Was 2016 a good year for films?

Sad Professor

The end of the year is upon us. Here’s your chance to weigh in. Was it a good or bad year...

For blockbusters?

For indie/arthouse cinema?

For foreign language cinema?

For animation?

For documentary?

What were your highlights and why? And what was overlooked or deserved better?

Fysh

For me, 2016 was a year of insipid blockbusters. After the magnificence of Fury Road last year, the best this year seems to have offered is Civil War - but I'm not interested in world-building at the expense of the individual film, so for me that fell flat as a leaden, flabby effort at a premise that could have been so much better. Other efforts like Batman vs Superman, Suicide Squad, Ghostbusters, Independence Day 2 all seem to be just sort of...there. I haven't seen Rogue One yet so can't really comment on it, but given that I'm not much fussed about Star Wars and don't particularly rate Edwards as a director (unless he was forced to work from a great script he wasn't allowed to change) I don't expect much from it.

We did, however, also get one of the best superhero films of the current crop in the form of Deadpool.

In terms of animation, there was some safe fare (Finding Dory, Moana) but 2016 also gave us Kubo & The Two Strings, Zootopia/Zootropolis, and Your Name. I still have to catch up with Sausage Party, which probably deserves a mention just for being an R-rated animated feature.

I'm struggling a little to recall what foreign film I've seen this year. Train To Busan was excellent. The Wailing had some astonishing segments but was unfocused and over-long. Creepy had some very nice ideas but couldn't decide which of three or four films it was trying to be. Julieta was fantastic from start to finish.

johnny_ultimate

I say the same thing every year - that there's always going to be a good solid amount of great films. But 2016 did nonetheless feel I guess somewhat underwhelming, possibly because as alluded to above it was a dumpster fire of a year for blockbuster films. The Hollywood Blockbuster has been on a downward trajectory of years now, more and more films settling on purest mediocrity. But you usually get a 'tentpole' or two with actual artistic ambition and invention to balance that out - a Gravity here, a Mad Max: Fury Road there. There was nothing of the sort this year, and you have to dive down to the mid-tier films like Arrival or Kubo and the Two Strings to find anything approaching that quality (although I'd like to launch the utterly horrible Deadpool right into the sun). When it came to nine-figure budget films, of what I've seen there's a few 'grand' or 'three star' offerings but little to nothing I can ever see myself revisiting.

There's some cause for hope that 2017 will be a little brighter, though, with a few potentially promising prospects like the Rian Johnson Star Wars film, Denis Villeneuve tackling a Blade Runner sequel, and Nolan's Dunkirk. And while I've made an active effort to completely skip superhero films recently, I'm cautiously curious to see what Taika Waititi manages to do with Thor.

It was a scattered year elsewhere, but of course plenty of gems too. I for once am a little bit ahead of the release schedules and have already ticked off Manchester by the Sea (a genuine masterpiece IMO), Toni Erdmann (riotously funny) and Elle (delightfully and playfully subversive), as well as some scattered others like Personal Shopper, After the Storm (hell of a year for Kore-eda with that and Our Little Sister) and Neruda. Still have several others to look forward to over the next few weeks though - La La Land, Moonlight, The Handmaiden, Jackie etc... mean it'll be a reliably busy start to the New Yar.

And yeah, there was a lot of quality 'leftovers' crammed into the first few months of 2016. Adored The Assassin, probably tied with Manchester... and Happy Hour (which I hope to hell gets some sort of release in 2017) as my favourite of the year. Found myself surprisingly hooked on Hateful Eight despite having grown off of Tarantino over his last few films. Closer to the end of the year, Paterson is probably my new favourite Jim Jarmusch film - a beautifully observed piece of work about everyday life. The likes of Anomalisa, Arabian Nights, Mustang, The Witch, Under the Shadow, Cemetery of Splendour, Embrace of the Serpent, Son of Saul, Childhood of a Leader etc... all also worth highlighting.

I know there's plenty of performances in the above films and others worth singling out, but Tom Bennett in the generally delightful Love & Friendship was particularly fantastic. The rest of the cast acquit themselves quite nicely too, mind, and a rare treat to see Kate Beckinsale gifted such strong material.

Feel like I'm a bit behind with documentary this year, although adored absolutely One More Time With Feeling. Behemoth also well worth a watch. Looking forward to catching up with Cameraperson and Fire at Sea soon.

In a year where a lot of iconic figures were lost, have to say the death of Abbas Kiarostami hit me more than any of the other 'celebrity' ones. Thought he was one of the great contemporary filmmakers, and cinema will be a lesser place without him.

One hopefully positive thing to note towards the end of the year was the success of Your Name (well, in anime terms at least). I had issues with the mostly charming and endearing film itself - and personally preferred The Boy and the Beast in the 2016 anime sweepstakes - but great to see it achieve crossover success outside Japan. Similar thing seemed to have happened with Train to Busan. Hoping that it will encourage others to take similar risks: limited but high-profile releases seem to be a good way to draw attention to films that wouldn't receive it otherwise, so here's hoping a few other films with potentially wider appeal enjoy similar treatment.

pumpkin4life

I thought Green Room was fùcking brilliant; old school John Carpenter bloody as hell 70s style horror movie with Captain Picard of all people starring as a neo-nazi. My favorite movie of the year.

Arrival was also fantastic (though the ending was a bit flat imo) and American Honey was a sprawling, ambitious, beautifully shot movie which did the impossible for the pumpkin; made me realize that Shia Leboeuf is actually a pretty good actor.

Also great: the tasteless but great craic Deadpool; Jeff Bridges as the one day away from retirement sheriff lad in Hell or High Water; the spot on movie making marxist satire of Hail Caesar!; the zombies on a motherfùcking train in Train to Busan; the melancholic and desolate One More Time with Feeling documentary; the highly entertaining Everybody Wants Some; the other really good but not as good as the other one science fiction Midnight Special and the hipster hell but hey its really good so score two for the Adam Driver led Paterson.

This year was a funny one in that a lot of critically acclaimed movies I found mediocre to simple outright hated: Anomalisa, I Daniel Blake, Cemetery of Splendor, Son of Saul, Neon Demon, Ghostbusters, Rogue One. Mark Kermonde's list this year was my idea of movie hell in all honesty.

I count three classic films. Heard great things about Manchester by the Sea. Maybe not a great year tbh.

Wedwood

I usually judge how good the year was by the Oscar winners/nominees, which is not for a few weeks yet.

The below are the current front runners, no clear favourites for best picture, usually a sign of a poorish year.

“Arrival” (Paramount)
“Fences” (Paramount)
“Hell or High Water” (CBS Films)
“La La Land” (Lionsgate)
“Loving” (Focus Features)
“Manchester by the Sea” (Amazon, Roadside Attractions)
“Moonlight” (A24)

Contenders:
“20th Century Women” (A24)
“Hacksaw Ridge” (Lionsgate)
“Hidden Figures” (Fox)
“Jackie” (Fox Searchlight)
“The Jungle Book” (Disney)
“Lion” (Weinstein Co.)

Long Shots:
“A Monster Calls” (Focus Features)
“Silence” (Paramount)
“Sully” (Warner Bros.)

johnny_ultimate

Wedwood wrote: »

The below are the current front runners, no clear favourites for best picture, usually a sign of a poorish year.

I'd say the exact opposite to be honest. Unusually high standard of awards contenders this year, even just based on what I've seen so far.

Sad Professor

Don’t get all the love for Hell or High Water. Found it solid but generic.

The Witch, Green Room and Evolution tied for best of the year for me.

I agree that it was a terrible year for blockbusters, although I loved Rogue One and liked Star Trek Beyond. But so many stinkers, especially Jason Bourne and Suicide Squad.

I think 2016 was the worst year on record for film. If Hell or High Water is the best of them so far that says it all really. Not that it was bad, it was a good movie, but nothing special or moving. A cool road movie, and thats about it. Green Room I liked too, and I haven't seen Hacksaw yet, but really nothing has stood out to me as being absolutely outstanding whereas in previous years theres always been a few.

It seems to me that the money in film is for the CGI movies now because thats where the return is off the merchandise and the chinese market, and the money for good quality stuff is put into TV instead where I guess the likes of Netflix are making serious bucks off subscriptions. TV Drama has been exceptional this year and seems to be improving year on year as film gets worse.

flazio

Wasn't bad. Highlight for me was Doctor Strange in IMAX.

johnny_ultimate

Sad Professor wrote: »

Don’t get all the love for Hell or High Water. Found it solid but generic.

Same, solid but unremarkable thriller that I wouldn't rank anywhere near the best films I saw in 2016. I do guess even being solid was a refreshing change after a dire summer tentpole season.

Sad Professor

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Same, solid but unremarkable thriller that I wouldn't rank anywhere near the best films I saw in 2016. I do guess even being solid was a refreshing change after a dire summer tentpole season.

It seems to have struck a chord with US audiences for its portrayal of post-crash economic devastation in the South, which is fair enough I guess, but as subtexts go it didn't make much impact on me.

Frank O. Pinion

I've seen 74 films from 2016 (actual 2016 films, not 2015 films that got an Irish 2016 release), and Swiss Army Man is the best film so far, followed by Hail, Caesar!. I usually see 130-150 per year on average, so only half way, but I wouldn't say it's been a great or memorable year for film.

pumpkin4life

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

I've seen 74 films from 2016 (actual 2016 films, not 2015 films that got an Irish 2016 release), and Swiss Army Man is the best film so far, followed by Hail, Caesar!. I usually see 130-150 per year on average, so only half way, but I wouldn't say it's been a great or memorable year for film.

Best scene of 2016:

:D:D:D

learn_more

pumpkin4life wrote: »

I thought Green Room was fùcking brilliant; old school John Carpenter bloody as hell 70s style horror movie with Captain Picard of all people starring as a neo-nazi. My favorite movie of the year.

This year was a funny one in that a lot of critically acclaimed movies I found mediocre to simple outright hated: Anomalisa, I Daniel Blake, Cemetery of Splendor, Son of Saul, Neon Demon, Ghostbusters, Rogue One. Mark Kermonde's list this year was my idea of movie hell in all honesty.

Agree with Green room. Cpt Picard was brill in this movie. I was really surprised to see him cast in this role but boy did he deliver. It was one of my fav films of the year too, prolly the best.

I watched Son of Saul on Kermode's recommendation too. What would be to 'like' about this movie is beyond me. Notihng but gruesome scenes going on in the background and too many close up's of that quite ugly mans face.

---

I'm a bit of a sci-fi enthusiast but I though X-Men: Apocalypse and Star Trek : Beyond were both utter garbage. Looking forward to Logan but I don't see much good things happening with Star Trek under this current incarnation.

Also Starring LeVar Burton

A fair few quality Irish films this year - Sing Street, A Date For Mad Mary, The Young Offenders.

My own personal favourite film this year was Eddie The Eagle - proper feel good film.

Another two I felt were standouts were The Nice Guys and Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping.

There were maybe a dozen other films that I really enjoyed, but overall I agree that it was a somewhat poor year with a lot that should have been good, but just failed to deliver (I usually go to the cinema quite frequently, but this year there really wasn't a whole lot that had me willing to pay the price of a ticket) - I have much higher hopes for what 2017 has to offer.

pumpkin4life

learn_more wrote: »

Agree with Green room. Cpt Picard was brill in this movie. I was really surprised to see him cast in this role but boy did he deliver. It was one of my fav films of the year too, prolly the best.

I watched Son of Saul on Kermode's recommendation too. What would be to 'like' about this movie is beyond me. Notihng but gruesome scenes going on in the background and too many close up's of that quite ugly mans face.

---

I'm a bit of a sci-fi enthusiast but I though X-Men: Apocalypse and Star Trek : Beyond were both utter garbage. Looking forward to Logan but I don't see much good things happening with Star Trek under this current incarnation.

Kermodes a great film critic, but he's an ideologue. If that movie fits his particular ideologue, he'll go on about the movie being much better than it actually is. But for everything else, the guy is class.

Agree with you on Son of Saul; found nothing special in that movie whatsoever.

pixelburp

I think the issue of the Modern Blockbuster is well discussed at this stage; they've become such unwieldy, eye-watering behemoths it's going to take a 'Heavens Gate' sized disaster before things change (or, preferably, audiences will stop rewarding train-wrecks such as the utterly execrable Suicide Squad).

However, one bright area in 2016 for me was in animation: I found this year to be pretty strong in that genre, varying between watchable & entertaining (Finding Dory, Secret Life of Pets), to straight-up excellent (Kubo and The Two Strings, Zootropolis being the standouts & broadly flawless). And while I haven't seen other well-received features such as Moana, Your Name or Sausage Party, or that there were still some duds - Angry Birds, basically - the year was decent & reviewed well.

Gaz

Hunt for the Wilderpeople was my favourite of the year, just shows how a good story told well, can hands down beat a €100 million dollar blockbuster.
And everyone I recommended it to loved it.

eviltimeban

I thought it was a strong year. I went to the cinema more last year than in previous years, and I didn't even get to see everything I wanted (Inferno, Fantastic Beasts, and Florence Foster Jenkins were on that list).

For me, Arrival, Midnight Special, War Dogs, Deadpool, Allied, Dr Strange, Oasis Supersonic, and The Nice Guys were all highlights. Even dumb stuff like Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates and Bad Neighbours 2 were enjoyable.

I was slightly let down by Star Trek Beyond, elements of Rogue One, and very much let down by Zoolander 2 and Independence Day Resurgence.

Saw a lot of kids films too (often not by choice) and probably enjoyed Storks the most. Finding Dory was good too, but Kung Fu Panda 3 trumped them all!

learn_more

eviltimeban wrote: »

I

Saw a lot of kids films too (often not by choice) and probably enjoyed Storks the most. Finding Dory was good too, but Kung Fu Panda 3 trumped them all!

Finding Dory was the biggest disappointment of a film this year for me, because I expected it to be a lot lot better.

I'm not really an animation fan but I really did love Finding Nemo, to my own surprise.

I think the animation thing isn't quite what it used to be. It's a bit like sci-fi where the first movies were good or great, but as time goes on, they end up being as rubbish as romantic comedy's

Fysh

learn_more wrote: »

Finding Dory was the biggest disappointment of a film this year for me, because I expected it to be a lot lot better.

I'm not really an animation fan but I really did love Finding Nemo, to my own surprise.

I think the animation thing isn't quite what it used to be. It's a bit like sci-fi where the first movies were good or great, but as time goes on, they end up being as rubbish as romantic comedy's

I think that's less to do with "animation" and more to do with probable pressure from Disney to exploit a very successful and profitable piece of IP with a sequel.

Kubo & The Two Strings and Your Name were both excellent examples of what animated films can offer from 2016, though sadly Kubo seems to have not fared very well financially and Your Name was always going to be kind of niche by virtue of being in a foreign language as well.

learn_more

Fysh wrote: »

I think that's less to do with "animation" and more to do with probable pressure from Disney to exploit a very successful and profitable piece of IP with a sequel.

Kubo & The Two Strings and Your Name were both excellent examples of what animated films can offer from 2016, though sadly Kubo seems to have not fared very well financially and Your Name was always going to be kind of niche by virtue of being in a foreign language as well.

Well, you could say that about any film genre, and it would be true. No reason to think animated movies would be excluded from that I suppose.

I suppose it's the same with any movie sequel's, it's not the production, or the acting, it's the script and the writing.

I thought the comedy element in Finding Dory was non-existent. The forgetting things thing was just a small aspect of Finding Nemo, whereas with finding dory, that's what the whole movie was about. I actually didn't watch it to the end such was my disappointment with it.

I haven't see the other 2 animated movies you mention but I can't see how it would be too hard to do a english language version of Your Name. I know Finding Nemo was voiced over in many different language, including Polish.

Fysh

learn_more wrote: »

Well, you could say that about any film genre, and it would be true. No reason to think animated movies would be excluded from that I suppose.

I suppose it's the same with any movie sequel's, it's not the production, or the acting, it's the script and the writing.

I thought the comedy element in Finding Dory was non-existent. The forgetting things thing was just a small aspect of Finding Nemo, whereas with finding dory, that's what the whole movie was about. I actually didn't watch it to the end such was my disappointment with it.

I haven't see the other 2 animated movies you mention but I can't see how it would be too hard to do a english language version of Your Name. I know Finding Nemo was voiced over in many different language, including Polish.

Yeah, I'm a bit worried the same will be true of Incredibles 2, which would be a shame - the original film is great, so if a sequel is to be made I'd prefer it to be because Bird and co. have hit on a really great idea that makes more sense with the existing characters than as a new thing. I guess we'll see in due course...

If you get a chance, you should definitely seek out Kubo & The Two Strings - it's not just one of the best animated films from last year, it's one of the best films full-stop. The fact that it's wonderfully animated is a bonus

The Studio Ghibli films have certainly demonstrated that it's possible to create effective and successful English dubs of foreign animation, but I don't know how often distributors are willing to invest that kind of money - and a poorly-executed dub can have a negative impact (I adore Spirited Away, for example, but I can't watch more than a few minutes of the English-language dub because to me it's shrill and badly voice-acted). Your Name is the 4th highest grossing film of all time in Japan, and while it has its issues it's also definitely worth seeking out.

Zootopia and Sausage Party were also highlights of the year, and I've seen Sing crop up on a few lists even though it's not out yet (at least, not in the UK).

learn_more

Oh I didn't know Incredibles 2 was in the pipeline. I loved that one very much too. I wonder if the characters will be 12 years older

faceman

2016 was one of the worst years for mainstream movies IMO. We live in a world now dominated by comic book movies with everyone trying to do what Marvel do. But it seems to be what people want. Most posts in this forum are about blockbuster, comic book and franchises.

While these movies are for the most part profitable, art and quality continues to suffer.

The Good
Sing Street
The Big Short
The Witch
Green Room
Don't Think Twice

The Ok
Arrival
10 Cloverfield Lane
Captain America Civil War
Don't Breathe

The Bad
Deadpool
Ghostbusters

The Downright Awful
Star Trek Beyond
Rogue One
Suicide Squad
Batman vs Superman
X Men Apocalypse

Story and character development are the big let downs in 2016.

Wedwood

It's interesting that while there's a growing view that cinema standards are dropping, TV standards are increasing at the same time.

Shows like Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad on pay per view channels or Netflix are becoming the must see events. 'Stranger Things' on Netflix was last summers must see event, with the likes of Star Trek Beyond, Independence Day and Ghostbusters widely panned.

It'll be interesting to see how or if studios respond to audience fatigue with endless comic book movies and sequels. While some of those movies did very well at the box office, a sizeable number either underperformed or flopped.

Sad Professor

Wedwood wrote: »

It's interesting that while there's a growing view that cinema standards are dropping, TV standards are increasing at the same time.

Shows like Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad on pay per view channels or Netflix are becoming the must see events. 'Stranger Things' on Netflix was last summers must see event, with the likes of Star Trek Beyond, Independence Day and Ghostbusters widely panned.

It'll be interesting to see how or if studios respond to audience fatigue with endless comic book movies and sequels. While some of those movies did very well at the box office, a sizeable number either underperformed or flopped.

When you say TV is great you are only talking about the top shows. Yeah, blockbusters suck, but we’re in a golden age of indie/art house cinema. There are also numerous off-Hollywood auteurs working with a considerable amount of creative freedom. Good films are being made, even if don’t get a lot of marketing and are lucky if they make it to most multiplexes for a week.

And even the worst of the current superhero/blockbusters will probably be looked back on fondly one day. The blockbusters of the '80s and '90s that the '70s generation dismissed as garbage became the childhood classics of the next generation.

johnny_ultimate

Yeah I think the TV overtaking film argument is a fundamentally limited one.

Is TV in a great place? Sure! There's some fantastic, artistically accomplished shows out there. Are blockbusters getting ****ter? Sure, although you still get your odd Mad Max: Fury Road. But GREAT cinema is still several orders of magnitude more aesthetically and narratively accomplished than even the finest TV out there (only a few outliers, like Louis CK, manage to IMO overcome TV's inherent limitations). Like even just looking what's out at the moment, films like Manchester by the Sea and La La Land are beautiful and complex pieces of work you just wouldn't get in TV. Cinema's long history allows for a diversity of voices from around the world that the TV industry hasn't come close to catching up -when has TV ever offered anything like Toni Erdmann, The Assassin or Embrace of the Serpent, to name but three of many recent examples. TV also suffers from 'too many cooks' syndrome being built into its very production structure with only a few exceptions, and lacks the sort of support and funding structures to allow for less commercially driven productions (hence a dominance of 'genre' television, even if wonders can be worked within prevalent genres such as crime).

There's more reasons for it, but to make the argument based on blockbusters alone IMO more or less completely negates and ignores what makes cinema such a rich and exciting medium.

eviltimeban

The problem with the artistic nature of TV vs film is that most films (that aren't blockbusters) are 2 hours long and that's it. Generally no sequels or "expanded universes". Now, while that results in limitations, it also means it is under more pressure to deliver.

The problem with TV shows nowadays is the "boxset effect", where they just keep the show going for far longer than it needs to, and the quality drops off (even within the one season). The great thing about the aforementioned Stranger Things is that is was a short enough show with just 8 episodes. It didn't drag on for 10 - 12 episodes. And if the writers are approaching it the right way they'll make sure the second series is just as tight (though I believe there's going to be 10 episodes). And then they need to give it a finite lifespan - another series or two and they should end it.

pixelburp

eviltimeban wrote: »

The problem with TV shows nowadays is the "boxset effect", where they just keep the show going for far longer than it needs to, and the quality drops off (even within the one season).

I don't think that's a problem specific to nowadays TBH; networks have always tried squeezing as many seasons out of their productions as possible, it's not unique to the 'boxset' era. I mean c'mon, The Simpsons is in its TWENTY-EIGHT year. That's insane.

What has changed IMO has been the nature of TV, that with boxsets and TV-on-demand, longer form narratives are easier to pull off because the audience is more capable of keeping up. The scope of TV drama has changed in that respect; it's easy to forget that not that long ago, if you didn't catch a show when it aired, that was it - you were out of the loop.

As an example of what I mean, I'm watching Star Trek Next Generation all the way through, and it's notable just how un-serialized it is. Aggressively so: nothing ever happens that has knock-on ramifications in future episodes. There are no ongoing arcs or plots, and I suspect part of that is the fact the audience back then had no internet or common rewatch options, so episodes had to be kept very self-contained.

Sad Professor

I find it amazing how people won’t give a 90-120 minute film a chance but will happily binge on 10 hours of some mediocre wheel-spinner of a show. For all the talk of TV being more challenging than movies, the way people watch it suggests it’s more comfort food than ever. Really, TV has taken the spot formally held by mainstream mid-budget Hollywood thrillers/dramas - most of which were crap but very popular with older audiences. Hollywood meanwhile is almost exclusively focused on younger viewers, many of whom are lapping up what they are being served. This leaves the indie market to fight over the scraps.

eviltimeban

pixelburp wrote: »

I don't think that's a problem specific to nowadays TBH; networks have always tried squeezing as many seasons out of their productions as possible, it's not unique to the 'boxset' era. I mean c'mon, The Simpsons is in its TWENTY-EIGHT year. That's insane.

Well they're just taking the p*ss with the Simpsons now. It hasn't been good for 20 of those years.

pixelburp wrote: »

As an example of what I mean, I'm watching Star Trek Next Generation all the way through, and it's notable just how un-serialized it is. Aggressively so: nothing ever happens that has knock-on ramifications in future episodes. There are no ongoing arcs or plots, and I suspect part of that is the fact the audience back then had no internet or common rewatch options, so episodes had to be kept very self-contained.

I like that though, you get a story with a beginning and an end in each episode. I think more shows should be like this; I find I haven't the patience to follow a show where very little happens across several episodes. And there were some ramifications in TNG; Picard being captured by the Borg, some of the Spock storylines, and the constant meddling of Q.

There's definitely "too much" TV now, too many shows that are "essential". Its hard to keep up with them. In the last year I tried, and failed, to keep up with Game of Thrones, Ballers, Westworld, Jessica Jones, Orange is the new Black, Daredevil... I'm good with more of a mini-series however, so the Night Manager and Stranger Things worked for me. Ditto Sherlock.

Tony EH

learn_more wrote: »

I watched Son of Saul on Kermode's recommendation too. What would be to 'like' about this movie is beyond me. Notihng but gruesome scenes going on in the background and too many close up's of that quite ugly mans face.

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Agree with you on Son of Saul; found nothing special in that movie whatsoever.

It's a holocaust film, so it automatically gets 2 stars before anyone writes a review.

Tony EH

Most memorable of 2016?

'Hell or High Water'

Left it til late. Very surprised at how entertaining it was considering it's low key affair. Jeff Bridges mumbles his way through another excellent screen role and even Chris Pine shows he can be decent with a good script. Goes a bit off the rails in the end, but not damagingly so.

'Don't Breathe'

Far superior to the other horror that came out at the same time, 'Lights Out', 'Don't Breathe' manages to channel a lot of 70's and 80's classics in a Carpenteresque package. Like 'It Follows', it uses a run down Detroit as a scary backdrop, without needing it to be front and centre. Very tight and suspenseful.

'Hunt for the Wilderpeople'

More enjoyable than it has any right to be. Good mix of serious, funny and eh?

'10 Cloverfield Lane'

Great, up until MEW gets out of the shelter. Then it really should have tried to tie in with 'Cloverfield' on a much, much better level.

'I am Not a Serial Killer'

Strange film that doesn't go the way the viewer expects. Best seen knowing nothing at all about it. I was in two minds when I finished the film, but now consider it to be very good. Great turn from Christopher Lloyd.

'Hail, Caeser'

I have a on again/off again relationship with the Coens. Some of their films take me some time to like, some I hate and some I like instantly. 'Hail, Caeser' was one of those instant likes.

'The Conjuring 2'

Not as good as the first one and still containing James Wan's penchant for jump scares (although they are forgivable) 'The Conjuring 2' contains just enough to keep an old jaded horror fan like me happy. Ostensibly based on a "true" story, it's better viewed as a screenplay in its own right. Check out the real events after the credits roll.

'Rogue One'

The best Star Wars film in 33 years. I appreciated its more adult approach. It has some issues, no doubt, but it comforably beats the middling 'The Force Awakens'. Hope Disney can keep it up.

'I, Daniel Blake'

Ken Loach is always a director to be admired and his take on the difficulties that some people face when dealing with social welfare in England is a very straight faced story. His films aren't always completely successful ('Looking for Eric'), but it's hard to name a truly bad one.

'Batman vs Superman'

A lot of people hated it. I didn't. I found it to be a decent comic book film. I like DC's serious take with moody Superman and pissed off Batman. I wouldn't be a fan of Zack Snyder is any shape, be I feel he did well here. Unfortunately, due to the backlash, I think future attempts will be watered down and will end up pleasing nobody.

'The Monster'

Low budget horror film featuring great performances from the two female leads. The story is quite straightforward, but it never becomes boring or trite.

---

On the list, but yet to watch:

'The Green Room'
'Arrival'
'Silence'
'The Clan'
'The Lobster'
'Hacksaw Ridge'
'The Jungle Book'
'The Nice Guys'
'The Witch'
'Florence Foster Jenkins'
'The Neon Demon'

---

Worst film of 2016 (that I saw)

'Suicide Squad'

A failure of epic proportions. Almost nothing worked.

Tony EH

pixelburp wrote: »

As an example of what I mean, I'm watching Star Trek Next Generation all the way through, and it's notable just how un-serialized it is. Aggressively so: nothing ever happens that has knock-on ramifications in future episodes. There are no ongoing arcs or plots, and I suspect part of that is the fact the audience back then had no internet or common rewatch options, so episodes had to be kept very self-contained.

I think that has to do with the nature of television back then and the lack of boxsets for later sales appearing a month or two after a series has finished its run. The idea of a show that you "follow up" was a thing of the past, like the old weekly serials of 'Flash Gordon' from the 30's or 'Rocketman' from the 40's. Most TV shows in the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's were one shot episodes, where everything was wrapped up that week, apart from two parters which always rattle a crowd.

The 10, 12, or 15 consecutively joined episode series is very much something that was revitalised in the last 15 years or so, which is a good thing IMO. Looking back at old shows now, like 'Starsky and Hutch' there is a real sense of rush and too much ease at which problems are resolved in each episode.