It’s June! It’s the halfway point of the calendar year! What a good time to assess a year-long task, eh?
But first…
I can now unveil a major new undertaking (for me): the complete 100 Films review database, sorted by director.
Creating this page involved taking nearly 800 reviews from their title-sorted 28 categories on the existing list, looking up the director for each film, then re-sorting them into a new list that eventually came to include 537 categories (that being one per represented director, of course). It’s taken over four months of work (on and off), but it’s finally here — and is perfectly easy to update going forward, thank goodness.
I have no idea if this is of use to anyone. Probably not. But it’s a slightly interesting, different way of looking at my review archive. For instance, compiling it threw up some odd things, such as James Hill. Who, you may ask? Indeed it’s no surprise I hadn’t noticed I’d watched two films directed by him. More interesting was what they were: lovely family animal movie Born Free, and Hammer-esque Sherlock Holmes vs Jack the Ripper thriller A Study in Terror! He also directed Lunch Hour, part of the BFI Flipside strand, so he may one day acquire a third entry. That’s more than some incredibly well-known directors have.
Anyway, if you want to have a peruse and somehow missed the links above and the one in the menu, it’s here.
What Do You Mean You Haven’t Seen…?
Statistically speaking, my selection for WDYMYHS threw up a few interesting ratios. For instance, exactly half the films hail from the 1950s; there are 9 in black & white vs. 3 in colour; and also 9 in English vs. 3 in foreign languages (French, Japanese, Swedish); and 5 on DVD vs. 7 on Blu-ray.
Having so far watched a third of the films, it’s got to the point where I can see what needs to be done to keep these numbers roughly in proportion. So, if I wanted to do such a thing, I came to the conclusion that I needed to watch a 1950s black & white English-language film on Blu-ray. That left two options: The Night of the Hunter or Touch of Evil. And this month I watched…
Orson Welles’ Touch of Evil.
No particular reason for choosing one over the other, although during the time I was pondering this the BFI announced their exciting Gothic season, the trailer for which included a clip from Night of the Hunter, which led to the thought that I might put it off until such a time as it coincides with whatever the BFI are up to. But we’ll see.
Those familiar with Evil’s multiple versions (there are five included on Masters of Cinema’s Blu-ray release) may like to know that I watched the Reconstructed Version in 1.37:1, as recommended here.
June’s films#55 The Bourne Legacy (2012)
#56 The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)
#57 The Hitch-Hiker (1953)
#58 Touch of Evil: Reconstructed Version (1958/1998)
I talked last month about the shape of this year’s viewing emulating most previous years, and that continues in June, a month which has never seen my viewing reach double figures. Nonetheless, this year’s four is the poorest on record (behind last year’s five).
More interesting, however, is what it might tell us about the year as a whole. It’s exactly half way, after all, giving enough time to settle down from the exuberance of the year’s first three months and paint a picture of how I’m getting on this year. At 58, I’d call it “not bad”. Clearly I’m well over the halfway mark, and ahead of this point in 2008, 2009 and 2012 to boot… though as I failed to make 100 in two of those years, and only scraped it with a mad dash in the other, such facts aren’t that comforting.
What about June as an indicator of my final tally? It’s not that hot, to be honest, showing just how erratic my viewing can be across the year. It was closest (or I was most consistent) last year, when I reached 51 by June, giving a ‘prediction’ of 102, and I made it to 97. 2010 was similarly close: 64 in June gives 128, and I made 122. But in other years it’s ranged from 18 under (2009) to 34 over (2011), so it tells us nothing. More exciting that way, eh?
With only four films to consider there’s not much more to say (50% from the ’00s and 50% from the ’50s means nothing when it’s out of four, does it), so moving swiftly on:
5 Sequels That Killed Their Franchise
There have been innumerable bad sequels, especially in these franchise-driven days of modern Hollywood movies… but which have gone down so badly they’ve actually killed off their series? Not just been the final film, but actively led to the series’ demise. (This was inspired by The Bourne Legacy — although #5 is reportedly in development, if they don’t have a serious rethink then I expect Legacy will wind up a member of this club.)
- Batman & Robin
Obvious, I know, but it really is the archetype. Burton delivered two Bat-films that were critical and commercial successes; Schumacher delivered one that didn’t go down so well but turned a healthy profit… and then this. A critical disaster, a box office flop, the series went down with it. It took others to revive the superhero genre, a seven-year gap, and a ground-up reboot to save the series. - The X-Files: I Want to Believe
Six years after the TV series ended (was that all?), ’90s favourites Mulder and Scully returned. Hopes for a third film dealing with the series’ cliffhanger-ish ending were dashed by this low-key supernatural fable, released in a glaringly inappropriate summer slot, with none of the aliens casual viewers expected and too many incidental ties to the series. Some still whisper about a third movie, but 2012 was the perfect time and that’s long gone. - Terminator Salvation
The first three Terminators all recycle the same plot to some degree, but with Salvation they finally pushed forward. Unfortunately bad word of mouth before release plus constant rumours about final-act twists did the film no favours. It was meant to launch a new trilogy, but instead killed the company who held the rights. A fifth film is in development now, but it sounds like it’ll go back to aping the first. - Blade: Trinity
The first Blade was something of a breakout hit in the late ’90s, leading to a Guillermo del Toro-helmed sequel that helped put him on the mainstream map. This third entry was designed to launch a spin-off movie for its supporting stars, but behind the scenes woes resulted in a messy film that flopped both critically and with audiences. A TV series did follow, but that was reportedly awful too and didn’t last long. - Saw VI
“But there was a Saw VII,” you cry.
“But there was meant to be at least a Saw VIII,” I reply.
When Saw VI lost its opening weekend to Paranormal Activity, someone guessed a shift in horror-fan tastes and called time on this annual scare saga, leading to it wrapping up in film #7. The Final Chapter, as it was advertised, actually did better at the box office, but by then it was all done.
And one that actually revived a franchise… briefly…
- The Final Destination
This fourth entry in the Death-defying horror franchise was due to be the series’ last — hence the definitive article title. In no small part due to being released in 3D in the immediate run-up to Avatar, the movie was a surprise box office hit, becoming the series’ highest-grossing entry, and New Line did an about-face and greenlit a fifth movie. Unfortunately for them, The Final Destination was utter shit, so the marginally-better Final Destination 5 became the series’ lowest earner. In the US, anyway — worldwide, it actually wound up just a few million dollars short of its predecessor. Nonetheless, instead of having a neatly-monikered send-off, the series seems to have limply disappeared.There are many more sequels that have killed their franchise, so are there any I should have mentioned? And what about that even trickier question: films that have taken an ailing series and turned it around?
Next month on 100 Films in a Year…
With the halfway point passed (did I mentioned we’re halfway through the year?), it’s full steam ahead into the second half. 100 films don’t just watch themselves, y’know.
#44 The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
#48a Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)
The clear victor is the Alfonso Cuarón-helmed franchise-revitalising third film, 
You can’t have a list of great car chases without including at least one Bond. Indeed, I could easily fill this top five with that series alone. TND wins because of two stand-out sequences: Bond driving a BMW saloon around a car park in Germany, which sounds dull as dishwater… except he does it via remote control and the car is stacked with gadgets; and a motorbike vs helicopter chase on the streets — and rooftops — of Saigon.
To bring extra swish and excitement, the Fast & Furious films often use CGI in their car chases. Ronin, however, does it all for real — often with the actual actors in the cars. There are several chases in Ronin, but the extended climax through the tunnels of Paris is of course the best. The film used 300 stunt drivers and they wrecked 80 cars, but the exhilaration provided is entirely worth it.
Many times, a great sequence is born out of an idea to innovate or do something different (to go back to Tomorrow Never Dies, the bike chase was a deliberate counterpoint to GoldenEye’s tank chase), and the first Jason Bourne film is no exception: he’s in a Mini! Americans always find small cars striking (see also: Da Vinci Code’s Smart car), but at least it’s put to good use — he drives it down some stairs!
For sheer throw-everything-at-the-screen bombast, you can’t beat the car sequence in the first Matrix sequel — it was so big, they had to build their own stretch of freeway! Of course, it’s as much about the fighting going on in and around the cars as it is the chase, and there are bikes and lorries and stuff involved too — including a spectacular head-on collision — but it’s all road-based, so it counts.
I wanted to avoid having two Bond films, and I tried, but I couldn’t think of anything significantly better than the opening minutes of 2008’s widely maligned Bond adventure. Cut like lightning, almost intuitive and impressionistic rather than classically clear, and viscerally destructive throughout, it demands your attention — and indicates the kind of pace the rest of the film will move at. Then the reveal at the end makes it all the sweeter.
Read most lists of the greatest car chases and one of these will be at the top, usually with the other in second place. They’re iconic for different reasons: there’s The French Connection’s frantic illicitly-filmed chase between Gene Hackman and Brooklyn’s elevated railway; and there’s Bullitt’s eleven-minute pursuit around the streets of San Francisco, with Steve McQueen and co gaining plenty of in-car air-time on those famous stepped hills. So iconic, I know this much without having seen either.
#38a 
You might have expected Batman & Robin to top this list. It would be a fair choice. But, believe it or not, it actually has some redeeming features. Not many, but some. This woefully unimaginative spoof has none whatsoever. I’m not even sure it had any laughs. OK, it might not be a ‘real’ superhero movie… but then again, look at the title. It counts.
These days, it’s difficult to imagine Hollywood managing to kill off a franchise they didn’t want to. Even those which are consistently a bit rubbish. I imagine this is where they learnt their lesson, turning a reliable cash cow into a despised monstrosity. How the genre got back on its feet just a few years later (and grew stronger than ever) is a minor miracle.
I really wanted to like this — a great concept, based on a great comic, with great people involved in the film — and on its release, I convinced myself I did. But it’s a bit of a mess really, isn’t it; and the needs of being a PG-13 blockbuster wrecked a lot of the comic’s best ideas. Shame. (It has left me always abbreviating the comic’s title as LXG too, though.)
I don’t actually know that much about the Punisher, but I don’t believe this is a very good rendition of the comic (where’s the skull emblem?!). And even if it is, it isn’t a very good film. I’ve largely wiped it from my memory, but I recall it being the twin sins of boring and amateurishly made. The two ’00s movies starring the character didn’t go down well, but I can’t imagine they’re worse.
A lot of people didn’t like Daredevil. I did. It has flaws, certainly, but it got a lot right. Nonetheless, I had no particular hopes for this spin-off featuring a fan-favourite character who had been mediocrely rendered on screen first time out (and not recast). Low expectations were good, because it’s a mess that doesn’t deliver in any notable respect.
There are many great superhero movies, but this is an undervalued one. Coming in the genre’s quiet period, between the death of the Batman franchise and the rebirth afforded by X-Men, I think this all-star comedy would fare better today. That said, I’ve not seen it for years, and sometimes comedy dates badly, so maybe I should’ve re-watched before putting it here… But I definitely did love it.
Of course. Some would argue it’s cheating to include an entire trilogy as one film, but Jackson made it as one film and it’s really a single tale that has to be divided to make it possible in cinemas, both financially and for the sake of the audience’s posteriors. But I’ve watched it in a single sitting, something I’ve not managed with some much shorter works, so that makes it OK by me. And I’ve spent all my words here saying that because, really, do you need me to tell you why this tops the list? (Not that this is a ranked list. But if it were, this would top it.)
I did think my main rule for this list would be “set at least partly in an alternate world” (see things like Narnia and Stardust), but that would rule out Harry Potter (which is clearly Fantasy) and this. If we’re talking swords-and-sorcery, this definitely has swords and it probably has sorcery too. How else do you explain immortality? Except with some BS sci-fi claptrap in the sequels that no one, not even their makers, wants to remember. It may be campy and ever so ’80s, with the most hilarious array of mismatched accents ever committed to film, but goodness me do I love it.
A modern, British-tinged take on the tone of The Princess Bride — two elements that give this the edge, for me. It’s also less of a spoof, more of a straight take on a fantasy adventure with an awareness of the comical and a resolute lack of po-faced-ness. There’s a reason Neil Gaiman’s a beloved author, and there’s a reason Matthew Vaughn is a mainstream filmmaker we should all keep a very close eye on.
This is a bit of a cheat, because it’s actually a two-part miniseries… but in its entirety it’s shorter than Return of the King, and for some inexplicable reason is 
If Merlin was a bit of a cheat, this is a great big one, because The 10th Kingdom is actually a seven-hour miniseries. But tough, because I love it and it’s not well enough known. Here in the UK it aired on Sky back in the days before I had said channel, and so my first encounter was through 
Quite what inspired this turn-of-the-millennium wannabe-blockbuster I don’t know — it came out the year before the double-whammy genre kick-start of Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter… but it feels much more than a single year older. It’s not all bad — some of the scenic effects shots are quite good, and there’s a certain joy in Jeremy Irons’ ludicrously campy performance — but, mostly, it is. The CGI is dreadful, the acting isn’t any better, and the location work makes it look like Power Rangers. If it wasn’t bad enough in itself (which it was), the glossy quality of Rings and Potter just 12 months later revitalised the genre to the point that this was blissfully consigned to ignominious oblivion.
#17 Final Destination 5 (2011)
This honour was widely seen as recognising the whole trilogy, and really my inclusion is for the same reason — I love all the Lord of the Rings films, but if I had to pick a favourite it would be Fellowship. That The Hobbit didn’t get anywhere near the Best Picture nods this season gives it a faint ring of The Godfather Part III: belated and misguided. Though even Coppola’s threequel got a nomination.
Speak of the devil… I really need to re-watch the Godfather trilogy, so I can’t offer much insightful comment, but I’m one of those people who sides with Part I being better than Part II. I found Michael’s descent into the family more engaging than… what, his consolidation of power? Is that what happened? (I really do need to re-watch them.) Plus, you can’t beat a bit of Brando.
I love an epic — indeed, the average length of my three choices so far is 2 hours 34 minutes — and in many respects Gone with the Wind is the ultimate epic, a tale that sprawls through time and across locations, but with the relationship between two individuals at its heart. And it beat The Wizard of Oz to the prize, which is a bonus.
As with The Godfather, I need to re-watch this. It was one of the first Westerns I saw and I think it would benefit from the improved understanding of the genre I now have. Equally, it was instrumental in transforming a type of film I’d previously ignored (not through any conscious effort) in to one I enjoy. (There’s a whole article to write on modern mass perception of Westerns, but that’s for another day.)
For all the talk of the Academy always getting it wrong, there are numerous times they’ve got it right. Or, at least, near as dammit. Which made choosing just five hard, but I’ve chosen this to try and balance things out — I don’t only like epics that mostly feature some kind of war (this was very nearly Schindler’s List). Woody Allen on form is great fun, and this is that. I liked Manhattan more though.
There’s a lot of love for this movie in some circles — it’s ranked 
#1 Underworld: Awakening (2012)
#6 Dredd (2012)
Fans have waited decades for a decent cinematic translation of the iconic 2000 AD lawman, and they finally got it last year. The filmmakers mooted a trilogy; the pathetic US box office take seemed to put the brakes on that; but now it’s doing great business on DVD and Blu-ray. Who knows if we’ll get a sequel, then, but the exciting future world depicted in the first film deserves further exploration.
Another mooted trilogy that seems to be in limbo — when you look into the first film, no obvious quotes crop up denying a sequel, but the first was released in 2010 and there’s no sign of a follow-up being in the works. I don’t know how well it went down in its native France, but I thought it was a daft, exciting, funny entertainment and I’d love to see more.
A sequel has been on and off ever since 
I don’t really mean a sequel to 
M. Night Shyamalan’s leftfield take on the superhero genre is, for my money, the best of his films. Ever since it first came out he’s talked about how the entire movie was originally just act one of a longer piece, and that he might produce the rest as the next two films in a trilogy. Instead, he’s made numerous unrelated but 
As Christopher Nolan 
Talking of Halloween, you may have noticed that I’ve been re-posting all of my Saw reviews. Now seemed as good a time as any. To accompany that, I wrote some new words on my opinion of the franchise as a whole. If you missed it, you can read those 
#81a Dr. No (1962)
#83 Prometheus (2012)
100Films.co.uk 