Chef: 6/10

I have seen this type of movie before: chef loses touch, chef needs drastic change, change is good, complication arises, everything works out in the end. Yep, I just about got it.

Jon Favreau's Chef is the director's return to his indie, low-budget roots after branching to the Blockbuster Hollywood lifestyle. And almost parallel to his career path (In need of some calming), we see Chef as a stripped down back-to basics films that shows the age-old battle between art and business with minimal effects, minimal pizazz, and an overall minimalism approach that requires a strong script and strong performances to carry the movie through.

And to an extent it works, but almost too well. Chef is not a lazy movie, it is instead a very harmless adult-oriented film that doesn't take any risks, doesn't push any boundaries, and remains comfortable within its borders. With the safe approach, you can predict where the movie is going and despite the mildly enjoyable ride you can't help but be underwhelmed by the lack of challenge of it all.

What's worse is that you have a stellar cast with each not given enough material to truly excel. Come on now, a movie with the likes of Scarlett Johansson, Sofia Vergara, Robert Downey Jr., and John Leguizamo has to have some sort of spice. Instead each of them were handed limited roles that didn't allow for any of them to truly grow and have any standout moments. They were instead treated more like cameos in the life of a struggling chef (Jon Favreau acting and directing) trying to regain his footing after a rough month that culminated from a scathing review.

Nothing about this movie fizzled to be honest, but nothing really stood out. It's similar to a breakfast of cereal and milk; no matter how good the cereal is, it's still just a breakfast consisting of cereal…and milk. During the self-fulfillment trip there wasn't much of a rock bottom moment, there wasn't much of a challenge or a setback to return to prominence. Compared to the instant classic gem about a cook known as Ratatouille and even a milder fare involving a cook on the sentimental rocks like No Reservations, Chef doesn't stack many odds against our hero. Your investment to keep watching is the nice locales (Wish there was more Miami though), the nice food, and the great performance from youngster Emjay Anthony.

Favreau's rise to fame was his indie gem Swingers, which entered the pop culture lexicon as well as displayed Favreau as a good low-budget director and a good down-to-earth actor. His latest film was his attempt to recapture his youngster roots. While he does step in the right direction, Chef lacks the bite that was prominent in his earliest works. But it's the right step forward. That being said, Chef will not stand out, but will entertain, and will keep you visually satisfied with the good food, good locations, and attractive people. This makes for a decent appetizer that can hopefully someday lead to a Swinger-like main course from Jon Favreau.

The *Legacy of LeBron James II

Here is Part One in case you missed it.

So LeBron James is coming to Cleveland after all.

I had always said that if the Heat had won the entire thing, then he would have stayed to attempt to become the first since the great Bill Russell to win 4 championships in a row. And then the San Antonio Spurs had other plans, as they obliterated the Heat in every single possible way. In the midst of the chaos, LeBron James must have noticed that unless his team improved or he got out of there, the chances of winning another ring was going to disappear. The Spurs overwhelmed them, but let’s not forget the other rising Western Conference teams like the Clippers, Blazers, Rockets, and to an extent the Warriors that could have handled them if they had arrived at the big dance. And with the beatdown being so intense it made us wonder if the Spurs should have been back-to-back champs and was more deserving of last year's title. After all, if Ray Allen had missed that infamous shot LeBron would have been 1-4 in Finals appearances, branding him to Atlanta Braves territory.

But there’s more. LeBron James wants to be considered one of the greatest players ever to play the game. But instead the reputation has made him more like an excellent player that plays like a mercenary; recruited to lead a team to victory---as opposed to being the leader of a team that evolved into a contender. There is a huge difference between being a sure-fire Hall of Famer and being a Legend. Shaquille O’Neal is a Hall of Famer that has 4 rings. But 25 years down the road we won’t really discuss him on a weekly basis when basketball is happening.

Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Bill Russell, Michael Jordan? Played for the same team all their careers, were incredible leaders and teachers, and elevated their teams and the sport to a whole new level. LeBron James? For as long as he remained with the Heat with three other sure-fire Hall of Famers (established BEFORE the uniting, as opposed to during the reign) LeBron was going to stay in Shaq status to the more hardcore NBA crowd—especially those spoiled by the entourage of excellent players in the 90s. He elevated the popularity of the game, and altered the free agency culture, but I don’t see the foundation of the game changing with his presence.

But LeBron sees a way out of this: Cleveland. Wiggins is there. A brand new coach is there. Cleveland still can’t buy a win if it had free coupons. Irving is there. Kevin Love might even be there. A hungry young squad is wearing Cavalier uniforms, and Cleveland is just as hungry as ever for a championship as the Browns look better and the Indians are actually being more consistent. LeBron knows that the only way to establish the legacy is to go the route of David Ortiz: end the curse, represent the city, and never have to buy food there again. Cleveland’s curse across all sports has been around since the 1960s, and with the East being as weak as ever this is their chance to sneak into the Finals and stir up some emotions. This is the potential for a new chapter to enter some new territory.

LeBron can cement himself as one of the best if he can lead a young team to the top of the world like he did in Miami with superior stars. Not to insult Wiggins, Love, Irving, or anyone else in the Cavs, but they are not the Heat. Cleveland does not have a slick GM like a Pat Riley, nor do they have an innovative coach like Spolstera. Lastly, they don’t have the clutch shooting of Ray Allen, the energetic range of Chris Bosh, or the playoff experience of Dwayne Wade. LeBron sees the potential but is starting again from the bottom.

Haters will be unable to gripe much if Cleveland wins it all, simply because the city has never seen it with their basketball franchise. There is no sellout, quitter, or lazy argument here. James has come back to his roots, he abandoned the chance to stay in Miami, to play in L.A., to play in New York, and to play in Chicago. He is back home after an extended vacation playing with some buddies and collecting a couple rings. His toughest task is ahead of him and if he can overcome the obstacles, then we have ourselves someone beginning to creep into the NBA books as one of the greatest. He is not among the greatest yet, but winning a ring in Cleveland will definitely elevate his status a bit.

Yes the media hype machine has affected our relationship with the best player in the NBA. Yes, his decision to go a city that has far more fair-weather and bandwagon fans than you can imagine didn’t help much either—making him more a fad than a once-in-a-lifetime experience. Yes, LeBron doesn’t deserve most of the hate. At the end of the day we will merely be disgruntled that all these intangibles (Like the biggest intangible of all: his two rings came during a lockout-shortened season missing a Derrick Rose and a true East rival and also during a Finals that was saved by the greatest 3-pointer in the history of the championship series made by a HOF Ray Allen) disallow for us to truly actually compare him to Jordan or Kobe.



Winning it all while wearing a Cleveland Cavaliers jersey however?



It just might silence all the hate and allow us to see him for what he truly might be: one of the best to ever play the game….whether we like it or not.


LeBron James, you have just signed a wimpy two-year contract to play in Cleveland and promised to finish what you started back home, back to where your career took off. This is most likely your last major opportunity to really prove us wrong.




Don’t. Mess. This. Up.

X-Men: Days of Future Past: 7/10

X-Men Days of Future Past should go down as the blockbuster film that had arguably the most daunting task you'll see from a Summer flick: successfully combining a rebooted franchise with the franchise it had just replaced. Luckily for all of us there's a good old-fashioned time travel story to connect the two without too many continuity disruptions. Bringing back the man that delivered the best of the X-Men films up to this point, 20th Century Fox went all out to ensure that they can still hang on to the Marvel franchise.

Based off of the highly-successful comic book series, Days of Future Past revolves around Wolverine (And not Kitty) heading back to the past to prevent a murder from occurring and creating the fallout that would lead to the dystopian-like present that involves all the mutants hiding for their lives. Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, the only constant that connects the two series of X-Men films, is the only hope to unite Professor X and Magneto in the 70s to prevent the creation of the ultra-powerful Sentinels. The emotional fallout from the events of First Class is overwhelmingly present so this movie feels a lot like a sequel and less as a mere connecting bridge between the X-Men films. Newcomers to the X-Men brand would probably be lost.

The time-traveling quirks and limitations that made Back to the Future a masterpiece are not present here; the focus is entirely on the characters and the task they have at hand. X-Men fans shouldn't be too upset because they get to see a heavy slew of the mutants including Quicksilver, Colossus, Storm, among others. Too bad most of the X-Men are condensed to cameo-like appearances.

And yea….still no Gambit……

Whatever the film lacks in humor and action, it makes up for it with the heavy set of drama, bouts with forgiveness vs. justice, and the genuine care you will have towards our heroes. But like I said, the action is rather lacking and after nearly 15 years of X-Men being on the screen the battling becomes...well.....repetitive. Which is a shame because Bryan Singer can craft good action sequences, especially when Quicksilver was involved. The Quicksilver appearance further proves the dulling of the fighting in X-Men when we see Magneto once again picking up something heavy with his mind and see Wolverine once again slash his way through opponents. After seeing the creative battles occurring on the Disney side, it gets hard to be blown away by anything here.

There is plenty of heart and good performances, but you can't help but feel slightly underwhelmed at the X-Men as this is the seventh film featuring at least one of the mutants since 2000. Back then the X-Men was the peak of joyful comic book mayhem as we saw lots of interesting characters work together and showcase their abilities. But after the likes of The Incredibles, The Dark Knight, The Avengers, and even the recent Captain America, the competition has caught up. It is time to expand the scope, and push the franchise farther ahead with more risks, more surprises, and more twists.

X-Men Days of Future Past will be sure to delight modern-day X-Men fans while slightly upsetting the hardcore crowd, but it doesn't quite top the quality batch of comic book movies we have seen within the past 5 years. Here's to hoping Apocalypse can shake things up a bit now that the transition between X-Men series is complete.