Accents

as payment for various sins, I've been watching Fear Street. It's a mildly diverting trilogy of movies set around a witches curse. The first is set in 1994, the second in the 1970s, and the final one is set in... 1666. Yep. Because it's all about curses, there's a lot of overlapping of actors between the three movies, some of them playing multiple roles. Fine.

The main thing is, the last movie, set mainly in 1666 has the characters all doing cod-Irish accents and it's really offputting, especially for such stylised shite. 

Anyway, accents are hard to get right, even the very best of actors can fail. Here are two:

Robert De Niro in Cape Fear - where he's a Southerner but his accent is just... not good.

and Meryl Streep, in A cry in the dark. Anyone brought up in Australia knows this movie, and also associates Meryl's terrible accent with it, which is why it's so fucked that she's almost universally recognised as one of the finest actors of her generation, not really.

I am finished here, take care of yourselves.

Vertigo (1958) some thoughts (in 2022)

 

So, here’s some thoughts on Vertigo – the movie which was annointed the finest movie of all time in that most recent sigh and sound poll. I’ll drop this here: it’s weird.

So, just quickly here’s the entire story – spoilers ahead – a detective who retired from the force after he is discovered to have vertigo is tasked with following the young wife of an old college mate. She acts in a strange manner and it seems as though she’s being possessed by the ghost of her grandmother – a woman who commit suicide many years before. Like all good private detectives, he falls in love with his friend’s wife whom he is supposed to be tailing. At a Spanish mission, she jumps off the steeple, and because of his vertigo, he’s not able to climb up to save her. Her death means that the husband gets all of her estate (ship-building, in case you ask) and the detective goes into a weird catatonic state after an inquiry deems him not responsible for the death.

He comes out of it when he meets a woman who looks a little like the wife, and after a very strange, manipulative relationship, it turns out that this woman was playing the wife – the husband had paid this young woman to act crazy, to trick the detecitve into thinking her mad, before the real wife was flung off the steeple. In a deranged fit, while the young woman is (for some reason) ready to run away with him – they RETURN to the steeple, seemingly in order for the detective to rid himself of his vertigo and confirm the truth about the death. The young woman, frightened by a nun, jump/falls off the steeple while the detective looks on.

That’s the story, it seems a little strange, but it’s much more than that.

Anyway, here are some thoughts:

There are special effects used throughout which add a certain charm. There’s a fair bit of green screen effects, especially when characters are driving, and the special effect of someone falling to their death is used a few times. It’s not convincing, but it’s pretty cool. Later on, Jimmy Stewart (he’s the detective) to show his state of high anxiety, goes into a technicolour dreamscape which reminded me of that bit in Dumbo with the bubbles and pink elephants. Charming, sure.

Anyway, as a private eye, Jimmy isn’t great. He barely keeps his distance while tailing his mark. In the worryingly empty San Francisco he would definitely be discovered if there wasn’t a plan in place to keep him following her. When the woman he’s watching jumps in the water, he a) feels her tits while he is saving her, and b) takes her home and strips her instead of calling the police or ambulance. To top it all off, he falls in love with this woman, a woman he believes is an old friend’s wife, before she dies under his watch. It’s a pretty crappy private dick job from old Jimmy.

 

Fun fact: in 1958, a boob-grab like this could lead to pregnancy.

When, later on, he finds the actress who was playing the wife, they embark on a very strange relationship. It reads as maniupulative and potentially abusive today, and probably did in 1958, too. He stalks her so that he finds where she lives, and his mad eyes and uncompromosing demeanour never let’s us see why she has fallen in love with him.

For the record, it’s the same actress, but because of the clothes, I couldn’t tell it was the same woman. It’s Kim Novak, who is still alive as of the time of writing, which is nice, and something I can’t help but keep an eye out for now. Anyway, this young woman was posing as the wife, and after the death of the real wife, she’s able to go back to her regular life, which seems to involve walking around showing off her slim waist. It doesn’t seem that she’s been paid very much for this difficult and dangerous action which would have taken months of planning, as she’s still living in the same hotel she ever was.

Jimmy Stewart falls in love with this new woman. He forces this much younger woman to dress and look exactly like the dead wife through clothes fittings and hair dyeing. It’s weird. He is in a clothes shop with a non-consenting woman, forcing her to wear clothes, and the shopkeeper just says ‘there’s a man who knows what he wants’ – it’s kind of funny, but it definitely plays weirdly today.

It’s not helped by the fact that Jimmy Stewart is in his very late 40s while he chases after a woman who is, we’re told, 26 – his other love interest, a woman called Midge is described as being Jimmy’s age, but she looks like his daughter. I watched this movie yesterday, but I’m still not sure how her story ended – was the last thing she said in the movie telling the psychiatrist that Jimmy is still in love with the wife? That’s not a very satisfying storyline.

The movie is from 1958, and there are a few funny incidences, too. We’re meant to believe that the husband broke the wife’s neck, carried her up several flights, then threw her off a bell tower without anyone seeing, despite at the very end, a speedy old nun is able to overhear mere voices. Also, is there only one restaurant in all of SF for them to eat at?

There are a few other things too, they notably turn down cigarettes from a town gossip, and Jimmy says ‘it’s a little early in the day’ for him to have a drink when meeting with his old friend. However soon afterwards, the wife, in a state of shock, is given brandy, arranges to meet with with him later, and he says, yes but in a couple of hours: “Make it noon.” How early are they drinking then? He also describes brandy as tasting like venison… which… it doesn’t.

Perhaps the most Hitchcock-ian element of the entire movie, and the most telling reflection of the time it was made, is the strange attitude the whole thing takes to mental illness. We’re told at the beginning that Jimmy’s vertigo is only curable by another trauma overtaking it (which explains why they go up the bell tower again at the end – note that it’s not a convincing reason). After the death of the wife, he goes into a catatonic state which is seemingly curable by Mozart. This strange attitude to psychotherapy is similar to other Hitchcock movies, such as Spellbound, and that strange bit at the very end of Psycho which makes nonsense of the rest of the movie. I’m sure that Hitchcock had some concerns with the branch of medicine at the time, but I’m too lazy to look it up further. At very least, it’s an interesting snapshot intop the thinking of the time, for sure.

At the end of this is a very weird choice for the best movie ever made. Arguments could be made that it’s not in the top, oh, 15, of its own director’s best movies. The plot is really weird. At the end of all of this, this is a very strange movie, it’s interesting, sure, the music is good and... you know, it’s well shot, but you’re left thinking ‘why is this considered the greatest movie of all time?’ in a way you don’t with many others. Put it this way..not many ‘great’ movies end with ‘the main woman dies when a nun spooks her and she falls the same was as the woman she was posing as did.’

1929: St Louis Blues (103rd!!!!!)

What else happened this year? Global Financial Crash. Boom!

What is the plot - in one sentence? It’s a short movie, Bessie Smith gets cheated on by her man, she sings a sad song, and then he returns and they dance.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? You don't have 10 minutes? What are you doing reading this? It was a psyche! move, he was just there to steal some money from her stockings before pissing off for good.

What is the meaning of the title? It’s the song that she sings, with the help of an entire restaurant as the chorus,

Here's Bessie having a beer, a sing and a cry. We call this the Irish sandwich.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Bessie does, as her kept man cheats on her, and then throws her to the ground when she’s confronting him. Also, the woman he’s cheating on Bessie with, a pretty woman, he refers to her as a ‘yellow lady’ for some reason. Also, he cheats on her in a single bed.

Any thoughts? I know Bessie Smith only from that song ‘I need a little sugar, in my bowl’ which is full of eye-opening euphemisms – it’s not subtle. I was therefore surprised to hear her sing here, as her voice is magnificent.

Would you recommend this? It’s 15 minutes long, features a good song, some crazy dancing (the guy who she breaks up with does some running on the spot for it bit and it’s weird. Yeah, you can watch it right here. . Oh, there’s a guy spinning a drinks tray during a dance, and he does a good job of it, it’s pretty funny to watch.

Final thoughts? This could easily have been a longer movie, cram in a few more songs and dances, and I wouldn’t complain. On a lighter note, this is the last one of these I’ll do, and for some reason 1929 was very difficult to accomplish – and I note that I’ve tried to watch the Movie Pandora’s box a few times, and despite the very pretty star, it’s positively glacial – the version I have leaves the interstitial subtitles for 20 seconds. I might watch it, at 1.5x speed, just as the director intended.

That's it! A movie from every year from 1920 to 2022. All for you to peruse, you can find them all right here if you want.* Have I learned anything from this endeavour? Not really, but I've seen some good movies as a result of it, and that's always something.

 

 

 

*If you don't want that, I don't want your readership, get fucked.

The Northman: aka why do none of the reviews mention Nicole Kidman's face???

 Howdy folks, I hope you're all well and enjoying the season.

I watched the Northman yesterday, and I feel that something needs to be said. There's some nice scenery, roaming accents, and much bloody violence. The story is a verion of Amleth, which we might know better as Hamlet - a prince must get vengeance on his uncle, who killed his father and takes his mother as queen / wife. So far, so good, and from the director of the VVitch? There's no reason this shouldn't be a good movie.

I've got a lot of time for humourless, dour viking movies, but this one didn't do it for me. There's a scene where Amleth, now a man, has joined a Viking party and raids a town for slaves. In the battle, there's a guy that he fights, I watched it pretty closely, and here's how it goes: the other guy swings his sword, Amleth blocks it with his shield and then shoulder barges the guy to the ground. While he's there he kicks him in the stomach to prevent him getting up. The other guy's face is now messed up for some reason. We're to assume he's dead, though if a shoulder barge and kick messes your face up and kills you, there's a reason your town won't get much money as slaves. This is from a long single-shot scene, and they should have taken another attempt at it. It's jarring, and the person I watched it with noticed it too, despite having me to distract them.

One of the slaves is Anya Taylor-Joy, who is a Russian for some reason. From the sounds of it her accent coach must have left to fight in Ukraine. The kid who played Amleth as a kid also sounds like an American trying to do a Scottish accent, and Nicole Kidman's accent is terrible. It's really off-putting.

Speaking of which, I read a couple of reviews saying that her performance is a tour-de-force, particularly a scene where Amleth confronts her as an adult. She tells him that she and the uncle had planned the death of Amleth's father - i.e. that Amleth's entire life had been for nothing. Fine, fine, but this scene takes place in a room with a fire underlighting it, and Nicole Kidman's face is so full of botox that she looks inhuman. There are no creases on her face so the flickering fire has no effect on it. It's even worse that it's in a movie set in the early 10th century. Every time she was on screen it was offputting, and removed a lot of the potential emotional heft of the movie.

I mean, come on.

I don't know who she's kidding, she was a very pretty young woman, there's no reason she'd be ugly as a 50 year old. Certainly it would be an improvement over the 'Janice from the Muppets' look that she's got now. I don't know how it's not mentioned in every review.

It's also telling that this scene, potentially the emotional climax of the movie, takes place when there's still 50 minutes left. The final battle, which takes place in a volcano, is far less cool than you'd imagine.

Anyway, not great. This movie has made Richard Egger's movies go from must-see (after the VVitch, and to a lesser extent the Lighthouse) to someone I might watch if the reviews are good. I'm sure that will really hurt him, but jeez.

1921: The Four Horsemen Of The Apocalypse (102nd)

What else happened this year? Teapot Dome Scandal? Not sure, Tulsa Race Massacre happened now though. That's a bit grim.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow the descendants of a wealthy Argentine horseman as his daughters return to France and Germany respectively, with their husbands, bringing their own children along.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? The German side of the family live German lives, while the French side of the family is beset with affairs, dancing, and the purchase of fancy castles.

At the end of it, all four of the male heirs are dead in the Great War, and the German’s wife scolds her husband for forcing the family to leave Argentina, and the French son’s lover is left looking after her now blinded husband. It took a bit of a turn.

What is the meaning of the title? There’s a mystic who lives above the French Grandson’s apartment (he’s ‘Latin’ in that he uses it to make paintings of nude models.) The mystic, who I thought looked a little like Rasputin / a Jewish stereotype, but is able to see the literal four horsemen – we’re later introduced to them, riding in the sky, and then riding back later on after the Great War ended. It was 1921, imagine the misery that was to come.

1921 Nazi Salute. 2022 mouse pointer. In the background is a guy getting bathed: timeless.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? No! Though a dog is mistreated and there’s also a monkey butler, who becomes a monkey soldier, until his master dies. The special effects were pretty good – a battle around the French father’s castle and its destruction was pretty impressive, and even the footage of the four horsemen themselves riding in the sky was pretty good. Less convincing at this distance was the ‘Apocalyptic Beast’ = a sort of metal dragon which spewed fire from time to time. Presumably it looked scarier in 1921 than it does in 2022.

There’s also a bit of father, son kissing on the mouth too, something which I remember from the Movie ‘Wings’, which is also about young men going to war.

Any thoughts? The handsome*, French Grandson, who was the Grandfather’s favourite (the other 3, Germans, are all a bit dull) falls in love with the younger wife of one of his father’s friends. The father’s other friend pretty much encourages them to go at it. 

Anyway, they get together eventually, and he comments on her beauty, but she looks EXACTLY like every other woman in the movie. Same hair, same fashion, same make-up and slightly confused look. It’s weird. I’ll say this too, the French grandson is a handsome fella even by today’s standards – is there less room for fluctuations in fashion and style for men’s attractiveness than there is with woman? Yes.

Would you recommend this? I would, with the proviso that this is a movie from 1921, and that it starts slowly, before turning into a romance story, and then a WWI movie – think how fresh WW1 was in the Collective consciousness too. 

I’ll recommend it, even though it has a weird thing where you inherit the innate traits of your race, despite your upbringing. For example, the Argentian-born-and-raised kids of a German father take on German characteristics – stoicism and militarism. Meanwhile, the French side of the family struggle with ennui and affairs. It’s a weird thing, but reminds me of Bonanza, where the three boys all take on the character of their respective dead mothers, despite not knowing them that well.

The movie also features, that movie trope of the father ignoring the son while he goes away (he’s angry at him for boning his friend’s wife), and then showering him with affection when he’s able to see him on the front line.

I’ll also leave a little time, to tell that there was a HITLER SALUTE in the scene at the castle. It’s just a coincidence, one of the Germans is pointing up to another room, but I’m going to make it the picture for this movie.

Final thoughts? Despite an initial onslaught of text – it was probably a chapter of a book’s worth before any moving picture was shown, this was a pretty good one. Despite the age and a few drawbacks related to that, it was a surprisingly modern, story, with a lot of implied boning, and a man murdered to prevent his daughter’s war rape, and the destruction of a family by war. 

There’s a lot of adult thoughts in this story, in what was a pretty new art form, and it’s got to be given credit for that. Sure it was slow in places (the Argentinian thing at the beginning, was glacial) and that helps to explain why this movie took forever to get through for me. I watched from Paris onward in an evening – that is the final 1 hour 40. However, the first 25 minutes, which follows the grandfather in Argentina, took me literally weeks to get through. Anyway, a surprisingly modern, reasonably fast paced story after that.

I also really like the comment, as French troops head off to war, in buoyant mood and confident, that the other side is doing exactly the same thing.

I believe I have a single movie to go. I’m sure you’re as happy as I am about this. If you’d like to see the other 101, there’s a list right here. 

 

*It's Rudolph Valentino

2022: Jackass Foever (101st)

What else happened this year? Russia invaded Ukraine, and it’s only April. I’m sure there will be plenty more to come.

What is the plot - in one sentence? The same as all the other Jackass movies; the gang do some dangerous stunts and pranks , this time they’re much older than before.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? They sure do ‘em, there are also some new guys added to the crew, presumably with the intention of making more of these.

What is the meaning of the title? As above, there’s a hinted at ‘passing on the torch’ thing.

Here Erin, owner of the most slappable face in Christendom, has to relax as a genuine bear comes along to eat food off him. He's shivering with fear. I understand why.

 Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Anything that’s not aged well… Johnny Knoxville, the leader, is now a fine grey haired dude, while the rest of the gang look a little more grizzled, except Steve-O, who looks great. There’s still a LOT of penis and anus stuff, so that’s not aged that well, either. Famously, the genitals age the fastest on males.

Any thoughts? The original gang are all in their 40s / 50s now. It’s a sad thing to see them still hitting each other in the balls and chuckling about it. The stunts seem much of a muchness to the other motives, and the fat guy, Preston, seems full of genuine sadness when he… shits himself before a stunt. We also see Johnny get nailed by a bull, which leaves him in hospital. We’re shown something very similar from about 20 years prior. it’s a bit grim comparing it today. I’ve since learned that he’s got brain damage as a result of this. Hmm..

Would you recommend this? Kind of. The new gang don’t seem to be very interesting though, even if it's a little more diverse than before. There's a few black guys – one of whom sounds quite posh English - a woman stand-up comic who seems pretty game for being stung by scorpions; a younger, more tattooed fat guy; and a surfer called Poopies – who has the positive attitude, bearing, and low IQ of most Australian men, despite not being Australian. They aren’t too compelling here, and the thoughts of this being a torch passing… well, not that exciting.

Final thoughts? This isn’t high art, but it’s entertaining, so you’ve got to give it that. There are a few funny things, some funny stunts, Bam Marguera isn’t in it any more (he’s the one who annoys his dad with pranks, he’s not missed much), and a couple of centerpieces, Johnny being fired from a cannon, and Erin being nibbled at by a bear, a genuinely heart-racing stunt – bears are terrifying.

Anyway, only a couple to go, and though it’s been a slog (I’ve been watching the four horsemen of the apocalypse now for months!), I should be finished with this soon. I also broke some toes when some braindead prick drove over my foot. Avid readers will recognise this is the second time I’ve been banged up with broken bones in my feet. I also use my feet to type, so that’s something.

The prior 100 of these can be found at this page.

1924: The Last Laugh (aka Der letzte Mann) (100th!)

What else happened this year? From the looks of it, a lot of crackdowns by the USSR on countries who declared independence (Georgia, Uzbekistan, for one), and Hitler gets out of prison, for two.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow an old guy who is dumped from his hotel welcomer job and becomes a toilet attendant.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He has a nervous breakdown, as his welcoming job had been his entire sense of being… and leave him flaccid bearded in the men’s room. However, we’re told that this story is to have a happy ending, so he becomes a wealthy guy and spends the rest of his time eating prodigious amounts of food and drink with a guy who helped him before. It ends before he dies of over-consumption, so it’s happy.

What is the meaning of the title? He has the last laugh, I guess – even if it’s a deus ex scriptwriter

In a dream sequence, he's able to... get it up again.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Maybe the oddest thing is the view of the bloke – he lives in a… hovel thing, and takes great pride in his work, before he’s replaced. He is given another job and has a breakdown… but he’s still one of the few people who has a job around the building. The toothless crones and gossip-bags who live in the building find it hilarious that he’s been replaced. It’s weird.

Any thoughts? I suppose the whole thing is a metaphor for the loss of manliness and virility – he’s replaced by a younger, larger man. In his drunk dream he dreams he can lift a suitcase above his head, before we spend the middle third of the movie following him in despair, slinking around and looking miserable… and being laughed at by crones. I didn’t get that at all.

Also, after he’s wealthy (for the film equivalent of ‘no reason’) why does he go back to the same hotel to eat at when he’s wealthy? He’s been treated badly by them, and the snooty customers continue to laugh at his big-spending bumpkin ways.

Would you recommend this? There were a few interesting shots – after he’s fired he gets drunk and rocks up to his daughter’s wedding, and he goes on a bit of a trip, we see a few interesting shots and special effects, but mostly I was just baffled.

Final thoughts? I didn’t understand the mindset of the villains, – his daughter seems to abandon him for his toilet job – and he’s made a laughing stock by the toothless, unemployed crones for.. having a job. He then gets laughed at by the crème de la crème for being a nouveau riche glutton. I didn’t get this, as a morality tale. Is it, money makes you happy? If so, then I agree. 

 Also, some research shows that at least a few of the cast members died in Nazi camps in real life, that's a bummer.

100 of these are now done! I’m so close you’d better close your eyes. The other 99 are to be found here.

1926: Faust (99th)

What else happened this year? I read that book about 1927, so I know a lot of things that happened here… but… from before then? I just looked it up, Emperor Hirohito came to the throne after his father died. That’ll do it.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow the Devil (aka Mephisto), as he tries to corrupt the soul of a godly man in order to win a bet with an angel, and take control of earth.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He makes a deal with the Faust, an old alchemist. Using magic, Faust becomes young, gains power and treasure, but falls in love with a local girl, which nulls the devils’ contract – love happening is proof of the divine, the angel tells him. That sounds like a shitty get-out, you may be thinking, and I’d agree.

What is the meaning of the title? It’s the name of the main bloke of the story.

Here's Mephisto, there's the youthful Faust, and there's a mouse pointer that I can't be bothered to edit out.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? When Faust is able to youth himself and travel around the world, he kidnaps a princess, and she’s not that into it, it seems. There’s a funny bit where Faust, bored, is offered by the devil ‘a drink, a game of dice, or an orgy?’ to take his mind off things.

There's a very confusing logic leap regarding the main woman in the movie. Her name is Gretchen, and Faust falls for her. Her brother, returned from some distance place, asks her if she has any lovers... within 3 minutes of the movie he has put her in the stocks for having one.

Because of this, she spirals, leading to her baby freezing to death, but only after being rejected for help from judgemental people. For this she’s burned at the stake. the whole thing takes about 4 minutes but is probably the most important part of a 2 hour movie.

Any thoughts? There are some cool camera effects - a giant skeleton blowing fire and pestilence over the town, for one, and some nice special effects. A lot of the models - the four horsemen of the apocalypse, some fake elephants – have all aged charmingly. There are a lot of very clever cuts, and the devil (a fat bloke with a feather in his hat) does some fun appearances and magic.This is a surprisingly light story for a movie where a baby freezes to death and a town dies of the plague.

I also have no idea what was going on with Gretchen’s aunt and the devil, as they flirt away like Mugatu and his assistant in Zoolander

Faust calls the devil his servant at various times, and it seems he does have him at his beck and call. I know he’s working on a bet to corrupt a pure soul (Faust’s) but surely he’s got other things to do, too?

Would you recommend this? Eh, I guess so, I’m always amazed by how many interesting cuts and special effects there are in these 1920s movies. It really puts modern cgi heavy movies to shame. I will recommend it, it was weird, was pretty fun, but I don’t think I’ll watch it again to be honest. So, yeah?

Final thoughts? I’ve been very surprised by how often boobs show up in movies from the 1920s also, and I’m not complaining.

The whole ending annoyed me – I felt sorry for Mephisto. He makes a bet that the Devil can’t corrupt a Godly Man, but the fact that he’s a godly man is enough to make him lose the contract, despite him being a party animal for the first part of the movie. That’s the very definition of a bad deal. Also, she’s burned at the stake, and Faust’s old again at the movie’s end, so it’s not like Faust gets what he wanted anyway

This is the 99th one of these - the rest can be found right here, baby

1922 Cops (98th)

What else happened this year? I think this was the year that Ulysses was published, and the year that Ireland got independence. I should know, it was 100 years ago, and they always mention shite like this in the news… [Ulysses is 100, the Irish parliament elected its first president (though it had been around for a bit longer) and… if I’d said teapot dome scandal, that would be correct. Scandals used to last a lot longer around those days).

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow Buster Keaton who wants to become a businessman to impress his love interest

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? After some shenanigans, he’s chased by cops after they think he’s an anarchist. He manages to outrun and trick them, but his girlfriend isn’t impressed, so he throws himself to the police like a gazelle to a pack of lions.

What is the meaning of the title? A shit load of cops chase him. Just like a shitload of horny women chase him in Seven Chances, or a tonne of cattle chase him in that movie where he falls in love with a cow (seriously).

He's press-ganged into moving house for someone, but I think the most interesting thing is that spring mattress that is on the cart

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? There's a pretty miserable horse that doesn't look like it's enjoying its time, especially as it is offered... goat spleen from a chemist. The most notable contemporary thing might be the anarchist, who throws a bomb (which lands in Buster's hands, leading to the chase).

Any thoughts? Throughout the movie, he’s trying to help – he finds some money and looks to start a business, but he’s taken advantage of by various people before a wrongful police chase. In truth, it’s a story to hang some jokes and physical skits on. However, a darker view can be taken: the nihilistic view might be explained by the fact that this was the first movie made after Fatty Arbuckle’s arrest, so the whole thing is a bit… Kafka-esque.

Would you recommend this? It’s a short movie, there are a couple of iconic scenes at least, one where he balances a ladder on a fence and forces furious hordes of police to use him as a see-saw. The other: Buster grabbing the handle of a moving car, which whisks him away. Say what you want about the story, he was a hell of an athlete. It’s also the first ever sighting of the boxing glove on the end of an extendable wooden stick thing, he uses it here as an indicator / police puncher. From the sake of history, that's worth watching, right?

Final thoughts? After buying a horse, he’s suckered into moving house for someone, unsure that he’s actually doing that. Some shenanigans with the horse, and the annoyed homeowners, goes on for too long in a short movie. The titular cops don’t start the chase until well after the half way point of an 18 minute movie, and the one woman character, the love interest, doesn’t actually ever speak to our man outside of the first few seconds. 

I was going to say ‘I wish they made shorts like this now, those shorts are called TV shows.

Here we go, we're VERY nearly finished now, and I am happy to admit that... yeah, it's been a drag. If you'd like to see what led to this mess, kindly click right ... here

1920 The Golem: How He Came Into The World (aka Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam) (97th)

What else happened this year? The League Of Nations was formed. Luckily we have a less toothless global organisation that we all have faith in, today.

What is the plot - in one sentence? A Jewish Mystic uses some Middle Eastern Magic to bring a clay figure to life.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He uses it for chores, it saves the king, it seems to want death, and then the amulet which is keeping it alive is taken by a small girl the Golem was playing with.

What is the meaning of the title? The Stone figure is the Golem, so it’s named after him.It's titled as 'how he came into the world' and that's what we're shown. Thanks 1920s for keeping things so literal!

So here's a fancy knight and the daughter of the Jewish mystic guy. They are the weirdest looking couple you've ever seen in your life.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? There’s a bunch of weird dynamics between the daughter (more on her later), and the father (who looks a lot like Nick Offerman) – it seems he wants to use the golem to protect her innocence, but she’s busy getting it on with a fancy knight with a large feather in his cap. She’s dragged by the hair in a later scene, too.

More of note is that the ‘Jews’ here are shown as obsessed with incantations and magic, wearing dumb robes and living in ghettos. Is that true of the indeterminate age that the movie is set?

Any thoughts? The golem is invited to the King’s court with his owner, the owner shows a magic movie on the wall of the King’s court, which goes awry. The place starts to collapse, and the Golem holds up a support beam to save the room. After this he's celebrated as the hero? What about the magician? He’s celebrated despite causing the room to nearly explode.

I knew about the Golem and his main beats – he’s clay, but can come to life with a magic incantation (the incantation here is given by a very metal Demon head and ritual here - it was awesome) but didn't really know any more than that. 

I assumed it was a destructive creature, a sort-of proto Godzilla, but in this, he starts as a servant, gains sentience (and because of some horoscope nonsense goes ‘out of control’) before being taken out of action while playing with a child. It’s hints of Frankenstein’s monster there, in that he’s misunderstood. It was a bit of a surprise, especially as he’s tries to play with the girl, a la the Monster.

Would you recommend this? I would. It took a lot of effort to actually find and then watch this, but I enjoyed it. The music really was cool too, a relentless tune that changed tempo depending on the scene was used throughout, and I have found myself humming it from time to time. 

Final thoughts? The love interest part of the story was utterly pointless, there was also a devious servant that wanted to get with the daughter. The daughter herself may be the ugliest leading actress of any of these movies, which is saying something considering the fashions that have happened at other times, but the movie was short enough and interesting enough to overcome that.

Was this a German movie about Jewish isolation and persecution from the year 1920? It was. Were the outfits of the dancers in the King’s throne room so tight that you could see all of their penises in worrying detail? Yes too.

 Speaking of hot cocks, here's the rest of the feature here: I'm very nearly done!

2005: Matador, The (96th)

What else happened this year? Hurricane Katrina hit. That was a thing.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow a drug addicted assassin as he recruits a new, straight-laced friend, to help him overcome performance failure and get back to killing

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He is helped by his new friend and assassinates what turns out to be his boss, so that he doesn’t have to take any more jobs. Hooray!

What is the meaning of the title? There’s a bit of bull-fighting that they go to (in Mexico), and Piers suggests that he appreciates the matador’s skillset. The bull fighting is all CGI, they tell us at the end, yeah, the CGI hasn’t aged well. 

 

Greg and Piers enjoy a tense laugh in the men's room.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? No, amazingly, we do get to see Piers Brosnan saunter around in cowboy boots and underpants, and he’s aged very well for an alcoholic with nerve problems.

Any thoughts?This is largely a black comedy, and it was pretty funny. I’ll keep it at that.

We’re meant to think that Greg Kinnear hired Piers to kill a business rival, but it turns out at the end that he talked him down, and uses that information to get his friend to help him.

Would you recommend this? There’s a weird thing where I wasn’t expecting anything from this movie, so I was surprised by it being fun and funny. If I recommend it to you, you’d expect it to be better than it is, so it would be overhyped, despite it being the same movie. This is one of those movies.

This was fine, I’d watch it again.

Final thoughts? This is a movie with a very obvious example of ‘dead child’ syndrome, Greg Kinnear and his wife are mourning the loss of their child, but it adds nothing whatsoever to the story.

I wonder if assassins really get the yips. I don’t really have much to say about this.Oh, Adam Scott was in this, as the business partner. That's it.

https://pascalsblogspot.blogspot.com/2021/04/century-of-cinema.html

2007: You, The Living (Aka Du levande) (95th!)

What else happened this year? On a personal level, I spent the year working, getting ripped and gorgeous, an enjoying my salad days with a variety of women who are now mothers. The rest of the world was of no interest then, and that remains so.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow a series of vignettes of life (and dreams) from a bunch of ill-looking people in an unnamed Scandinavian city.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? It starts with a guy dreaming about bombers flying in to destroy the city, we see people, hear from others, and then it ends with bombers flying in to destroy the city – the main link seems to be a brass band who turn up at various points.

What is the meaning of the title? According to wikipedia The title comes from a stanza in Goethe's Roman Elegies, which also appears as a title card in the beginning of the film: "Therefore rejoice, you, the living, in your lovely warm bed, until Lethe's cold wave wets your fleeing foot. - it's a reminder of the inevitability of death.

Everyone is this kind of sickly pale colour. It made me miss Scotland.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? There’s no direct violence, but there’s a bit of dog cruelty possible, and a guy is racist to a barber, who in turns shaves his head in revenge – with his shaved head, he looks exactly like Louis C.K. - which is something you’d want more in 2007 than in, 2022 (I can’t believe it’s 2022).

Any thoughts? I think the point of this movie is to show how stupid various rituals we do are: there’s a funeral, a wedding, a weird thing where rich people dance on a table, but mainly it’s a chronicling of unhappy people living unhappy lives. Rich and poor, Nazi (yep) or not, they all have only a single place to drink, so they’re always there.

Other than members of a brass band being present in most scenes, there’s nothing to link it together but misery, so it’s a bit like a game of the Sims where everyone is depressed. The colour pallete and make-up are so that everyone looks like shit, so that might be something – is this hell?

One thing I will say, there is too much depiction and discussion of dreams in this movie.

Would you recommend this? For one thing, there were too many descriptions of dreams, and visualisations of said dreams. It’s unclear which were real and which weren’t. It kind of reminded me of 22 short films about Springfield episode, but not funny. It wasn’t terrible or anything, just interesting.

Final thoughts? Despite how recent this year was comparatively, it took me a long time to find a movie from here. When I found this, I had started, and it got removed from the online playlist, so it took me forever to find and watch again, and that frustration definitely influenced my viewing experience.

There’s one bit, however, where a young woman and a guitarist are in an apartment, which becomes a train (from a dream sequence) and the scene is excellent – their apartment travels through the country and comes to a stop at a train station where they're welcomed by friends. It’s very well done.

 Speaking of well done, you can read the rest of these, unproof-read musings if you click here!

1930: The Blue Angel (aka Der blaue Engel) (94th)

What else happened this year? A lot of stuff that would have raminfications later, it seems. However, on the 18th of April, the BBC reported that there was 'no news' for the day and played some music instead.

What is the plot - in one sentence? A stuffy professor falls in love with a… burlesque singer.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? His life goes on a spiral, and he tries to kill her when she cheats on him with a strong man. Disheveled and heartbroken, he ends up breaking into his old university and ‘dying’ on his desk.

What is the meaning of the title? The Blue Angel is the inn where the ‘burlesque’ performances happen. This appears to mean that a half dozen very stocky women drink beer while Marlene Dietrich sings songs in revealing yet unalluring clothes.

Here are a couple of the 'sexy dancers' in the Blue Angel. The professor is on the left, his clean clothes and confident manner mean that he is yet to be married.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? No real violence, it’s more of a morality play. Something which was cool was that we see a bear at one stage being led onto screen, I definitely wasn’t expecting that.

Any thoughts? This is quite a racy one, but mainly in suggestive ways. A lot of romance and love is merely implied, but I can imagine it causing some scandal back in the day.

They’re in a noisy nightclub for large parts of the movie, but whenever the flimsy looking door is closed, all of the sound from outside ceases. I wish I had that technology in my place.

The professor and the singer fall in love for no reason whatsoever, he’s far older than her, and it seems like she’s marrying him for his money, but he loses his job because o fthe scandal… which implies he’s taking up with a prostitute or something like that, especially as he sells her saucy photos on the side.

Anyway, they fall in love for no reason, and the deal is sealed when she sings ‘Falling in love again’ – where she boasts about having men ruined by her love, that just spurs him on. I’d heard this song in English, but it’s much nicer in German.

Would you recommend this? Kinda – it takes far too long to get going, and the end is a bit rushed. We spend time showing they are falling out of love, but most of it is implied through the passing of time. It’s funny that they go fro married, to her kissing a strongman as soon as she meets him, in the space of about 15 minutes.

Final thoughts? This is a bit of an interesting one, Marlene Dietrich is a very pretty woman, put into some very unfashionable outfits. The professor’s plight is the real story here, but he seemingly falls for a woman and loves her, it seems a bit harsh to punish him like this, and his students seem like real assholes.

A few zingers here and there, too, so it’s not all terrible, and defnitely interesting.Speaking of interesting, the others in this feature are all to be found here!

1936: Dodsworth (93rd)

What else happened this year? A contentious Olympics in a fascist state. Plus ca change, huh?

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow a guy and his (new-ish) wife as they travel Europe after he sells the shares in his company.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? She ends up ‘dancing’ with men from various cities, having affairs with others, and constantly belittling him. He decides to go back with her to America, then changes his mind and goes back to a nice, much prettier by today’s standards anyway, woman who lives in Italy and inspires him.

What is the meaning of the title? It’s the name of the main character, why don’t you. From some research, it seems this is based on a book.

Spoilers, but this is from the last scene in the movie. He returns to her, and she wasn't expecting it, so she waves to him. She waves in a way that no human being has ever waved before.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? Incredibly no, despite the main woman’s rogueish behaviour. Something which hasn’t aged is at the end, in a fit of inspiration Dodsworth gets a plan to work out a delivery system, which he describes as working, especially if they get help from the USSR, who seem nice fellas.I think he's due for a business failure there.

Any thoughts? I mentioned in the piece from 2000, that I hadn’t ever seen the main actor before, and it turns out that Dodsworth here, a Houston, is his grandfather. The director John is between them, generation wise.

Speaking of links between movies on this feature, David Nivven appears here a creeper looking to hit on Dodsworth’s wife. Pretty much the same thing he was doing in the 1963 movie. A brief look online suggests that David Nivven doing this here means that he’d been acting as a womaniser since before Claudia Cardinale was born. 

No wonder that scene creeped me out so much. In this movie, she also has a German guy, an Austrian guy, and an old Russian as her lovers, which Dodsworth tolerates for whatever reasons. She’s also a bit of a drag, and it’s a pretty thankless role for the actress, but we're all glad to see her left on the boat at the end.

The movie ends with Dodsworth ditching his wife for a pretty and elegant woman on an Italian island, which seems a bit Porco Rosso to me. 

Would you recommend this? Yeah, sure, it was nice, I don’t know if they really travelled to all these places, but they implied they did, and in this shitbox lockdown, I’m happy with that. This is a better romantic tale than some of the others I’ve seen on this feature, that’s for sure, and the two right characters are together at the end.

Final thoughts? At various points, the (presumably) new Mrs Dodsworth gets angry because people assume she’s 35. She really gets the hump, but if she’s not a new wife, she’s got an adult daughter at home in the states. I dont see the fuss.

Just before he meets his Italian friend / lover again, he's in Italy in a holiday office looking for things to do. He's bored, and frustrated because of his wife, and he's a complete cunt to everyone in the office. When she recognises him she offers him a tour in her car, when she really should have set him on fire or something.

I’ll also say that 1936 seems to be the year that waistlines were at their very highest.

That's 1936 done, if you'd like to see some of your favourite years, why not click here?

1962: The Trial (92nd)

What else happened this year? Cuban Missile Crisis. Me thinks.

What is the plot - in one sentence? A man is arrested and becomes lodged in the labyrinthine legal system, and struggles to defend himself and find what his suspected crime was.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He works hard to rally aid, and defend himself, but he’s eventually blown up in a gravel pit by a couple of idiotic policemen.

What is the meaning of the title? The entire movie hinges around the opaque, Kafka-esque legal system he’s thrown into. and the trial that happens. You’ll notice I said Kafka-esque because it’s based on one of his works.

Here's Norman Bates talking to his uncle, in a gigantic office room that was pretty impressive. I guess.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? No, amazingly. It’s directed by Orson Welles though, so he gets to paw at some women it looks like he would consider a snack.

Any thoughts? Anthony Perkins, of Psycho fame, is the innocent at the heart of the story. I hadn’t ever seen him in anything but Psycho before. He does ok. Orson Welles pops up as a bloated, pussyhound judge, which must have interfered with his time as a bloated, pussyhound director of the movie.

Would you recommend this? The book it’s based on is a brief read. This is not a brief movie. Scenes which are too long don’t help, and add to the sense of bloat. While some scenes are genuinely impressive in their scale – the court room FULL of people, or a seemingly endless office that he works in, but the whole thing is a bit too bloated which makes it drag, when it would have been better to make it tight, tense and claustrophobic.

Final thoughts? The book is better, but it’s still a reminder that so much of the society we believe in is just a whim and that in most countries this can still easily happen. Anyway, that’s enough there.

Want to read others? Some are longer, few are shorter. All can be found right here mf.

1931: smart Money (91st)

What else happened this year? To my mind this is all Great Depression stuff, and also in fact, that seems true.

What is the plot - in one sentence? We follow a barber (Edward G. Robinson) who is good at gambling, as he rides his luck to becoming a crime boss.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? He’s got a fondness for women, and one of them betrays him, leading to his arrest, coupled with the accidental murder of his best mate (James Cagney) means, well, he’ll be cutting hair in prison if he’s lucky. He bets reporters that he'll be out of prison before too long, before boarding a...prison train, they don't exist anymore, right?

What is the meaning of the title? It’s called ‘Smart Money,’ and he does seem to have a preternatural amount of luck, especially in games of chance – something which I don’t think it’s possible to have in real life or benefit from.

Edward G. Robinson and James Cagney sharing a breakfast in dressing gowns and shooing away a servant so that they can bicker like an old married couple.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? A woman does get slapped when she’s found to be betraying the gang (she’s on a very obscure case of blackmail. This is after they stopped her from drowning, so come on.

In an… enlightened manner for the time, James Cagney is slapped twice by a couple of women too. 

Robinson also calls some of the black ‘servants’ things like ‘suntan,’ but It’s too late to do anything about that. 

Oh, and Boris Karloff is there, in a fedora, threatening horrible things to a pretty woman if she won't pay him back. He looks weird in contemporary clothing. 

Any thoughts? The cities in the movie are shown as ‘Iron Town’ and ‘The City’ for no real reason.

Like a lot of movies from this era, the main romance in the movie is between the two main male characters. Edward G. Robinson and James Cagney (their only shared movie) share the most love in this movie. Even if Edward G manages to have some ‘attractive for the time’ woman on his arm most of the time, we know where his heart really lies. The final fight, after this, where he kills his friend accidentally, has all the cinematic beats of a breakup.

Can you be skilled at unskilled games? He seems to be. For example, he flips a coin to win for money, and wins most of the time. I don’t think that can happen for an extended period of time. He also gets robbed by a rigged card game, then goes back again to show them who’s boss, and beat them on the level – but it's a game of chance, right?

Would you recommend this? Yeah, I liked it. I have a lot of time for pithy, zippy movies from the 1930s, and this one has passed the test of time pretty well, even if there’s not quite enough characterisation to really deliver – Edward G. and Jimmy Cagney only have a few scenes together, for example, and the ‘great rise’ as a gambler / casino owner happened VERY quickly.

Final thoughts? There have been a lot of links to other movies during this feature, which makes sense. However, it is very easy to see Robinson’s character here as the younger version of his successful gambler in ‘The Cincinatti Kid’,

Meanwhile, the little midget who has appeared in at least a few movies now, but most notably was killed at the end of The Unknown, appeared for a second to have his back rubbed by Edward G. I hope he got paid ok in his career. 

 

Speaking of paid, you can see the other movies in this feature, for FREE, when you click right here.

2000: IVANSXTC (90th!)

What else happened this year? All of that drama surrounding George W. Bush's election.

What is the plot - in one sentence? In a documentary style, we follow the life of a drug-addicted, womanising Hollywood agent, and the immediate aftermath of his death.

I don't have time, just spoil it for me? We see flashbacks of his life, and then his unpleasant and sad death, while his new charge Peter Weller moves in on his old girlfriend.

What is the meaning of the title? The bloke’s name is Ivan… so we follow his XTC… I guess? It couldn’t be a more 2000 title, could it? He’s named Ivan because it’s based off a Tolstoy novel. Very loosley, it must be said.

2000 fashion is weird. So is all fashion.

Anything that's not aged well? Does a woman get slapped around? I don’t think there’s any violence, but there are plenty of age-inappropriate relationships. This guy is addicted to drugs, alcohol, success at work, and women who look too young next to him.

At a party held by the even older Peter Weller, we get Victoria Silvestedt, who is a pretty good depiction of everything wrong with the year. She may have been pretty before getting re-done in plastic.

Peter Weller plays a character that Ivan becomes the agent of. He’s a mostly unpleasant guy to be around, but says some stuff about gay people that would be played as a villain’s role nowadays, I think it’s not meant that way in such a way back then.

Any thoughts? This is a fairly standard drugs and Hollywood excess movie. At the end though, he dies, in a very lengthy scene in a hospital, and Peter Weller imediately moves in on his girlfriend, who is too young for Ivan, who is 30 years younger than Weller. It's grim.

There’s a fair amount of non-seuxalised full frontal nudity, which is always a bit of a surprise too from a US movie, even if it's an independet one. Also interesting is the police breaking into his house to handcuff a guy having a seizure.

Would you recommend this? A critique of the Hollywood agent system made on a low budget with an obvious axe to grind, Peter Waller playing against type as a shitheap? Yeah give it a go.

Final thoughts? The movie starts with that piece from Tristran and Isolde, which is now an overused piece in movies and TV (here it is, it's the beginning of Melancholy, if you're interested.) It's overused now, but was that the case in 2000?

I hadn’t seen the main guy before in anything, it’s the grandson of the guy from Dodsworth (which will be our movie for 1936), and Angelica Huston’s brother. It's pretty telling that a critique of Hollywood stars a third generation Hollywood family guy. He’s got a pretty severe case of Jack Nicholson eyebrows, too.

90 of these done now, what a guy I am. The others can be found right here.

Unpleasant death at the end, weird.