1934: The Scarlett Empress (85th!)

What else happened this year? The worst year of the great depression and an important year for establishing totalitarian dictatorships. Also, that picture of the Loch Ness Monster.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow a naive German Princess who marries into the Russian Royal family.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? She marries a simple-minded prince, and eventually becomes Catherine the Great, the one who, in mythology, fucked a horse. Here she’s happy with sleeping with a bunch of noblemen and soldiers, who help her to kill her husband and let her become Empress.

What is the meaning of the title? She’s never referred to as the scarlet empress in the movie, and I had to look up that it was indeed Catherine the Great’s nickname. It’s also weird to have a colour as a name in a black and white movie.

Here's our young princess straddling the line of 'coquettish' and 'brain damaged.' Seriously, it's hilarious how stupid she looks at the beginning of this movie.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Yep! A mistress of the prince is slapped around for some reason.

This is pre-code, so it can hint pretty heavily at sex and goings on in the court, but Catherine the Great as a young, German princess, spends the first half of the movie as a ‘naive’ waif and looks mildly retarded, for want of a better word. Also, it’s Marlene Dietrich, who's gorgeous. 

Any thoughts? It took me a while to piece together the plot, as a lot of it is implied rather than explained. Our young princess is brought to the Russian Court, where Empress Elizabeth reigns through lusty fury. The princess marries her mentally challenged nephew (I think), but he already has a mistress so the wedding isn’t going well. It’s even worse when she realises that her handsome soldier lover is the lover Empress Elizabeth, so following the Empresses death, she sets about getting the military on her side to help kill her husband and become the Empress. That’s the plot. It took me a while to work all that out.

Would you recommend this? There’s a literal cast of thousands (it even says so in the credits), and some of the scenes have a really epic feel – the wedding ceremony had a lot of people there, for example, and seeing men on horses storm the castle was pretty impressive. There’s a bit of intrigue and romance, and it looked great, but I probably won’t watch it again. There’s other pre-code movies which are more interesting, romantic and funny that I’d go to first.

Final thoughts? Catherine is a confident, man-hungry Empress by the movies end, and this has to be juxtaposed with her wide-eyed naivety at the beginning, but a lot of her ‘innocent’ looks come across as looking completely stupid by today’s standards. There’s a Scots word, ‘Glaikit’ which means dead behind the eyes, and it fits her perfectly. It was very distracting.

Incredibly, we have a surviving cast member of note. The child version of the Princess, is still alive – she’s played by Marlene Dietrich’s kid. Even more incredibly, this same actor is the cat-loving wife of Robert Mitchum in Scrooged, a movie I don’t think is very good, but which I’ve seen a lot. Anyway, she’s still going, and that’s awesome.

Only about 15 more of these to go, whoo! The others can be found right here pal.

1965: The Cincinnati Kid (84th)

What else happened this year? 1965… Let’s see, Cold War stuff… I can’t get anything more specific than that though. I thought it was the year Harold Holt drowned, but that was 1967. Civil rights stuff was 1965, as the voting rights act came in.

What is the plot - in one sentence? It’s the 1930s, and we follow a talented young gambler (Steven McQueen, 'the Kid') as he comes up against a talented older gambler (Edward G. Robinson, 'the Man.')

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? The Kid goes out of his way not to cheat, but ends up losing all his money, and getting into debt, after an improbable hand beats him.

What is the meaning of the title? He’s referred to as ‘Kid’ throughout, and while Cincinnati is mentioned, it isn’t mentioned much. This is weird, as most of the movie takes place in New Orleans, and the kid is never outright named the Cincinatti Kid.

Here's Ann-Margaret,complete with her famous 'mouse pointer nose', and the villain of the piece, a creepy guy that it took me most of the movie to realise was Rip Torn.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Ann-Margaret, a year off being married to Elvis, is now married to Karl Maldon. She goads him to slap her, but he doesn’t, which is a HUGE win for femininity from a mid-1960s movie. Let’s ignore how Rip Torn treats everyone, including his family, and focus on the positives of the movie...

As for not ageing well, it’s a period piece, and it features a pretty unpleasant cock fight. For the record: Steve McQueen slaps a cock around to goad it. I think this cockfight scene was left out of a lot of versions of the movie. It didn't add much, to be honest.

Any thoughts? I was very happy that this was about a poker game, instead of a Western movie, which I was expecting from the movies title. This was offset by the fact that I care so little for Poker in real life. I am also well aware of how unlikely the last pair of hands that were in the game were, too, but to give us a bleak ending I realised that it's important to ignore the laws of probability.

Would you recommend this? There’s a really good cast here, Edward G. Robinson, Karl Maldon, Steve McQueen, Ann-Margaret, and Joan Blondell. Joan, whom I had, by chance, just seen in The Gold Diggers of 1933, and it was interesting to note that she has the same face in those two movies, while her body had shifted in 30 years. They play pretty well and it kind of flew by, despite the fact that there was an hour before any real poker playing kicked off. I liked it, but I’m not sure that I’ll rush back to watch it again.

Final thoughts? Ann-Margaret is a very attractive woman, and I understand why Steve McQueen went for her and not that weird-looking child he was in love with. It was an age inappropriate looking relationship, though they end up together in the end. Watching this on HD, you see that Steve McQueen is grizzled and handsome, but looks older than he is, which makes the VERY young looking love interest that he has a little more creepy than it should be.

A shoe-shine boy bothers Steve McQueen throughout the movie, and by playing games with him, we see that The Kid's luck has changed. However, is Poker just luck? I have played a bit and yes. 

Despite the movie being in New Orleans, there’s not that much music: there’s a musical funeral at the beginning, a small shot in a nightclub, but otherwise the rest of the movie is tense silence on the music front. It makes a violin solo right at the end very jarring – is it the only music that’s not diagetic to the movie? I think so.

Anyway, that's enough of this, want more? go here, I said

1946: Cloak and Dagger (83rd)

What else happened this year? WWII stuff, it seems.

What is the plot - in one sentence? Early-ish on in WWII, A scientist (Gary Cooper) is drafted into the OSS to rescue a couple of famous scientist from Nazi hands.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? One of the scientists is shot by a Nazi nurse, the other in convinced to be rescued only if they can save his daughter from Nazi captivity. They bring what they think is his daughter along, but it’s a trap and there’s a shoot-out. At the movie’s end, Gary cooper and the old scientist fly away on an RAF plane, leaving the woman that has fallen in love with him to the inevitable uncertain future, despite promises to meet again when the war's over.

What is the meaning of the title? An OSS guy at the beginning says that his organisation specialises in ‘cloak and dagger’ stuff.

Incidentally, Gary Cooper is working ‘on the Manhattan Project’ which appears to be him on his own doing some welding. He later speaks some German as phonetically as possible and is able to blackmail an American traitor in her hotel room, but the spy work is pretty limited.

Here's the main couple of the movie, her, as pretty as a fox, him, as hairy-handed as a gorilla.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Amazingly, not really. There’s a (very) long battle at the end with a nazi goon* and he’s strangled slowly. During the fight he hits the female resistance fighter, but I think we can mark that as an incidental injury for this one. Even more of note, Gary Cooper deals with a hysterical woman by hugging her. She slaps him, and also calls him a ‘long American’ which seems to be pretty fitting for Gary Cooper.

There’s a funny bit at the beginning where Gary Cooper decries the waste of scientific effort of the Manhattan Project, and he argues that so many scientists, working together, instead of bringing destruction, could cure cancer. Then he lights a cigarette.

Any thoughts? The rest of the ‘spy work’ is laughably naive. For example, the female scientist they are trying to rescue has slipped into Switzerland, but mentions that she’s being blackmailed into returning to work on the Nazi nuclear weapons program. Gary Cooper tells her to ‘go there, but just do shitty work’ (I’m paraphrasing, of course) and she acts like that’s a genius idea that would never have occurred to her.

The Nazi spies are incredibly obvious, and must have been at the time the movie was made. Furthermore, the only hint at micro-technology involves a matchbox which may or may not have been a recording device, but after it is stolen by Gary Cooper, it's never mentioned again. Hilariously, Gary Cooper is able to blackmail a spy through a letter writing forgery, and a plan to hideout in an apartment is ruined by a cat.

The middle act of the movie is a waiting game – we’re waiting on the scientist to be freed, and his daughter to be rescued. In the meantime Gary Cooper and an attractive resistance fighter need to remain in hiding. After a few failed attempts, they end up hiding in a bomb shelter, and it’s heavily implied that they have sex there. This romance is a bit of a diversion but it’s not without its charms, it shows the hardships happening for people in Europe, the sacrifices that resistance workers have to make, and hints at the upcoming PTSD of an entire generation. It’s not particularly saccharine, and the ending, where he has to bid her adieu, is affecting. What hasn’t aged well is the use of ‘jealousy’ to make him interested, but that’s by the by, we also get a strangely paced romantic montage.

Would you recommend this? Yeah this was good. I’ll recommend it.

Final thoughts?

The pockmarked Nazi who is strangled in a doorway by Gary Cooper is one of the guys who is in the gang at the end of ‘The invisible Stripes’ – I noticed that because he has a very distinctive face and I wondered, almost aloud, if I’d ever seen him before when I watched that movie. Lo and behold, he’s in another movie almost right away. I’m sure a quick IMDb search would say I had seen him before, but who wants to go to that site?

At a couple of times, in both America and in Europe, Gary Cooper chomped down on an apple. I was sure this was going to inspire some ‘eureka’ moment or lead to a call-back, but it just turns out that he likes apples. Weird.

Anyway, I've finished watching movies now, so I'm coralling the notes that I've made into readable articles. I hope you can imagiene that it's not easy. You can read the rest right here, thanks!

1938: A Christmas Carol (82nd)

What else happened this year? War in the East, while in the West a lot of stuff that suggests that a full World War would be inevitable - Sudetenland goes back to Germany, for one. A quick internet search suggests that it was only this year that the discovered Arabia had petrol - amazing.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We meet Ebenezer Scrooge, a miserable old man with a dislike of Christmas.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He’s visited by three spirits of Christmas, as well as the ghost of an old business associate. They show him how being miserable will lead to his demise, and because of this he has a complete change-of-personality and becomes psychotically happy and generous.

What is the meaning of the title? Thinking of it, it’s a bit weird that it’s called Christmas Carol because that is usually a type of song.

This is a small part of the Cratchit family, weirdly stroking the goose's corpse as though it was a living puppy.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Can you imagine? There’s nothing of the sort, there’s some implied child death, but that’s all right, it was Victorian times.

Any thoughts? I hadn’t seen a non-Mickey Mouse version of this (or the Muppets, come to think of it), - I certainly haven’t seen a straight live-action version of this, because it’s such a classic. I was mildly fearful it would be too reverent, and was delighted that within a couple of minutes, the Donald Duck nephew character was sliding along with a crippled child on his back.

In this age before ice skates, sliding seems to be one of the few pleasures open to people, save for actively fighting in the streets (something that the ghost of Christmas present has a much-needed magic cure for).

Like all the best Christmas Carol’s, a lot hinges on Scrooge being a completely miserable old git. More hinges on him becoming a certifiable madman at the end of it too, and the Scrooge in question is more than up to the task.

The Cratchett family, which seems to number in the low hundreds, are shown enjoying Christmas and coo and gabble like maniacs for a goose, and for punch, and then for pudding. I was therefore surprised that they’re relatively restrained when Scrooge rocks up with gifts for them at the end. Seriously, they’re stroking the feathery corpse of a goose like it’s a puppy.

In Tiny Tim news, I was disappointed that he was actually pretty big and healthy looking, but happy to note that he, and one of his sisters at least, remain alive at the time of writing. I’m aware that it’s a bit morbid, watching movies and looking up who’s alive, and making a note of child actors who are now well into their nineties, but I don’t have a lot of love in my life right now. 

The sister who is alive still, who found huge fame later on on Lost in Space, was the legitimate daughter of the actors who were playing the Cratchit parents, which is pretty nice.

Would you recommend this? As mentioned before, I hadn’t seen a non-comedy, non Mickey version of it, but it’s a pretty well defined tale by now and is sentimental and nonsensical. I enjoyed it, but perhaps I’d enjoy it a bit more a bit closer to Christmas itself!? (Note, I watched it in, August - time of publishing is December, eep)

Final thoughts? Tiny Tim is carried around by his dad for a bit, and it looks like an ordeal. It’s close to being an ironic nickname.

The ghost of Christmas past turns up and she’s gorgeous, and the ghost of the future needed to be a lot more gaunt (it didn’t say anything, but the arm with which it pointed was fleshy and youthful looking), I want basically a skeleton arm pointing there.

I always think of a Christmas Carol from an article I read that stated that as Ebeneezer doesn’t celebrate Christmas, is a tight-fisted money lender, and has a weird name, he's a Jewish parable. I can’t even remember if that is from a pardoy or not. Anyway, keep going!

Enjoyed this? check the rest here. Didn't? Well, you can go fuck yourself here.

1939: Invisible Stripes (81st)

What else happened this year? WWII stuff in Europe, for sure!

What is the plot - in one sentence? We meet an ex-con named Cliff, played by George Raft, as he tries to live a straight life...

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He has trouble finding work, then gets dragged back into crime by Humphrey Bogart, who masterminds some very relaxed bank robberies. At the end, Cliff is killed in a shoot-out with Bogart’s gang. However, he’s left some money behind for his biologically improbable brother, which will allow him to open a garage, get married, and avoid some of the same mistakes his brother made.

What is the meaning of the title? Quite early in the story (and it’s not a long story anyway) Bogart mentions that even when you’re out of prison, it’s difficult to live a normal life, because it’s like you’ve still got invisible stripes on you all the time. Turns out old Bogie is right.

Here the 'brothers' have a chat. I'd just watched the Wild Bunch. and I freaked out a bit that William Holding was so handsome and young once.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? It appears that the late thirties was the absolute pinnacle for high-panted fashion, and my prediction is that before 2040, that will come around again. I can only hope that some global catatstrophe means that it is impossible. 

There’re a few weird things other than this, such as a focus on not being rich enough to get married – despite the couple basically living together. You’ll be happy to know, however that the slapping in this movie is done between fully-grown, pock-marked gangsters.

Speaking of note ageing well, George Raft’s character claims to be 27, but he’s a solid 40 if he’s a day. It’s even more preposterous that he’s the brother of William Holding, who is a tall, dream boy whose only flaws seem to be a lack of money, and a hair-trigger temper. Another thing that hasn’t aged well is the romantic depictions of love between George Raft and his mother, right down to sexy dancing and mouth kisses. Yep. That’s not aged well.

Any thoughts? In the beginning, they’re just out of prison and Bogart travels on the train with our hero, George Raft, whose character name is Cliff Taylor. Bogart describes a woman he’d like to be with most of all, and the woman he describes is Lauren Bacall, to a tee. They hadn’t met yet, but I’m glad his dreams came true.

Cliff looks for work, but has to tell them he’s a con and so is rejected for any good jobs. At one of the crappier jobs, he’s described as a ‘snooty con’ by someone. I was sure I'd heard a c-bomb dropping. Another thing that I had struggle listening to was William Holding criticising (possibly) his brother and mother worrying about him, by saying ‘you keep me like a rubber stamp’ – even from context, I don’t know if this is good or bad.

Would you recommend this? Yeah this a swift, interesting character piece with some nice parts. There’s a promotion-at-work montage, and a bank-robbery montage too, which might be a first in cinema history.

I’ve seen George Raft in a few things: he’s the lead gangster who’s hunting them in Some Like it Hot, for example – so it was good to put a name to the face. A brief search shows that despite his tough guy demeanour, you’re never far from a video of him sexy dancing to a group of G.I.s in WWII movies. A similar shock happened when we get to see James Cagney dancing in Yankee Doodle Dandy.

Final thoughts? After a false accusation, Cliff loses his job and is forced to stay ‘2 nights in a cell’ for no reason. For the record I watched this during a 2 week strict quarantine while deep nose tests were administered, so come on.

Bogart only really appears at the beginning and the end of the movie, but… you really notice his eyebrows both times, they’re approaching monobrow, and they obviously got some grooming later on in his career.

Oh yeah, and as George Raft leaves prison, the warden seems really nice and says ‘if you feel like committing a crime again, call me!’ - but he doesn’t. He also doesn’t get his old job, which he was doing very well at, after a false accusation of robbery. Perhaps they were just a bit freaked out by him dirty dancing with his mother, which happened right before the robbery was meant to take place.

Anyway, may you all have snowmen dreams.And if your dream is to read more of these year-by-year movie reviews, you should click here.

2010: Meek's Cutoff (80th!)

What else happened this year? 2010. let’s see… I was living in Newcastle, world events… I can’t think of any. There was an election in the UK, which sucked, oh and there was a swine flu. Which was the last flu thing any of us ever heard about.

What is the plot - in one sentence? In another Western, this time a post-Western, we follow a group of wagon trailers who are heading west.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? The get lost and struggle with thirst and a general lack of water. They encounter a Native American guy, they lose one of their carriages, and they find a tree with green leaves, suggesting that the water they are looking for is nearby, but we’re left to an uncertain fate for the entire party.

What is the meaning of the title? The guide they have is named Meek, and as this is based on a true story, the area they are in is now named Meek’s Cutoff, as it seems that we meet them at the point that they become cutoff (unless it means cutoff in a geological sense). I don’t think the real Meek would have glued his beard on every morning as the actor here evidently did, though.

The beard budget for this movie must have been huge. This is our man Meek.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? No, this is a woman directed movie, Michelle Williams is the moral heart of the movie, and she even defends the Native American guy against Meek, who is desperate to kill him. Despite that, and the hint that Michelle Williams’ character is the intelligent and moral centre of the group, she’s left from most important conversations, instead she’s treated to overheard snippets of earnest discussion from the menfolk. For the record it’s three husband and wife teams, a child, and Meek.

Any thoughts? There’s a real sense of thirst and how unplesant a trip like this would have been. There’s a pious and shrill woman annoying everyone, everyone sheds sentimental trinkets to save energy from carrying them, and there’s endless walking and struggle. Looks like it wasn’t fun.

When thirst is hitting hard, they are happy to come across a big lake,… but we’re told it’s alkaline water that they can’t drink. I am not sure that this happens, but I’m also far too lazy to look it up.

I also want to make a shout out to Paul Dano, who is in this as one of the husbands, and he’s made a very healthy career out of looking unhealthy and being the biggest weiner in any movie he’s in. He’s good in this.

Would you recommend this? It’s well-shot, ponderous but not slow, and tense but nothing happens. It was interesting, though the ending was a ‘is that it?’ style disappointment.

Final thoughts? The men each go in a different direction to look for water. The women stay behind and the native American guy happens upon them. To signal the men, she fires a gun twice, which involves muskets, tamping, a little gunpowder, and then firing. It’s a process. It takes about a minute of the movie, and it’s pretty impressive, though in real life she’d be a scalp, in that amount of time, you’d imagine.

One of the first shots we see if the groups moving things over a river. On of the things is a colourful bird in a cage. It’s the most certain money in the world that that cage is going to be empty by the end of the movie. Spoilers: it was.

Having a great time? Want to read more. You can go here. Or here. Or even here.

2002: May (79th)

What else happened this year? Iraq war stuff and the war on terror. No thanks.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow a lonely and strange young woman as she looks for love.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? She’s more than merely strange, especially after being jilted by her two lovers. She hacks up several people and uses their parts to create a best friend. At the end of it, it starts stroking her face. Her mother had told her ‘if you can’t find a friend, make one’ when she was young.

What is the meaning of the title? Her name is May, easy one!

This is the beast she's made by the movie's end (spoilers for that sentence). She's got pretty girls legs, dreadlock guys arms, and dreamboys hands. She's going to have some fun.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? She isn’t slapped around, but she’s treated pretty badly. And keeps biting guys she kisses.

What’s not aged well: answering machine messages, what a grim time to be alive.

There’s also a little bit of lesbian panic – Anna Faris is a predatory lesbian, who spends a lot of time flirting with and then seducing May. She later finds a lover, who is an attractive woman, but is dressed in prime 2002 garbage. She looks terrible, there’s a guy with dreadlocks that May gets the arms of for her monster, and he looks like shit too. It’s interesting that the fashion is as stupid as stuff from the 90s, and 80s now.

Any thoughts? I went in expecting a horror movie, and it’s more a psychological thriller. What’s interesting is that though she’s weird, and awkward as hell, you spend the whole movie feeling sorry for her, even though she’s a murderer with a hand fetish.

There are general themes of upbringing (her mother made her a creepy doll which appears to whisper to her at some stages), and there’s a lot of unrequited love. What’s probably more telling is… how much happened, and how much is her imagination? Did she kill that cat? Did those kids crawl around on broken glass?

Would you recommend this? Interesting, for sure. Not really a horror movie, but an interesting psychological thing with some horror elements to it.

Final thoughts? She has a huge hand fetish. She has that fetish sated by a handsome dreamboy. Lucky girl. This was fine.

May herself is also pretty, but she's tied her hair back and is wearing glasses, which makes her weird looking for the movie. why not?

79 Gone already. Where does the time go? You can click here to read more.

2004: Night Watch (aka Ночной Дозор) (78th)

What else happened this year? The Olympics were in Athens, I headed to Sydney for a university course, and Bush got re-elected.

What is the plot - in one sentence? At a hidden tangent to everyday society, there’s a battle between light and darkness, and we follow a new recruit to the light side.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? The good side manages to stop an armageddon event, but the dark side tricks the new recruit guy into betraying his own son, and a battle takes place after this.

What is the meaning of the title? The good guys are the night watch. For the record, the people in charge or protecting the world and all that is in it, have at their disposal: a small office with two computers, a truck with three people who may be magic in it, and their great saviour can’t climb 7 flights of stairs without getting out of puff. I think I’d choose the darkness.

This is the son having a between worlds vision. The Effects for this were very cool, but it only happened a couple of times in the movie.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Does a woman get slapped around… not really, there’s violence against ‘women’ but they’re all magical beasts of some sort (it’s very ill-defined – there’s a tiger woman who changes once into a tiger, with some pretty unconvincing CGI.)

Some other things which have aged badly: the nu-metal soundtrack, which was terrible at the time, and the almost constant shaky-cam, particularly for action shots. It’s jarring.

Of note, the main bad guy is playing a sort of video game version of the final fight (he also, ridiculously but not un-coolly rips out his spine to use as a a sword for no reason) but he is swinging the controller around to control the characters. Looking at the year, he predicted the Nintendo Wii.

Any thoughts? This was a bit muddled, glossing over certain things which needed explaining, and taking a lot of time to go anywhere. It starts off with some LOTR knockoff battling with an English language voiceover, which thankfully stopped as they go into a cool-ish sci-fi world.

The central concern for the mid part of the movie, a kid is lured to a couple of vampires, the ‘good’ guy follows the kid, finds the vampires, is attacked by them, and kills one, leaving the other to cause mayhem, is completely nuts. For some reason though, this leads to a huge amount of trouble for breached protocol. But, it’s obviosuly self-defence,and it’s not clear why this killing leads to greater conflict between dark and light.

There’s also a bit involving a woman who is ‘cursed’ and who will somehow bring about the end of the world (a plane is shown crashing, in a pretty cool scene too), but her curse involves her having people get sick around her – but she’s a doctor, of course they’re sick.

Other things that I think could have done with some explanation – most of the stuff involving the son of the main guy. The owl-human assistant – what was her deal? The main bad guy’s partner is a woman who was wearing a very strange dress while she sang on a stage… she’s called Alice and she’s there for a single scene, when it was hinted that she should have been there longer – I would have needed an hour to make sense of her dress.

Other than that it was interesting and there were some really cool effects on the few times that they went into someone’s spirit (which happens when someone is able to see both reality and the underworld).

Final thoughts? At the very beginning, we’re shown a flashback of the guy who turns out to be the main ‘good guy’ of the movie. He’s visiting a witch, and he’s hoping to give his ex-girlfriend an abortion so that he can get her back (yeah, some logic there)… but at the time, he had no knowledge that magic was real… but he must have had an inkling at least, surely, otherwise he wouldn’t have visited someone who can give his ex an abortion? The other good guys stop the ceremony going ahead, recruit him (he can see them, most people wouldn’t be able to) and the kid who is a sort of Christ figure at the end, was the fetus which wasn’t aborted at the time…. Was this movie an anti-abortion movie? Knowing what I know (nothing), I’m going to say… yes??

78 done here, the others are here. Click 'em if you want, merry fuckin' christmas to you.

1943: Shadow Of A Doubt (77th)

What else happened this year? World War 2 stuff mainly. Of most note is that Alfred Hitchcock wasn’t able to get back to the UK to visit dying family members, and so made this movie as a form of therapy.

What is the plot - in one sentence? A family in small town America have their lives changed when the younger brother of the mother rocks up for a visit.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He forms a strong bond with his niece above all, but charms the family. Despite this, he’s a murderer of widows, and after a struggle, dies in a train crash. The town he’s in mourns him, his secret going with him to his grave.

What is the meaning of the title? It seems a pun, but there is a shadow of doubt about him from very early on.

Yet another awkward movie dinner. From L-R: the dad, the niece, uncle, and the two smaller children.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? On the whole I’ll argue that this movie has aged well, the town the family are in is just idealism, USA, - it’s a dreamed-for town of picturesque squares, traffic cops instead of traffic lights, and sharing malts in diners with your handsome uncle. As for abuse, the uncle spends a lot of time trying to kill his niece (they’re both called Charlie) and he also grabs her by the wrists a little. Fair play to her for tripping him up and making him fall into the path of a train.

Of note is that Charlie (the girl) is poisoned by carbon monoxide, but manages to escape. She’s slapped around a little by the doctor, and given whiskey (not whisky…) for her troubles. I don’t think that’s how they do it these days.

Any thoughts? This is a ridiculous movie, but one which seems more than a little self-aware. Because of that, everything in the movie makes perfect sense.

Uncle Charlie goes out of his way to destroy an article in the newspaper about a series of widow killings. The article is presumably one of many, and him taking it from a paper is more suspicious than anything else he could have done. We also have a couple of police officers who, for some reason, are trailing uncle Charlie, sure that it’s him. They, for some reason, don’t know what he looks like.

Meanwhile, Charlie the Younger, having fallen out of an obvious lust with her uncle and realised his penchant for killing fat old ladies, gives him an ultimatum: Leave or I’ll tell the police. He stays, and attempted murder of her follows… what’s interesting though, is that she’s willing to let her murderous uncle’s spree continue, just so that she can save her mother’s feelings. In the logic of the movie, though, this is all perfectly fine,

Also of note, the Family ages are all over the place. There’s Charlie the niece, who is late teens, ish, two tiny children, and the parents who seem in their 50s at least. That doesn’t matter, as the smallest kid steals the show a bit, she’s an avid reader who talks like an adult. She gives a prayer to ‘Veronica Lake’ and just wants to be left alone to read, who can blame her? The other child, a boy, seems only to tell of crazy superstitions and old wives tales of the time, for example, ‘if you sing at the table, you’ll marry a crazy husband.’

Would you recommend this? Yes. This was lubricious but a lot of fun, and also a little tense at times.

Of particular interest to me is the town, an everywhere USA which never could have existed in reality. A prosperous place where people are milling around at all times, policemen who know everyone, attractive schoolfriends of the younger Charlie, and a bunch of funny secondary characters. My two favourites being a skeletal librarian who religiously enforces the 10am-9pm opening hours of the town library (can you imagine that happening now?), and a neighbour who is obsesses with the perfect murder and chats about it endlessly with the father of the family, each planning death on the other in a friendly way.

The town is tiny, but has a town square, an upper crust, and a single seedy bar where the Charlies have a tense conversation. In the end, it (the movie and the town) is charming enough that you don’t mine some of the most ludicrous plot holes of all time.

Final thoughts? Throughout the movie, almost subconsciously, we are shown footage of old couples dancing. There’s not any explaination – they can’t be attractive widows prime for a killing, as they seem to be dancing with their husbands. It’s never answered, and I’m too tired to even care.

What’s interesting is how strange this movie is, There’s a lot of implied cousin-ly attraction there for most of the first half of the movie. Certainly the uncle / neice relationship is framed romantically at first. After Uncle Charlie’s death, the choice to deify the guy (for ‘business success’ ?) is also a very interesting end to the movie, but perhaps most interesting of all is the policework. The two police men follow a man across the country when they don’t know what he looks like, make up elaborate lies to follow him around, and enter his home, and then at the end of it, the younger one ends up engaged to the young neice. It’s not ideal policework, I’ll give you that.

That's it, 77 down, few fewer to go! The others can be found here

2013: The Selfish Giant (76th)

What else happened this year? According to the internet, ‘twerking’ became a thing, and the Boston Marathon was bombed. So many memories... 

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow a young, impoverished boy around Yorkshire as he is expelled from school and looks to make ‘his fortune’ in copper wire theft. 

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He gets into a debt with a local scrap dealer, and is forced to collect some copper wiring from a dangerous site. A shock kills his only friend, and he mourns him until that kids mother comes along. 

What is the meaning of the title? It’s apparently take from an Oscar Wilde short story , where a giant locks off his garden and invites the winter in, and then relents when the kids of the area throw a wobbly. It doesn’t really apply here 

This is a contemporary movie. This is from when they are stealing copper from a power plant. There's also a visible mouse clicker in this picture, which someone cooler than I would have changed.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? There’s no slapping, but the threat of violence hangs around EVERYWHERE, particularly in the friends house. This was a grim movie. 

Any thoughts? The main kid, who is named Arbor, is a a ritalin-fed ADHD kid, and he’s the biggest annoyance of all time. We all know someone like that from school, and they’re all working in copper wire now, and all forcing the police to take their shoes off when they come over. 

 Despite that, it’s a tragic movie. His family life is grim, he’s got a single mum, a drug addicted brother, and his friend is part of a clan under the grim leadership of a pale junkie. This friend is a more tragic figure, he’s got a grim future, but has a link to animals that suggests a way out, but his misplaced loyalty to Arbor gets him killed. 

Would you recommend this? Pretty grim stuff, I’ll give you that. Poverty porn? Yes, but there’s a scene where they race a couple of horses along a main road, with cars crashing into each other, and it’s pretty awesome in a terrifying way. This was a bit of a peek into a life that I wouldn’t have expected to see. 

Final thoughts? Is there much money in scrap metal? There’s definitely money in copper, but what a grim way to make a living. 

 The sound from the wire which killed his friend was really cool: it was a very deep hum which I replayed a couple of times because I liked it. 

There’s seemingly some debate about whether or not Arbor killed that foal deliberately (it had led to a huge falling out between the friends in the first place) – I’ll say yes, he was jealous and had a history of violence and lashing out.

 Here we go, 76 down. The other 75 can be found right here! RIGHT HERE!

1966: Farenheit 451 (75th)

What else happened this year? England won the soccer world cup, of course. China was also in the midst of the horrors of the Cultural Revolution. Of those two things, one is mentioned constantly in the country it happened, one not at all. Guess which is which.

What is the plot - in one sentence? It’s a dystopian future, and we follow Montag, a ‘fire’man, whose job it is to burn books which have been discovered: they’re all illegal now.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He starts reading, which is illegal. This causes a crisis of conscience, amplified when a woman chooses to burn herself to death rather than live without books. Eventually he leaves and finds a community of people who have memorised books, and wander around reciting them endlessly.

What is the meaning of the title? At 451 Fahrenheit, books start to burn, it’s the name of the firemen’s office too.

This is their fire engine. It's shown speeding along roads and looks genuinely cool and dangerous as a prop. It's probably in some billionaires private museum now.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Julie Christie plays two characters, one the girlfriend of the main character, one a more interesting neighbour. Neither of them get slapped around. However, one of them gets ogled by some medics who come and deal with an overdose of mood levellers she takes. Let’s also just ignore that immolation, as self-inflicted. As for ageing well, this movie has aged a lot better than you may think. It’s a ridiculous sci-fi aesthetic which is both retro and very futuristic, but the themes have kept a lot of poignance.

While the original book was a critique of book-burning, this movie puts in a little more criticism of the nascent pharmaceutical drug rage, and these criticisms valid today. It appears that everyone takes various chemical drugs to level their moods, and it has various effects. It's implied that reading leads to emotion, and it needs to be limited, thus the ban. For example, Julie Christie in her girlfriend character forgets that she needed medical assistance the night before. 

The glazed expressions and lack of inner thoughts can today be easily compared to the obsession with gawping at phones and reality TV instead of books today. Very interestingly, there’s a bit where all of the travellers on the monorail thing (which looked very cool, by the way) rub themselves in an idle-minded but horny sight, it’s a very clear throughline to people gawping aimlessly at their phones on public transport. Arguments of ‘but some people read books on their mobile phones’ can be met with a raised eyebrow, at least where I am.

Any thoughts? This is the second example here of a movie set in England but with a strange case of ‘inexplicable German Guy’ syndrome, Montag is just German and not commented on, in an era when it would have been. What’s interesting is that his black suit, and all of his firemen colleagues, really show up the dandruff on their shoulders in modern HD transfers. It made me a little queasy.

There’s a bit of camera trickery, and a few things which are just unmentioned which hint at a bit of world-building that I quite enjoy. For example, the firemen can use the fireman’s pole to go up – it’s just footage of people going down, reversed – but if you aren’t having a good day, it won’t let you and you have to use the stairs. I liked that.

Would you recommend this? It’s on the nose, quite interesting and has aged well. There’s some interesting thoughts, and with a bit of of-the-time grime to its vision of the future, I’ll give it a thumbs up. It’s also very clever to spoken credits at the beginning of a movie where illiteracy is forced on people.

One thing is for sure, I would rather watch this than a remake from 2018.

Final thoughts? The conclusion ends with our heroes arriving at a commune where everyone remembers a book by rote, and it’s then handed down through oral tradition? That won’t work.

This is also the place for this. A few years ago, when I lived in Edinburgh, every Saturday that I could afford to, I'd head to a fancy breakfast place for coffee, fried meats and danishes. At first this was with a then girlfriend, and then with my two housemates (this is really going back!) A few times, Julie Christie was there, usually minding her own business. Very cool. One time though, someone dropped a yoghurt, not-too-near her and she went crazy at the waiter, who was genuine sorry for it. But because it was such an outburst, everyone in the cafe murmured… huh, that’s Julie Christie… they probably wouldn't have noticed had she remained quiet. Anyway, weird time in my life.

Want to read more of this? You can...HERE

2012: Beyond Outrage (aka アウトレイジ ビヨンド) (74th)

What else happened this year? On a Personal level, I was working in Georgia (the country) and met some very interesting people, some of whom I’m still friends with. On a global level, there was… the Olympics in London, and an election for Obama, whoo!

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow a conflict between two yakuza gangs after some meddling from a policeman.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? An alliance is formed between a gang from Osaka and a new gang which is formed from old enemies [It seems that these two enemies were the focal point of the first movie, this is a sequel]. They work to get rid of a Toyko clan which has wronged them before. When everything seems settled, the police betray one of the new gang leaders, and the last man standing kills the policeman behind all the scheming – he’s a sort of Iago figure, and some of the other detectives are evidently unimpressed by him, too. The last man standing is Takeshi Kitano, so it’s no surprise.

What is the meaning of the title? This is a sequel to a movie called ‘Outrage’ and so it goes ‘Beyond’ what has happened there. I’m not sure exactly what the original outrage was in the first one, but I’d genuinely be interested in finding out what it was.

So the guys shooting are part of Takeshi's gang and are assassinating some enemies. However, each enemy needs like, 14 bullets to the chest before they die. It's a bit weird, and it happens a few times.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? There are two women in the movie, one is a prostitute with some yakuza tattoos, one is a gangster’s moll who sees her man get shot up. This is an old-fashioned man’s movie. This is already a decade old, and because it’s so sleek, I think the only thing which may age it are the overblown gunfights.

Any thoughts? It’s a Yakuza movie, so it’s nothing but settling old scores and not much else. The detective who is seeking to play all the gangs off each other, is one of the main villains of the movie, and his partner, a - tall guy seen in a lot of movies (he’s the guy who helps edit the videos in Ringu, for example), plays a concerned but confident policemen very well.

There’s political wrangling, assassinations, and even some interesting plot details – a particularly odious little guy is killed by a baseball pitching machine, for example, though the whole thing could have done with a little more of the trademark Takeshi's flights of fancy and humour inside the violence.

Would you recommend this? Yeah, I would. The plot never really goes beyond – we have to kill our enemies - but it’s shot deliberately, the action scenes are good, it’s undercut by an effective yet minimal soundtrack. Importantly, the details of the plot are complicated but not convoluted. I’ll try to watch the original and the sequel if possible

Final thoughts? Takeshi directs this, and plays a couple of the ‘coolest’ scenes: he helps drill a guy to death, and shows a cool and detached nonchalance to proceedings; his allies and underlings (who just appear as a gift from the Osaka gang) seem to be everywhere, and though the bullet fighting seems a little overblown (see the notes on the picture above) this really kicked ass.

Why am I posting so many today, you may ask? I haven't been able to log on, but... happy to say, I'm very nearly done now. Keep your eyes peeled and check back here to see the others as they come up.

1969: Alfred the Great (73rd)

What else happened this year? Summer of Love, man.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow Alfred The Great, a king of Wessex, England, as he fights Danish invaders, in the, ooh, 9^th century.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He is a bit of a pious prick, and ends up ostracising himself from his nobles. After some soul-searching, he promises greater equality, bringing outlaws and noblemen to a final battle against the Vikings. The battle looks lost until a bunch of armed monks and peasants join in the fight. He forgives the Danish Leader instead of killing him, and looks to get back with his wife, who can’t stand him but still loves him. 

What is the meaning of the title? It’s a rare ‘named-after-the-main-character’ movie.

It's been ages since I wrote this, but on seeing this picture, I immediately had a facial spasm of annoyance at the redhead on the right. He's combines gymnasts jumping with his fighting and talks in verse. He didn't get his head caved in, which is a tremendous shame.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? A woman does! Alfred is meant to be very religious, but also very lusty. This angers him, and he takes it out on his wife. Slapping his wife is almost his first act as King. His wife, an old childhoold friend, is slapped around for a bit, and later prays that he won’t be so violent to her, implying some vague sexual violence too. He also sets a (very obviously friendly) dog on her. She later takes up with a ‘Danish’ Prince (played by Michael York in a fake beard), and you can’t blame her.

Other things which haven’t aged well, they are given a Viking as hostage, and he’s ‘simple-minded’ i.e. retarded.

Any thoughts? There’s a lot of drama here, which is just as well because the action scenes aren’t really up to much. There’s some impressive marching and formation setting, particularly for the final scene, but the open battle scenes are really not great.

There are a lot of famous actors in this, aside from Alfred, played by David Hemmings. His Athelstane is Julian Glover, the leader of the outlaws in the swamp is a very young, boomingly-voiced Ian McKellen, and the viking leader is Michael York. The Vikings wear all black and seem to chant in unision. There’s a battle at the beginning where they do a chant then a shield smash, and repeat for ages, which must have been exhasuting. There are a few scenes where they have a lot of extras, but the action isn’t ever quite up to it. 

Some of the added secondary voices and dubbing is also hilarious. If there's a plot to ambush the Danes, we're told that Alfred knows what he's doing, but a dozen shrill, off-screen voices question it, and his right to be king. Every time. I found it hilarious

Would you recommend this? Despite the big names, this is a pretty tepid thing. I think that the Last Kingdom covers the same era and ideas in a better way, and that's only ok, too.

It also suffers because the main character is such a prick. He's smug, pious and annoying, and it's impossible to feel any sympathy for him. 

The central romance is weird, the action not great, and the politics, such as they are, are muddy at best. Yeesh.None of the performances are terrible, but this was a huge box office failure for a reason.

Final thoughts?

Alfred has a 4 year old kid, who lives with his mother and her Danish lover. He eventually meets his son, and despite the story saying that he's 4, it's played by a very strange looking, quite large 9 year old. It's weird.

Also, this has some of the very worst 'dead acting since the Barefoot Contessa, some of the extras can be seen chatting and laughing while they are 'dead' from battle.

Another one done! You can find the rest right here baby! Hope you're all fab. 

1985: Lost in America (72nd)

What else happened this year? This I do know – that Rainbow Warrior boat was sunk by French agents. Imagine that happening now!

What is the plot - in one sentence? Neurotic Los Angeles advertising exec Al Brooks gets a job offer in New York instead of the promotion he was promised, and decides instead to travel around America in a motorhome with his wife.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? She loses all their money, gambling, and they stop in some godforsaken part of Arizona, before deciding to take the job offer that he got at the beginning in New York. The written message at the end tells us that if you drive from L.A. to New York, go through Utah instead of Arizona.

What is the meaning of the title? They aren’t ever really lost in America, so we have to assume it’s a more metaphorical lost, which they are.

She looks like she's wearing a pelt made of muppets.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? No one is slapped around! The ‘wife’ of the piece is the woman who was the star of Airplane! and she’s a bit of a dope in this. She’s also covered in some of the ugliest clothes you’ve ever seen in your life. 1985 is peak hideous fashion for women, I will say.

Similarly, Al Brooks spent a lot of time worrying about a car that he was buying, and that he was looking forward to owning. Seeing one out in the flesh being driven by an obvious sex-offender spurs him to quit his road-crossing job and go back to the rat race, but the car is fucking hideous.

Also they don’t want to go to New York, they wanted to stay in L.A.. For some reason though, when he’s offered a job out there instead t’s like they offered him a job in some third world country. His reaction is insane. However, the shot of New York at the end makes it look a little dangerous, but still pretty fuckin’ cool.

Any thoughts? Al Brooks looks a lot like James Caan in this movie. You could easily cast them as brothers.

At the end of their ‘ordeal’ – we’re told that they’d only been gone for two weeks.

Would you recommend this? This was a weird, not very funny comedy. If it’s a satire of road trip movies, it’s pretty tame – they mention Easy Rider a lot, for example. There were a few really awkward bits in it – her losing all of their money to a gambling binge, and her going away with the beer-swilling guy from Bloodsport, only for him to beat up Al Brooks, being another. It wasn’t great, and neurotic Al Brooks is a difficult character to watch, it’s stressful to see him like that.

Final thoughts? Unfunny, largely uneventful road trip movies don’t happen like this anymore. I guess that’s a shame?

Angry that I'm back? Too bad, you can find the rest of this project right here baby.