<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>james</title>
<link>http://www.cinemaroll.com/tags/james</link>
<description>New posts about james</description>
<item>
<title>W: Waste of Time</title>
<link>http://www.cinemaroll.com/Cinemarolling/W-Waste-of-Time.377811</link>
<description>
<![CDATA[<p>I expected deep insight into America's least respected president ever. I expected&amp;nbsp;to understand what make the man so famous for verbals gaffs that the phrase 'Bushisms' has been coined to describe them tick. I expected to love him or hate him but at least have every image I ever held of the USA's out-going president turned on it's head.What I got, however, was not much of anything...Stone's film dips it's toe in Dubya's past, including portraying his apparently stormy relationship with his politically active father and his hell-raising past as a young man. These flashbacks, however, are abandoned too early in the film to have any significant impact on our understanding of Bush as he is now, the most powerful man in the world. Instead we are subjected to re-hashes of his political decisions in the wake of 9-11. Perhaps in 20 or 30 years time these sequences will seem more powerful, but given that these events are still so vividly etched in the audience's minds, at times I just felt like I was watching Sky News.Speaking of the news, I can only hope that the segment in which two American newscasters discuss Bush's pull on the voters simply for wearing army gear was a satirical statement on cable news channels in the States because if the banter which passes for analysis between the two news anchors in any way resembles actual news coverage, then American journalism is doomed! According to these happy, polished presenters, it doesn't matter that Bush never went to war himself, he looks good in uniform and apparently that should be enough to win the trust of the voters during America's most turbulent time in international relations since the Vietnam War.For the most part, though, satire is thin on the ground as Stone refrains from poking fun at his subject or making any serious comment on the politics of the Bush era. I think much of the audience I viewed W. with were disappointed by this, as several loudly guffawed at even the slightest suggestion of mockery, perhaps expecting that there would have been more examples of this.Oliver Stone took a fantastic cast giving phenomenal performances (with the sole exception of Thandie Newton who portrayed Condoleezza Rice as a constipated twig in a manner which can only be described as painful to watch) and failed to make any sort of political or editorial statement worth taking home. Perhaps ambiguity was his aim, but considering the length of the film (a bum-numbing 130 minutes) and it's subject matter, I expected to at least have a few things to mull over on the Luas ride home...no such luck. More than anything, I was actually bored by the film, to the point where I actually dozed off for a few minutes mid-way!I don't think every film-maker needs to use the in-your-face propaganda of Michael Moore (in fact, the one of him is more than enough!) but I do think that we need a bit more bite from our cinematic political profiles, especially when they focus on such a controversial figure. For that reason I'm keeping my hopes up that 'Frost/Nixon' will provide me with more political meat to sink my teeth into on it's release than W.'s pitiful scraps.<br />2*s**</p><a href="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?x=&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinemaroll.com%2FCinemarolling%2FW-Waste-of-Time.377811"><img src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?x=&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinemaroll.com%2FCinemarolling%2FW-Waste-of-Time.377811" border="0"/></a>]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:59:17 PST</pubDate></item>
<item>
<title>Quantum of Solace: Wham, Bam, Thank You Mam, and I Loved It</title>
<link>http://www.cinemaroll.com/Action/Quantum-of-Solace-Wham-Bam-Thank-You-Mam-and-I-Loved-It.375963</link>
<description>
<![CDATA[<p>2008Director: Marc ForsterStarring: Daniel Craig, Dame Judi Dench, Mathieu Amalric, Olga Kurylenko, Gemma Arterton&amp;nbsp;</p>
<p>Quantum of Solace picks up directly where Casino Royale left off, with our hero mourning the loss of his lover Vespa, and burning with rage at the nefarious organisation which forced her to betray him. This is the first time the Bond franchise has ever continued a direct plot line through more than one film, and the narrative occasionally suffers as a result as the viewer may struggle to follow the complex web of deceit which Bond attempts to unravel. &amp;nbsp;Bond films have never before been too hung up on the plausibility of the plot, however, and Quantum of Solace is no exception, saving it's energy for it's visually stunning, viscerally breath-taking action sequences. It's a clich&amp;eacute; to say so, but I was actually on the edge of my seat, wincing in sympathy as Daniel Craig pounded the bad guys to pulp, while taking quite a bashing himself. The opening sequences in Italy are particularly amazing.&amp;nbsp;</p>
<p>The other Bond prerequisite is of course beautiful girls, and in Quantum of Solace they come in the form of the shockingly underused Gemma Aterton, and the powerful newcomer Olga Kurylenko, who shares bond's passion for revenge.&amp;nbsp;My only real disappointed with Quantum of Solace came with the anti-climatic final battle. Perhaps I was burnt out from the stomach churning action sequences which preceded it, but I didn't think the burning cardboard compound made a particularly dramatic setting for the finale, and the action itself seemed lacklustre compared with the earlier dynamism and power displayed.&amp;nbsp;This alone, however, would not be enough to deter me from recommending this film, and I think it is another fine addition to the 007 catalogue. It may not have the wow-factor of Casino Royale, but given that that film was so utterly different to every other Bond film, there was no way that Quantum of Solace could have surprised or impressed the critics in the same way.&amp;nbsp;***3*s</p><a href="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?x=&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinemaroll.com%2FAction%2FQuantum-of-Solace-Wham-Bam-Thank-You-Mam-and-I-Loved-It.375963"><img src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?x=&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinemaroll.com%2FAction%2FQuantum-of-Solace-Wham-Bam-Thank-You-Mam-and-I-Loved-It.375963" border="0"/></a>]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:40:30 PST</pubDate></item>
<item>
<title>Dragonball the Movie: Spring 2009</title>
<link>http://www.cinemaroll.com/Action/Dragonball-the-Movie-Spring-2009.281649</link>
<description>
<![CDATA[<p>For years now there has been speculation as to if and when there would be a live action version of the hit anim&amp;eacute; series Dragonball Z.  Last year 20th Century Fox seemed to answer this question when they announced that they had purchased the rights to the film in back in 2002, and soon the production began.  However it was soon revealed that the long anticipated film would not cover the sagas released as 'Dragonball Z' but instead would be loosely based on the shows precursor, 'Dragon Ball'.</p>
<p><img src="http://images.stanzapub.com/readers/2008/10/01/1_6.jpg" alt="" /></p>
<p>In the new film, the central character is still Goku.  Fans of the original Dragon Ball series will be familiar with the story of how Goku and Bulma met, how they met Yamcha the Desert Bandit and many more characters that make their appearances in the later Dragonball Z series.  The film will stay relatively faithful to the series however a more "grown-up" approach will be taken to make sure that it is reasonably believable.</p>
<h3>Cast</h3>
<p>Goku - Justin Chatwin<br /> Chi Chi - Jamie Chung<br /> Yamcha - Joon Park<br /> Bulma - Emmy Rossum<br /> Piccolo - James Marsters<br /> Roshi/Turtle Hermit - Chow Yun-Fat<br /> Gohan (senior) - Randall Duk Kim<br /> Mai - Eriko Tamura</p>
<h3>Plot Summary</h3>
<p><img src="http://images.stanzapub.com/readers/2008/10/01/0_17.jpg" alt="" /></p>
<p>In the original story, Goku was a child who lived with his grandfather (Gohan) in the middle of nowhere.  In the movie it seems that Goku is a high school student (18 years old) and although he does live with his grandfather, the similarities end from there on.  After his grandfather's death at the hands of Piccolo, Goku sets off on a trail to find the Legendary Dragonballs to help him stop Piccolo.  Now the Piccolo we see in the movie is not the same Piccolo as the one in Dragonball Z it is in fact his father.  The Piccolo in Dragonball Z is actually the spawn of Lord Piccolo, an evil ruler in the original manga.</p>
<p>Along the way, Goku meets many acquaintances including Bulma, Yamcha and eventually Master Roshi (also known as the Turtle Hermit).  No further information has been released as to the remainder of the plot but we have been told through interviews that it will include a world martial arts scene, plenty of flying and the legendary 'kamehameha wave'.</p>
<h3>Speculation</h3>
<p>In a recent interview Emmy Rossum, who plays Bulma, revealed that a large monster that appears in the Anim&amp;eacute; would also feature in the film.  She goes on to explain that it is actually an 8ft humanoid shaped monster.  One of the Androids? Perhaps Cell? Some even believe Raditz or Ozaruu, which would mean the end of the movie spilling over into Dragonball Z.  If this happens you can be sure there will be a sequel.</p>
<p>All in all, people have mixed views on what the movie will be like.  Many hardcore fans of the original (now primarily in their late 20's early 30's) will be worried that it messes up the story much in the same way Madonna covered up Don Mclean's American Pie.  Kids now say "American Pie? Yeah that Madonna song it's great".  Of course there is a young target audience for the movie which means that a lot of the original action, gore and especially humour will be cut out.</p>
<p>I personally was a big fan of Dragonball Z and didn't really get in to Dragon Ball until much later on but I still have my reservations about the film.  On the other hand it could be a hit but  I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.  See you in the Cinemas!</p>
<p><a href="trylobyte.wordpress.com/tag/dragon-ball" target="_blank">Image Source</a></p><a href="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?x=&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinemaroll.com%2FAction%2FDragonball-the-Movie-Spring-2009.281649"><img src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?x=&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinemaroll.com%2FAction%2FDragonball-the-Movie-Spring-2009.281649" border="0"/></a>]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:59:51 PST</pubDate></item>
<item>
<title>All About Casino Royale</title>
<link>http://www.cinemaroll.com/Action/All-About-Casino-Royale.86967</link>
<description>
<![CDATA[								<p>In a bond film we expect lots of action, sex and violence. Also threes lots of death and gadgets vehicles stunts and off course bonds mission. In his mission we expect Russians dieing and guns. There's always double-crossing unnamed guards and other baddies that bond kills.</p>
 
<p>In Casino Royale we studied 3 scenes. They were the stairwell scene the digitalis scene and the collapsing building casino royale is a remake of the first film that wasn't very good. In the 1st scene there asking for money 2nd bonds poisoned 3rd a house is destroyed.</p>
 
<h3>The first is stair well</h3>
<p>In this scene there are lots of sounds and dialog there's also a few special effects and Bondisms.<br />This is the basic sketch of this scene. Le chief goes up to his room so Bond follows he tells his girl to open the parcel and insides a gun meanwhile. Two men wait in le chief room. Then le chief enters the room they then ask le chiefe for there money they threaten to chop his girlfriend arm off but they don't. Le chief also said he would get there money. Bond was listening the men saw  bond they start fighting. So one gets chucked over the banister and the other carries on the fight down stairs with his sword they then smash a window finally they hit the floor bond starts to strangle the man but he reaches for the gun the bond girl pushes the gun in the air so the shot fires into the stairs then he is strangled .In this scene there are some special effects like when the man shoots and the smashing of the window and the sword blade hitting stuff and also blood .All the fighting is care fully choreographed so no ones hurt and it's the same when he gets strangled. In this scene there's death, girls and threats this is typical of a bond film I have named this Bondisms. There is lots of dialogue in this scene like the men waiting in the room the threats and the shouting and also the orders .The technique used most is sound. This includes the gunshot fighting footsteps screaming and being strangled etc. all this together really builds up lots of tension atmosphere for the rest of the film.</p>
<h3>Conclusion</h3>
<p>Casino Royale does contain most things we have come to expect from a bond film. But it just falls short in the action side off things. Even though it is a very good bond film one that many will enjoy. It still contains very good stunts and special effects and still a lot of action and they have more realistic props e.g. Better blood not ketchup.<br />Overall it is a very good bond film.</p>							<a href="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?x=&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinemaroll.com%2FAction%2FAll-About-Casino-Royale.86967"><img src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?x=&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinemaroll.com%2FAction%2FAll-About-Casino-Royale.86967" border="0"/></a>]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 24 Feb 2008 07:47:06 PST</pubDate></item>
</channel>
</rss>
