The Wakinglimb Team

The WL Big Chat:
2005 In Films

1st February 2006

31st Jan 2006 - So 2005 is finally over. Thank God for that! While everyone agrees it was a pretty awful year (Hurricane Katrina devestated New Orleans; Richard Whitely passed away), it wasn't all bad (Busted split up). To celebrate the passing of another stupendous year, the Wakinglimb team got together to mull over what rocked - and what sucked - in 2005.

Tim: Film highlight of 2005?

Nish: Sin City (SC) was probably the best I saw last year but then again I didn't see much.

Tim: SC was great.

Bob: It was legendary. Another stunning performance from Bruce.

Chris: SC was great, but only to a point.

Tim: What was wrong with it?

Nish: Yes, it was lacking a certain something...

Chris: Depth! It was glorious for what it was, but there is only so much of that you can honestly take before it starts to grate.

Tim: Pfft. I agree, but the film ended before that happened.

Nish: I loved the Marv episode.

Bob: Yeah I think Tim is just about right. It's a feast for the eyes.

Tim: That's Brittany Murphy for you Bob!

Chris: Oh no, it was a definite feast for the eyes, I just can't imagine watching if over and over again on DVD. Once the impact of the look wears off though, there isn't much left behind.

Bob: Yeah it's not gonna be like a Blade Runner where you can watch it over and over and get more from it I suppose.

"I cheered when the posh tall git was stabbed"

Tim: Rubbish. Brilliant action, dialogue and story. Maybe not as cerebral as Blade Runner, but Blade Runner was based on a sci-fi book by one of the best writers ever and Sin City was based on a comic book.

Nish: I must say that the Tarantino segment was pushing it. It's supposed to be even longer in the director's cut.

Tim: If I didn't see all the hype surrounding that scene I reckon it would have been impossible to tell it was him.

Chris: Same, I honestly wouldn't have spotted it was his scene unless it had been pointed out.

Tim: Pointed out is an understatement…

Bob: Well surely good direction should be like that?

Nish: The quirkiness gives it away.

Nish: Has anyone read the books?

Bob: Comic books?

Chris: No, I haven't.

Tim: Nah, they look a bit heavy. I dunno, it's not what I look for when I pick up a comic really, but I have been tempted.

Nish: I was wondering if the film was more or less the comic strip filmed or is it a standalone film...if you get my meaning.

Bob: It certainly looked like a comic book. Which given the number of big name comic adaptations we've had I thought was cool. Clive Owen was good too.

Chris: From what I read I got the impression it stuck close to it.

Tim: I think Miller decided on the most accessible stories for the film, but I don't know if they're all in say Book 1.

Chris: I don't think so. I believe the stories were taken from 3 books. I believe Sin City 2 will stick to just one of the comics.

Tim: One whole story?

Chris: That is what Miller wanted to do last I read about it, but that may have changed.

Tim: When's it due for release?

Chris: ETA: 18th August

Tim: Excellent!

Bob: Was Batman Begins (BB) 2005?

Chris: Yes it was Bob.

Bob: In that case that was probably my favourite film of the year.

Nish: I can use that film to illustrate my point. BB was based on several Batman stories but is actually a standalone story. If SC is just filmed strips...

Tim: Yeah the stories are straight out of the books in that regard.

Chris: BB was another highlight definitely, especially as it was the first big blockbuster of the year. It set a real marker for everything else that followed.

Bob: Stunning performances as well from Bale, Caine, Morgan et al.

Tim: Deffo, and it didn't rely on massive CGI, but rather a good story and some solid acting.

Nish: Chris, you forgot the film that ended my childhood...

Tim: Anal Invaders 4?

Bob: [Laughs]

Nish: Part 3 actually...

Bob: I thought the original was best!

Chris: No, the sequel was far superior, then they started getting sloppy.

Tim: Yeah but 2 had the effects.

Bob: Not floppy? Boom boom!

Chris: As for Batman Begins, Katie Holmes really stood out as a sore thumb.

Bob: I'd heard that before the film but I didn't think she was that bad to be honest.

Tim: Really? She seemed alright. I just don't know why we always NEED a damsel in distress, especially if they're gonna fuck off in the next one.

Bob: The love interest is always a good opportunity to show the hero's vulnerability.

Nish: She was the only one character that you couldn't look to the comics for inspiration. Oldman was spot on even in looks for Jim Gordon.

Chris: She would have been fine, but her scene with Murphy at the asylum just highlighted the gulf between the two.

Tim: Gordon was great.

Bob: Oldman did a really good job and didn't do it OTT like he can do.

Tim: With regards to Batman though. They NEED to make The Dark Knight Returns into a film asap.

Chris: Yes, they do, seeing as an 18 certificate Batman would really do it justice.

Nish: I can't see them doing DKR though. Superman as a spineless pawn of the US govt?

Tim: Well he wasn't spineless, just… mislead. Or certainly confused as to where his loyalties were.

Chris: He is Superman; he has always struck me as being very gullible.

Nish: A boy scout.

Chris: Which, for a super hero isn't a very good trait…

Tim: But an interesting trait for a superhero that is invincible and all powerful, no?

Will: [Arrives] Evening!

Bob: Hi Will.

Will: Sorry I'm late…

Chris: No worries, we were just on blockbusters. Speaking of which, War Of The Worlds: who else came out feeling disappointed?

Bob: Me.

Will: Slightly…

Bob: Crappest Cruise film in ages.

Nish: Yes. First hour was superb though.

Chris: I wouldn't go that far Bob. The first hour, as Nish just said, was brilliant except for the overuse of the word terrorist in the first hour.

Bob: I didn't even enjoy the first hour.

Tim: I have it on DVD somewhere but have no desire to watch it. I haven't even seen it yet.

"King Kong was responsible for my chin being on the floor for three hours"

Bob: It was just so unbelievable.

Nish: The aliens?

Bob: Not the aliens per se.

Chris: The idiocy of everyone other than Tom Cruise in it?

Bob: The bit where he was getting chased and so many people were getting zapped around him, but not him.

Nish: He's the star though!

Bob: Yeah… I know… but give me something I can believe in. It was just so over the top.

Nish: It would be damn short film if he got killed.

Will: Believability didn't really enter my mind, I just sat back and enjoyed it.

Tim: I'd love a film to do that. Kill a character and then follow someone else like Eternal Darkness.

Nish: Psycho?

Chris: Same Will, although the pacing from the basement scene onwards, plus that horrible ending really spoiled it.

Bob: The basement bit and the fucked up Tim Robins bit were crap.

Will: Yeah, I think everyone agrees the basement was crap.

Tim: What happened?

Will: The city scenes after that were quite cool I thought.

Tim: Why was the scene so shit?

Chris: There was zero tension, and it completely jarred the pacing of the film and ground to a slow halt.

Tim: Was it not a tip of the cap to the older version?

Will: Well yes, but a badly thought out tip.

Bob: And on the telly it looked fucking awful too. The effects looked so "effecty".

Will: Looked OK to me…

Nish: I liked the plane crash. If you're gonna break a 'taboo' do it in style…

Nish: Showing the aliens was a big mistake.

Will: Agreed, showing the aliens ruined it.

Chris: Yes, showing the aliens was horribly misjudged, but everything at the end was.

Bob: Plus the clichéd dysfunctional family set up was just so… clichéd!

Chris: It is a Spielberg favorite.

Nish: Did anyone go to see it (if indeed you did) because it was a Spielberg?

Chris: Partly yes.

Will: I rented it, but I probably still would've wanted to see it if he hadn't been involved. (In fact I wanted to see it at the cinema but didn't get the chance.)

Chris: I would have as well, but it certainly raised my expectations of the film.

Bob: I think we all know I saw it cus of the Cruiser.

Will: I thought Tom did ok, Bob.

Bob: Tom did great! He's a much under-rated actor.

Nish: I just can't see him as a dock worker.

Bob: I couldn't see him as a samurai either but he nailed that.

Nish: Watanabe acted him off the screen in that film.

Tim: Yeah Bob, he nailed being an Asian warrior. Oh no wait he nailed being an American in a Samurai's outfit!

Nish: I can see him as that.

Chris: Magnolia shows that he can act.

Bob: Indeed, he's much under-rated cus of the smile.

Chris: And in real life he is a twat.

Tim: He's a scientologist isn't he? Cuckoo…

Bob: Did you even watch the film Tim?

Tim: Yep.

Bob: It was genius! And he was a true samurai come the end!

Tim: It was the same old Dances With Wolves crap in a new coating. Hollywood loves that storyline for some reason.

Will: Because Dances With Wolves was great?

Nish: Because an American was a better samurai than a Japanese.

Bob: Well it is American…

Chris: Because it is heartwarming for an audience.

Bob: Is that why they're making Dances With Wolves 2: Dance Harder?

Tim: Because Americans need justification that when they were shooting native people they weren't all heartless bastards.

Chris: Moving back to this year, and the big end of year movies Harry Potter, Narnia, and King Kong. Did any of them live up to expectation?

Bob: Yeah, Potter was the best one yet. Daniel has almost nailed basic acting and the supporting cast was great and it looked amazing.

Tim: King Kong was one of the best films I've seen in the cinema.

Nish: Narnia was good but not great.

Tim: It was absolute horseshit!

Chris: Narnia was disappointing. For a start if felt too much like it was in a studio, especially when she first enters Narnia, and then it never managed to lift itself at all.

Tim: Shot for shot it ripped LOTR.

Bob: I thought the book was thinly disguised Christian propaganda that was horse shit 20 years ago when I read it.

Tim: That's because it was, Bob.

Chris: Tim's right, it felt like LOTR lite, and suffered for it.

Nish: It wasn't even disguised...

Will: I thought you were a fan Nish?

Nish: I haven't read the Narnia books in more than 20 years, Will, but I did enjoy them.

Chris: I enjoyed the books when I was younger.

Bob: I think it was slightly disguised in that Jesus is played by a lion…

Tim: I just didn't care about the characters. They gave no time for a connection with the audience and the cast. In fact I cheered when the posh tall git was stabbed!

Chris: At the least the battle at the end had some imagination in it. Luckily the performances were solid all round, and it had the odd nice touch (like the opening).

Tim: The battle at the end was awful!

Nish: Tilda Swinton was very good.

Tim: She was. The film's only saving grace.

Will: Is "our" problem with the source material or the film adaptation?

Chris: The film adaptation was poor.

Tim: Maybe both. Can't polish a turd etc.

Nish: I can't lie: I didn't think the film was bad.

Chris: Narnia wasn't god-awful, it was watchable, but it certainly wasn't as good as it could have been.

Nish: What could have done to it?

Chris: For me, Narnia never felt magical. Any magic it should have possessed was ruined by the first encounter with the lamp post being too obviously a studio set. That shattered any real possibility of it being Narnia, thus losing the connection and importance of the film.

Nish: I suppose it does make you wonder how hard it would have been to stick a lamppost in a real environment. Then again there are budget considerations.

Will: So they won't be doing any more then?

Nish: It'll be difficult to do since the connection between each book is loose if I remember correctly.

Bob: Yeah some of them are very loose.

Nish: Back to the end of my childhood and Anal Invaders… I mean Star Wars.

Bob: Episode III?

Nish: Shit.

Will: Oh dear… oh dear.

Bob: Absolute fucking shit.

Chris: You know what, I almost forgot about Star Wars, it felt that insignificant.

Bob: Lucas has completely lost the plot.

Chris: He lost it when he decided to do the prequels.

Nish: He never had one to start with…

Chris: Anyone deluding themselves that he would pick it up with Episode III should be shot.

Will: But the trailers were so good…

Bob: For me it's the over the top CGI that's as much to blame as anything else.

Chris: The problem was that we all knew where the story was heading, what would happen, etc, so the story relied completely on everything else.

Bob: I don't think it matters particularly that you know the end. Look at Titanic.

Nish: Chris is right. We were looking to see how he tied things up and filled in the gaps. Cowboy job.

Chris: The CGI was too obvious, Lucas can take talented actors and turn them rubbish and his script and direction are awful.

Bob: Some how the models of the original film manage to look more realistic than the CGI fests of the prequels.

Nish: The Return of the Jedi space battle is still the one to beat.

"Jar Jar Binks was the highlight of Episode I…"

Bob: OK, can anyone answer me a quick question about the cinema release and the DVD version?

Will: Probably not, but shoot.

Bob: When I saw it in the cinema I swear I saw the Millenium Falcon in the closing scenes where Leia is given to Jimmy Smit and his wife but I couldn't see it when I watched it on DVD at home.

Will: No idea, sorry.

Nish: That is odd. The films are full of in-jokes I know but I can't see them removing them.

Chris: Lucas just didn't seem to be able to let go. Star Wars was his creation and therefore his. He was never able to let others come in and take over the reigns.

Bob: The thing is everything about the original films from the ship design to the actors couldn't be improved on. So everything in Episodes 1-3 looked look a poor man's version.

Chris: Personally, I always thought 4-6 were glorified B-movies.

Bob: Oh yeah, undoubtedly.

Chris: The only thing that got them so much attention was the effects and the money Lucas has. Everything else about them was pretty average at best.

Will: I quite liked the elegance of the Naboo ships in Episode I.

Bob: But the X-wing and Tie Fighters where so cool, even the Millennium Falcon. The wanky yellow ships from Episode I looked clown shoes as did Jar Jar and the stupid robot trooper things…

Nish: I liked the new ship designs.

Will: Yeah, Jar Jar was butters.

Chris: Jar Jar was the highlight of Episode I.

Will: Are you kidding?

Chris: Seriously, has any other character that Lucas has created received so much attention?

Nish: Technically, Jar Jar was impressive.

Chris: At least Jar Jar had some sort of personality to him, which is more than most of the characters Lucas came up with.

Bob: Jar Jar was just too annoying. Also considering he had three fucking films of about six hours total time Episode III still felt rushed.

Will: Yeah, what happened in ? Nowt.

Nish: It was rushed. I reckon it would take six films to tell the back story.

Bob: For me Maddox nails all the plot holes in Episode III. Check this: Star Wars Episode III: A Steaming Pile Of Sith

Nish: You're as bad as I am with the Guardian.

Bob: But he's spot on, as I'm sure is the Guardian… apart from their Girls Aloud review!

Chris: You are both as bad as each other.

Nish: So bad that we're good?

Chris: For ease of argument, yes.

Chris: I think we have hammered Star Wars enough. King Kong (KK) probably needs a mention.

Will: KK left me a bit flat (not because he trod on me, ho ho).

Nish: Didn't go and see it.

Chris: Very funny Will. The main sticking point with KK is whether you buy into Jackson's self indulgence and just go with it, or it irritates you.

Will: Neither really.

Chris: As a movie, it is flawed. Some of the CGI shots were obviously unfinished (and will probably be polished up for the DVD), and it was too long.

Will: The LOTR bit with the islanders seemed a little out of place though and the bad CGI was really bad.

Chris: However, the good CGI was really astonishing. Kong himself is a marvelous achievement. A real landmark for CGI.

Nish: To the detriment of the rest of the film's effects though?

Chris: No, if Kong hadn't been that good, the rest of the film would not have mattered. This remake all depended on getting emotion out of Kong for it to have a chance of succeeding. After all, it couldn't just be the original looking better, they had to inject real emotion into Kong.

Will: The final sunset skyscraper showdown looked gorgeous.

Bob: But 3 hours has to be self indulgent for just about any movie doesn't it? Especially a creature feature.

Will: For something with so little plot, yes.

Chris: Which is why you either buy into the self-indulgence of not. The difference between Jackson and Lucas is Jackson loves movies, everything about them, and Lucas doesn't. So if you buy into his enthusiasm you can over-look the cracks more. As a cinematic experience, I would rate Kong very highly.

Will: That's my problem – as a "cinematic experience" it felt a bit hollow. Do we know what Jackson's doing next?

Bob: Is he not supposed to be making The Hobbit?

Chris: I don't think he has announced. He will be busy with the Kong DVD for a while and he may take a break.

Nish: The Lovely Bones and producing Halo.

Bob: The Lovely Bones is one of the very few books I've never finished.

Bob: So any other major releases we should discuss?

Chris: Not major, but there are lots of other releases that should get a mention this year.

Will: Harold & Kumar - film of the year!

Chris: I never saw it, have been meaning to though.

Bob: Film of the year: Madagascar.

Will: No.

Chris: Bob, Madagascar isn't even animated film of the year!

Nish: [laughs]

Bob: I had a great time and a hot date!

Chris: Doesn't make it a good film…

Nish: I think you'd have to be getting some to enjoy it.

Will: A good "cinematic experience" then…

Chris: Something to distract you from the film itself.

Bob: It's a great film anyway! Ben Stiller is a comedy legend! Even Ross from Friends is good in it.

Nish: We show it several times a day in Borders.

Chris: Lucky you…

Nish: Well, we do when I remember to press 'play'.

Bob: [laughs]

Will: Was it better than Shark's Tail?

Chris: Yes it was, but that is because Shark's Tail was so poor, not because Madagascar raised any bar.

"The Lost Boys is the best horror movie ever made"

Nish: Pixar still reigns supreme.

Bob: Well I liked it.

Chris: Wallace and Gromit made a stunning comeback this year.

Bob: Oh yeah! That was film of the year!

Will: I missed that one.

Bob: Much better than Madagascar, so fucking funny.

Nish: I'm waiting for the DVD.

Chris: Wallace and Gromit was hands down film of the year. It had everything, puns, one liners, a great story and great action.

Bob: "We'll call him Hutch"

Will: I hear Ms Johanssen liked it…

Bob: Yeah me too! And talking of Johanssen, I did like The Island.

Will: That lovely Alex Zane off MTV named it his turkey of the year!

Bob: I like Alex Zane.

Chris: The Island took a hammering, but mainly because of what it could have been as opposed to what it was.

Nish: What was his FotY?

Bob: What is a FotY?

Will: Film of the year and I can't quite remember. I think it was Kung Fu Hustle.

Chris: Brilliant movie.

Bob: What qualifies Alex Zane to know fuck all about movies? The kid can only be like fucking 10!

Will: His hair.

Chris: Same thing that qualifies us I suppose.

Will: What, his hair?

Bob: Well unless I'm missing something we ain’t being paid for this…

Chris: True, we need better hair in that case.

Will: Speak for yourself! Bob - in theory that should make us more reliable reviewers 'cus we’re doing it out of love. Love of moooovies.

Chris: I have great hair at the moment.

Bob: I haven't got a problem with us reviewing anything for the love of it. What I wanted to know was what qualified Alex Zane.

Chris: I thought we were doing it because we had nothing else to do.

Nish: So what's our FotY?

Bob: Shall we have a short list and then vote?

Chris: Hang on, I have a few more films to mention before we get to FotY.

Will: Go on then…

Chris: The Descent and Wolf Creek were both excellent horror movies that showed the genre isn't as stale as people thought.

Bob: Haven't seen either of those.

Nish: I've never been interested in horror as a genre.

Will: Missed them too but I wanted to see The Descent.

Chris: It's is excellent. As long as they stick away from teen slashers and western adaptations of Japanese horrors, original ones can prevail.

Bob: I find if I'm going to the cinema it has to be a proper film.

Nish: Madagascar?

All: [laughter]

Bob: Well I had a date…

Nish: As a matter of interest was it you or your date that suggested it?

Bob: My excuse for Madagascar is there's only two screens here and screen one was full. So fuck off all three of you!

Chris: Excuses…

Chris: Anyway, best horror of the 20th century The Descent is. Plus we have Romero back with his Living Dead, although that was a tad disappointing.

Will: Yeah, I wasn't a massive fan of that. Hopper phoned his performance in.

Chris: He did.

Bob: … Aren't we in the 21st century now?

Nish: I've only ever seen the original.

Chris: See the original three, you're not missing much with 2005 one.

Will: Haven't seen the original, but it's probably better. The remake of Dawn Of The Dead was fantastic though (2004 I think).

Nish: I mean the original Night Of…

Will: Yeah I know.

Chris: Night Of…, Dawn and Day are the three to see.

Nish: I did enjoy it. The ending was unexpected for me.

Bob: The Lost Boys is the best horror movie ever made.

Nish: Stop it!

Bob: I love that movie. It has the second best dialogue in any movie ever.

Chris: It is a very good movie, but not best horror.

Nish: It's not really horror though is it?

Bob: Scares me! Death by stereo!

Chris: No, it had too much comedy in it.

Bob: Comedy + Horror = perfect!

Will: The …Dead films have comedy though.

Chris: Have you seen, they are bringing out Final Destination 3 (thinking about comedic horrors)?

Bob: FD2 was a film too far for that franchise.

Will: They should've called the second one Penultimate Destination.

Chris: [laughs]

Nish: Or subtitled it Welcome Break

Will: I would've been there like a shot!

Chris: That's like my housemate saying Batman Begins should have ended by saying "Batman Ends."

Will: [laughs]

Will: As a side note: Cheaper By The Dozen 2 - laziest title ever? Surely they could've come up with a witty dozen-based pun or something.

Chris: I agree, sheer laziness but would else should we expect? Before I forget, Cronenberg's History Of Violence is often over-loooked, very good film indeed and a real return to form.

Will: That's on at the Corn Exchange here soon. I'll check it out.

Nish: DVD for me for that one.

Chris: The last film I can think of that I want to mention is Shane Black coming back with Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang.

Bob: I haven’t seen that either but I do like Robert Downey Jr.

Nish: I don't think that even showed up at the multiplex.

Will: If it did it was brief and not even the Corn Exchange are showing it…

Chris: It was a real highlight of the year; Downey Jr and Kilmer make a great double act and it brilliant rips into the genre Black basically perfected. Plot goes a bit loopy towards the end but well worth watching.

Will: Sounds good.

"Short of sending round lawyers dressed as Jar Jar Binks to rape me with gaffi sticks, George Lucas couldn't have insulted me more"

Bob: Kilmer?

Chris: Yep, a good performance.

Bob: Mr Wooden.

Nish: But he's in your favouritest film ever, Bob!

Bob: I know. But in that his wooden-ness helps with his Ice-like performance.

Nish: I liked him in True Romance.

Chris: Can I just say for the record, I never liked Top Gun.

Bob: Fag.

Nish: It's a homoerotic classic, Chris.

Bob: It's not even vaguely homoerotic!!

Chris: Yes it is and you love it for that.


Nish: It's one long dick wave, Bob.

Bob: In all seriousness, how is it??

Will: One word: volleyball.

Chris: For a start it has Tom Cruise in (who you love) - that right there is enough for you in any film.

Bob: [laughs] I'm not rising to the bait.

Nish: "Playing *grunt* with the boys…"

Bob: Calling it homoerotic is not just wrong, it's a cheap shot and I expect better from you guys.

Chris: Film of the year?

Bob: It's either Batman Begins or Wallace And Gromit for me.

Will: I think my FotY might possibly be Crash, but then I'm probably forgetting something.

Chris: Oh, Crash, interesting responses for that over the year.

Will: It was the Rock's favourite!

Chris: I love the Rock.

Bob: I love the Rock too.

Chris: Be Cool was this year wasn't it?

Will: I think so, yes. Was it as bad as I've heard?

Chris: My god, that sucked harder than Bob!

Bob: So are we voting for turkey of the year too?

Chris: At some point yeah. Film of the Year for me was Wallace And Gromit.

Nish: I'm still undecided. The best film I've seen this year wasn't made this year. Aw, hell, I'm going for Sin City because despite its faults it did make me sit up and pay attention.

Bob: Yeah I vote Sin City as well.

Chris: You just voted for Batman Begins or Wallace And Gromit!

Bob: Yeah but I forgot Sin City.

Nish: [laughs]

Chris: You have a brain like a sieve!

Will: I really loved Serenity, but that's fanboyism.

Chris: Oh god, how did we forget Serenity? Not as good as Wallace And Gromit but a top class film. Best Sci-fi in years.

Will: Possibly… I love the series too much to be objective I think.

Chris: Same, which is why I felt like saying it.

Nish: I'm gonna watch Firefly after I've finished CSI and then get Serenity.

Will: Good plan.

Tim: My FotY: King Kong. It was a cinematic even for me, just when I thought CG had become standard and boring, along comes Kong and is responsible for my chin being on the floor for the best part of three hours.

Chris: Surprise of the Year? (we all know the Limb loves lists)

Nish: Madagascar.

Bob: [laughs]

Chris: My surprise of the year was Serenity. Honestly, I just wasn't expecting it not having heard of the series, so it took me completely by surprise.

Tim: Deffo, I doubt I'll be watching it on DVD.

Will: Surprise of the year: Crash. Rich and I turned up at the cinema without knowing what was on, arbitrarily chose Crash, and it turned out to be fantastic!

Chris: It is nice when that happens.

Nish: Didn't Cookie rip into Crash?

Chris: Yes he did and I can see why.

Will: You can see why?

Chris: Yeah, he makes some valid criticisms of it. It never really makes any big statement.

Tim: Suprise of the year… Napoleon Dynamite?

Chris: Wasn't that 2004?

Tim: Garden State?

Chris: That was definitely 2004.

Tim: Well I dunno then…

Nish: Kung-fu Hustle as a suprise. I honestly haven't laughed as much at a film in ages. Daft but great fun.

Nish: Turkey: Star Wars.

Tim: Hrmmm. I think ambivalence is my feeling towards Episode III. I didn't HATE it…

Chris: Turkey: Be Cool.

Tim: Yeah, Be Cool. It should have been massive.

Chris: I pretty much knew Star Wars was going to be poor so I accepted it. Be Cool should have been better.

Will: Deuce Bigalo 2 is without doubt the worst film I've ever seen, but my turkey goes to Star Wars.

Tim: [laughs] Deuce Bigalow 2! Why did you see that?

Will: It was free, a pre-release screening.

Nish: Short of sending round lawyers dressed as Jar Jar Binks to rape me with gaffi sticks, George Lucas couldn't have insulted me more.

Tim: I don't think Episode III counts as a turkey as we all had low expectations didn't we?

Will: To be honest I naively still hoped it was going to turn out OK.

Tim: It wasn't shit though was it?

Will: Yes, it was shit.

Chris: Not as shit as Be Cool

Nish: I didn't think it would be as poor as it was.

Tim: It was just… not life shatteringly amazing.

Nish: I've read Be Cool so I knew it was never going to be great. So has it been a good year? In terms of blockbusters (regardless of quality) it has been pretty special.

Chris: Yeah, it has been one of the best years in recent memory for me.

Bob: It was a better year for albums than it was for films.

Will: Not bad for me, though I think I missed one of the year's highlights in Batman Begins.