A
(12)Bad Leutinant (2009) DVD: B+
(13)Prince of Persia: C-
(14)Daybreakers (2009) DVD: D
(15)Greenberg DVD: B-
(16)Inception: A
(17)Winters Bone:A
(18)Scott Pilgrim VS The World: B+
(19)The Other Guys: C+
(20)The Town: A
(21)The Social Network: A-
(22)Jackass 3D: C
(23)Paranormal Activity 2: B+
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Darksiders - PS3
VISUALS:A-
SOUND:B+
CONTROL:B+
GAMEPLAY:A
VALUE:C
SCORE:B+
Back in the 90's a game came out for the PS1 that's now regarded as one of the worst titles to ever hit any system. It was called "Spawn" obviously based on the comic series. It was a huge disappointment for me as a gamer and a fan of the series. Here we are in 2009 with Darksiders a game that is everything I wish "Spawn" could have been. The premise and characters in this game and the Spawn series are similar. You can really see the influence it had throughout especially with the demon designs. You play as War one of the Four Horsemen and all you need to know is that agents of both Heaven and Hell are going to feel his wrath. It's a ton of fun to reek havoc on both sides in what can only be described as exhilarating game play. I never seemed to grow tired of combat. Granted Darksiders borrows heavily from games like God Of War and even Zelda. Sometimes it's startling how similar it is to the GOW games. Certain animations like swimming and climbing walls are nearly identical to how Kratos does it. The way I see it, that's a good thing. Lets face it, there's not that many good original ideas left. The visuals are outstanding. Bosses are vividly detailed and very memorable. The voice-acting is crisp and the controls are solid, though the throwing aiming aspects can be a little frustrating. The only gripe I have is more on the side of the industry. $60 for a 20 hour single player campaign game seems like highway robbery. Hopefully they will add more features to the next installment. This is an awesome game getting 2010 off to a great start.
SOUND:B+
CONTROL:B+
GAMEPLAY:A
VALUE:C
SCORE:B+
Back in the 90's a game came out for the PS1 that's now regarded as one of the worst titles to ever hit any system. It was called "Spawn" obviously based on the comic series. It was a huge disappointment for me as a gamer and a fan of the series. Here we are in 2009 with Darksiders a game that is everything I wish "Spawn" could have been. The premise and characters in this game and the Spawn series are similar. You can really see the influence it had throughout especially with the demon designs. You play as War one of the Four Horsemen and all you need to know is that agents of both Heaven and Hell are going to feel his wrath. It's a ton of fun to reek havoc on both sides in what can only be described as exhilarating game play. I never seemed to grow tired of combat. Granted Darksiders borrows heavily from games like God Of War and even Zelda. Sometimes it's startling how similar it is to the GOW games. Certain animations like swimming and climbing walls are nearly identical to how Kratos does it. The way I see it, that's a good thing. Lets face it, there's not that many good original ideas left. The visuals are outstanding. Bosses are vividly detailed and very memorable. The voice-acting is crisp and the controls are solid, though the throwing aiming aspects can be a little frustrating. The only gripe I have is more on the side of the industry. $60 for a 20 hour single player campaign game seems like highway robbery. Hopefully they will add more features to the next installment. This is an awesome game getting 2010 off to a great start.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Sherlock Holmes
SCORE: B
Robert Downey now has two major franchises going for him so I think it's safe to say that he's become one of Hollywood's flagship names. With roles like Tony Stark and Holmes he seems so comfortable and fitting probably due to the fact that he really isn't too dissimilar to these characters himself. Guy Richie known for his signature suave, stylized methods takes the reigns on a film that works on most levels. Jude Law is Watson and Rachel McAdam's is the necessary attractive female distraction. Both are serviceable as you'd expect. The interaction of Law and Downey is obviously the films selling point as it's always been with these characters. When the action ramps up it's both exciting and silly in some instances. The fight scenes where Holmes dissects his opponents were my favorite. Things begin to falter a bit when the plot becomes convoluted. The later half drags and I thought much of it could have been streamlined. Aside from these pacing issues it's a pretty solid start to what looks to be a good franchise.
Robert Downey now has two major franchises going for him so I think it's safe to say that he's become one of Hollywood's flagship names. With roles like Tony Stark and Holmes he seems so comfortable and fitting probably due to the fact that he really isn't too dissimilar to these characters himself. Guy Richie known for his signature suave, stylized methods takes the reigns on a film that works on most levels. Jude Law is Watson and Rachel McAdam's is the necessary attractive female distraction. Both are serviceable as you'd expect. The interaction of Law and Downey is obviously the films selling point as it's always been with these characters. When the action ramps up it's both exciting and silly in some instances. The fight scenes where Holmes dissects his opponents were my favorite. Things begin to falter a bit when the plot becomes convoluted. The later half drags and I thought much of it could have been streamlined. Aside from these pacing issues it's a pretty solid start to what looks to be a good franchise.
Monday, December 28, 2009
Up In The Air
SCORE: A-
This movie was so close to absolute greatness. If it weren't for a few writing pitfalls and a couple botched segments, I could easily see this as Reitmans crown jewel. Clooney is fantastic as usual and the supporting cast is equally good. Vera Farmiga and the surprising Anna Kendrick (known as Bella's annoying friend from the Twilight series) play perfect counterparts to Clooney's shrewd character. I was genuinely interested in each character and their stories. Clooney's character fires people for a living at large companies going city to city year round. The scenes involving these downsizes are excellent especially the ones with J.K. Simmons and Zack Galifinagis. The writing issues I mentioned are minor but relevant. There's some blatantly predictable turns that throw off the vivid characterization. And I wasn't sold on the way Clooney's company functioned. It seemed very far-fetched and silly. It's ironic that nearly every point made is rendered irrelevant by the paths these people take. The film has one of the best endings I've seen in quite some time. The closing narrative dialog is touching and somewhat tragic depending on how you view it. Films rarely evoke this kind of emotion without being preachy and heavy handed. I look forward to Reitman's future projects as he is proving himself to be one of the better directors in Hollywood.
This movie was so close to absolute greatness. If it weren't for a few writing pitfalls and a couple botched segments, I could easily see this as Reitmans crown jewel. Clooney is fantastic as usual and the supporting cast is equally good. Vera Farmiga and the surprising Anna Kendrick (known as Bella's annoying friend from the Twilight series) play perfect counterparts to Clooney's shrewd character. I was genuinely interested in each character and their stories. Clooney's character fires people for a living at large companies going city to city year round. The scenes involving these downsizes are excellent especially the ones with J.K. Simmons and Zack Galifinagis. The writing issues I mentioned are minor but relevant. There's some blatantly predictable turns that throw off the vivid characterization. And I wasn't sold on the way Clooney's company functioned. It seemed very far-fetched and silly. It's ironic that nearly every point made is rendered irrelevant by the paths these people take. The film has one of the best endings I've seen in quite some time. The closing narrative dialog is touching and somewhat tragic depending on how you view it. Films rarely evoke this kind of emotion without being preachy and heavy handed. I look forward to Reitman's future projects as he is proving himself to be one of the better directors in Hollywood.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Topics to Run With: Dependence
In 2009, I was determined to become a runner. No casually, not someone who runs every once in awhile no, a full-blown, competitive athlete. How did it go? Better than I ever could have imagined. I lost 60+ lbs. ran two marathons (one of which went very well) and through making various mistakes managed to become dialed in as a runner. These mistakes I'm referring to range from running in the wrong shoes to wearing the wrong gear during my first 26.2 trek. Through these mishaps I learned many lessons though there's one mistake I believe I was smart enough to avoid.
Dependence in running is not a good thing. The more that you depend on, the more there is to stress over/worry about. For example, I ran with a guy earlier this year who absolutely had to listen to music while running. He couldn't get through more than 2 miles without it. He later suffered knee problems and abandonned the sport. Running with music blaring is a poor idea for three reasons. One; it's dangerous to take away one of your senses when your out around cars, stray dogs etc. Two; it's another object you must hassle and potentially be distracted by before and during the run. And three; it keeps you out of touch with your running environment, meaning that; instead of enjoying the various sounds during your run, Lady GaGa is blasting in your ears taking away something you should enjoy. I know this sounds preachy, and trust me I'm a huge music-fan but I can't stress enough how advantageous it can be to learn to run WITHOUT the tunes. If you must have it, try and get through the preliminary training stages without it. You don't need something else to depend on.
This applies to your running "fuel" as well. If you get used to taking 6 water bottles plus 4 gels strapped around your waist on each run you will become
overly-dependant on these items. I'm not advising you to tackle an 18 mile run unequipped but consider testing yourself to find out how much you really need. During my first marathon expo I was advised to bring a whopping eight gels on the run. Not only was this bad advise it's a huge hastle trying to tope this much "food" on such a run. At the 2009 CIM I had approximately two GU chomps and one sport bean That's it! Throughout my training I taught myself to only use what I need. I'd bring one handheld bottle of water and one bag of Sportbeans. It worked for me. I believe runners often overestimate how much they really need to have. Granted, everyone is different. Some elite runners swear by a greater intake of gels, water, etc. and it works for them.
The less you depend on, the stronger you will be. You'll have less limitations and a greater range of versatility.
Dependence in running is not a good thing. The more that you depend on, the more there is to stress over/worry about. For example, I ran with a guy earlier this year who absolutely had to listen to music while running. He couldn't get through more than 2 miles without it. He later suffered knee problems and abandonned the sport. Running with music blaring is a poor idea for three reasons. One; it's dangerous to take away one of your senses when your out around cars, stray dogs etc. Two; it's another object you must hassle and potentially be distracted by before and during the run. And three; it keeps you out of touch with your running environment, meaning that; instead of enjoying the various sounds during your run, Lady GaGa is blasting in your ears taking away something you should enjoy. I know this sounds preachy, and trust me I'm a huge music-fan but I can't stress enough how advantageous it can be to learn to run WITHOUT the tunes. If you must have it, try and get through the preliminary training stages without it. You don't need something else to depend on.
This applies to your running "fuel" as well. If you get used to taking 6 water bottles plus 4 gels strapped around your waist on each run you will become
overly-dependant on these items. I'm not advising you to tackle an 18 mile run unequipped but consider testing yourself to find out how much you really need. During my first marathon expo I was advised to bring a whopping eight gels on the run. Not only was this bad advise it's a huge hastle trying to tope this much "food" on such a run. At the 2009 CIM I had approximately two GU chomps and one sport bean That's it! Throughout my training I taught myself to only use what I need. I'd bring one handheld bottle of water and one bag of Sportbeans. It worked for me. I believe runners often overestimate how much they really need to have. Granted, everyone is different. Some elite runners swear by a greater intake of gels, water, etc. and it works for them.
The less you depend on, the stronger you will be. You'll have less limitations and a greater range of versatility.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
