Sunday, 21 December 2025

Review of 2025: Part 2 – Movies

Being the usual cycle through the year's cinematic shenanigans, handily divided into 26 'discoveries', 10 old favourites, seven new least-favourites, six re-appraisals and five obsessions. We began with the most important bit: the movies I saw for the first time and most enjoyed.

26 DISCOVERIES
1. Crossing Delancey (Joan Micklin Silver, 1988) – *SPOILERS* A Jewish Moonstruck, and somehow just as good – though here she loves the pleasant little guy, not the big and brooding one. The film seems to go awry in its third act, but don’t worry, writer Sandler and director Silver know exactly what they're doing; we had to go through that to get this. While the Roches will always be the ersatz McGarrigles, here they’re the perfect accompaniment, helping to cast a spell that rarely wavers and never fades, not even months later. This one moved me very deeply.

2. Rachel Getting Married (Jonathan Demme, 2008) – An astonishing film, its great balancing act underlined by how acerbically destructive Anne Hathaway’s Kym is, yet how seriously she treats AA and everyone there. Her monologue in a meeting takes what could be melodrama and does something with it that is never going to leave me. So much of the film hits close to home, and usually in that case it serves only to highlight how false the material rings, but, just once in a long while, it does the opposite. Rachel Getting Married is that exception. Guilt. Addiction. Family. Truth. Fuck.
3. Khane-ye doust kodjast? (Abbas Kiarostami, 1987) aka Where Is the Friend’s House? – A frowningly serious little Iranian boy tries to return his classmate’s workbook, and so save him from expulsion, in this extraordinary film. It’s a portal into another world, with a collision of elements that feels utterly novel: a thriller that radiates pure charm; Francois Truffaut’s After Hours; a wild goose chase pausing periodically to lament the passing of some old ways – the death of craftsmanship, old doors replaced by iron ones – and satirise the pointless irrelevance of others (our protagonist's grandfather tediously elaborating on the virtues of weekly beatings). There's witty circularity, mild absurdity and incomprehending pain here, but above all there is a faith in a conscientious form of humanism. Our culture tells us that children pester and nag and repeat things; Kiarostami’s radical viewpoint is that adults just aren’t listening. His film’s resourceful hero, then, takes matters into his own hands – and thank goodness. “Good work.”

4. Letyat zhuravli (Mikhail Kalatozov, 1957) aka The Cranes Are Flying – I’ve never seen anything quite like this. Who blocked and edited it, God?!
5. Si muero antes de despertar (Carlos Hugo Christensen, 1952) aka If I Should Die Before I Wake – A spectacular child’s-eye noir: like Where Is the Friend’s House if the hero were Argentine, the naughtiest boy in school, and hunting a serial killer. It’s tense, funny and deeply moving, full of vividly cinematic ideas, and with every scene seemingly better than the one before.

6. Glory (Edward Zwick, 1989) – What a writer Kevin Jarre was: his script for Glory is so nuanced in its characterisation, so unglamorous in its treatment of war and the grubbiness of duty, and so full of authentic and beautifully rendered dialogue. It was pointed out at the time, and has been regularly since, that he is a white writer focusing on a white colonel in this story of the Civil War's first Black regiment... but that is to puff up the reviewer's own progressive credentials at the expense of Jarre's achievement, and to do a disservice to the nature of the film, which draws (as the writer loved to do) from the best historical sources (in this case, the real-life letters of that white colonel), while allowing us to sit, repeatedly, with those Black soldiers. Yes, it asks us to sympathise with the wet-eyed guilt that the commanding officer feels at publicly flogging a Black guy, but it allows us also to understand the forces pressing down upon both men. The insights that we get from the letters themselves are small moments of revelation: not least the immediacy with which the Black soldiers could switch from drilling mode to their freer selves. Just now and then, director Zwick and a syrupy, overly conventional James Horner score take the film to somewhere less specific, yet that score comes into its own during the stunning climactic sequence, and it's Jarre himself, as a writer and actor, who gives us the most obviously Hollywood moment: the cry of "Give 'em hell, 54th!" that feels historically real, emotionally real and as calculated as something from a 1940s weepie. It is the most simply and deeply moving line in a picture that's hardly short of them. The cast, too, is superb: Freeman the veteran freeman, Braugher the bespectacled intellectual, and Denzel (in his breakthrough role) disfigured by repressed rage. His introductory scene is a masterpiece that turns on a dime, showing the unifying power of humour, and of a shared frame of reference. If Matthew Broderick is only competent as the colonel, his slight callowness as an actor proves a happy accident that fits the part.
7. The Ballad of Wallis Island (James Griffiths, 2025) – Carey + folk music + the familiar rhythms and vernacular of Tim Key + an understanding of grief + a cricket scene, and all on an island. Perhaps personal, customisable films are already here? (Yet such flawed and human beauty is the very antithesis of AI.) It’s Inside Llewyn Davis with a flame in its heart, Seducing Doctor Lewis in the acoustic idiom, and while it’s slightly schematic in shape, it deviates from expectation in just the right ways. It’s deeply moving, very funny and so beautifully acted, while feeling about music the same way that I do. I really loved it.

8. Just Pals (John Ford, 1920) – “The boobs will all be at prayer meetin’, and it’s goin’ to be an easy job.” A stunning film: one of the Master’s greatest extant silents. The story is simple melodrama – featuring both an orphan, and a villain who steals the school memorial fund – but oh what Ford does with it. Even in 1920, he’s siding with the outsider against small-town hypocrisy: as in his immortal Stagecoach, the most heinous character on screen is a respected banker. Since the pals of the title are local layabout Buck Jones and a little urchin (who turns out to be goodhearted and yet fantastically untamable and rude), there are obvious parallels with Chaplin’s The Kid, which came out the next year, but this one is more bucolic and, critically and above all, about the quality of mercy. There are so many wonderful small moments here – what Ford called his ‘grace notes’ – a cascade of petals, a lens-flooding sunset, a sackful of kittens getting a last-second reprieve. No-one but Ford would have turned to those details, or rendered them with such unapologetic sincerity. This was the director’s first film at Fox, and his new lead, Buck Jones, proves himself as real star material (though at one point he does the signature arm-grab of the director’s usual muse, Harry Carey?!). The love interest, incidentally, is Helen Ferguson, later a powerful Hollywood PR for actors like Stanwyck. During those hazy, lazy shots of Jones in his element, Ford uses the hay loft as a portrait frame within the landscape one, placing the hero with his back to us, a shot that I can’t remember any other director ever using, creating a portal into a contrasting world, as at the end of The Searchers.
9. Gimme Shelter (Albert Maysles, David Maysles and Charlotte Zwerin, 1970) – Most gig films don’t have a body count. But this ominous doc chronicles the nightmare of Altamont, as the Stones announce a free show staffed by Hell’s Angels, and events spiral rapidly and inexorably out of control. While you’ll know the story – and its place in a neat and tidy 20th century narrative – seeing it is something else: the nightmarish trips, a testiness that flares into beatings, and the chilling feeling that if it carries on like this, someone is going to get killed. The film is brilliantly framed, with Jagger and Watts reviewing footage in the studio, and a wrap-around narrative about the impending tragedy, which is then held back as we’re escorted on the rest of the band’s North American tour. The Stones are a weird band, for sure – freshfaced Londoners playing at the blues – and what might have been incredible in the room isn’t always as convincing on screen (Jagger sacrificing his vocals for movement, then waddling like a duck). What the Maysles realised, though, is that this is only tangentially a movie about music; it is instead a snapshot of a movement that, if minor in itself, took on an outsized and emblematic significance – in part, of course, due to their film. There are small on-stage pleasures – Tina Turner’s paintstripping soul, Jagger shouting “Well alright!” like Neil Kinnock – but everything is weighted towards, and coloured by, what is coming. So yes, Gram Parsons sings ‘Six Days on the Road’, but it’s his pleading with the audience not to hurt each other that will live in the memory. The worst gig of all time, then. With George Lucas behind one camera, and Walter Murch recording sound.

10. Sanshô dayû (Kenji Mizoguchi, 1954) aka Sansho the Bailiff – Last year I found myself watching Bird on a Wire, the much-maligned caper comedy starring Mel Gibson and Goldie Hawn, and made a joke about how I was watching this shite but still hadn’t seen Sansho the Bailiff. There was a truth underlying it, though: I’d been skimping on international cinema for a little while: largely reading when I felt able to intellectually engage, then watching comfort movies and genre films when I didn’t. I couldn’t see Sansho as a teenager because like all classics of world cinema, the VHS was £17.49 in HMV, but I haven’t had that excuse for a while. So it felt great to finally commit, in this new year, to watching probably the best-known and most celebrated movie I’d never seen, and one that at least from the outside seemed challenging and demanding. Of course, once you’re into it, you remember that those distinctions are false: if a movie grips, it grips. As obvious and slightly snobbish as the comparison may be, though, the difference that I felt in watching this, compared to a mediocre John Badham movie, was broadly analogous to that between eating junk food and something that’s good for you. I’m keen to try to do both. Because this Japanese folk tale about suffering, slavery and redemption was truly glorious: painterly, emotionally complicated, and periodically profound.
11. Hester Street (Joan Micklin Silver, 1975) – Silver's arresting debut: a flavourful film about Jews on the Lower East Side in the 1890s, which like several of her later movies pretends to be about the emotional travails of an unremarkable and self-centred man, but is actually about the woman he's trying to trample beneath his feet. She's Gitl (Carol Kane), who arrives at Ellis Island as an embarrassing reminder of his Eastern European past (no English, no apparent guile, an aversion to ever displaying her real hair) but isn't, much to his and our surprise, anybody's meek and martyred wife. The movie isn't flawless in the details of its filming or performance, but it's close to perfect in the sweep of the thing. And it has a lot to say not just on gender relations, but about the nature of cultural assimilation. Kane is the stand-out here, of course, but Dorrie Kavanaugh has an agreeably showy bit as her theoretical love rival, a Polish immigrant who speaks like Dietrich.

12. Rolling Thunder (John Flynn, 1977) – *SPOILERS* “Why do I always get stuck with crazy men?” “‘Cause that’s the only kind that’s left” A scintillating early Schrader script (rewritten by Heywood Gould) about a damaged Vietnam vet who winds up cleaning out a rats’ nest. Heard that one before? William Devane is the returning POW who, on the outside, is an all-American hero, and on the inside... well, there is no inside anymore. One remarkable thing about cinema is how poorly its worthy prestige pictures tend to age, and yet how much vitality, honesty and life there is to the genre trash that was largely derided upon release, but perhaps appealed to people’s truer instincts, and tells us so much more about the times. This one is astonishing, really, particularly in that near-perfect first half, which confounds you at every turn, while staying utterly true to a startlingly realised central character who, himself, seems utterly true. (Perhaps only those flashbacks – looking a little cheap, playing a little trite – land wide of the mark.) The remainder of the picture, a road trip en route to a bloodbath, has the odd misstep or slow stretch but also moments you’ll never forget, ending with Tommy Lee Jones blasting bad guys in a whorehouse, and an overt nod to The Searchers (an enduring influence on Schrader), in which he is Natalie Wood. (Jones's immortal line, "I'll just get my gear", manages to be quietly horrifying, deeply moving and just about the peak of bro cinema.) The varied score is way above average too, with one Tex-Mex theme that seems to anticipate Paris, Texas. A minor classic, in its periodically confounding, quasi-fascist Nixonian way.
13. The Browning Version (Anthony Asquith, 1951) – A scintillating Rattigan adaptation, filmed mostly in Asquith’s invisible late style, with Redgrave in incomparable form as a pedantic, apparently bloodless classics teacher hiding vast private torments. It’s an extremely English tragedy – a sort of Mr Chips for the melancholy – though containing the writer’s usual chink of light, in his usual counter-intuitive style. The character of Redgrave’s shrewish, adulterous wife (played by Jean Kent) appears for a while to be alarmingly one-note, but it isn’t quite that: it is instead the result of an ascetic marrying a sensualist, and not even realising at first that he had done so.

14. The Truman Show (Peter Weir, 1998) – I'd somehow seen half of this a couple of times, but I don't think I'd ever seen the whole thing. Beyond everything else, it's a truly great love story, done essentially in two scenes and two moments. The date sequence with McElhone, which begins in the library and ends on the beach, is so beautifully written, directed and played. And the film is daring in structure and form, timely and fairly prescient on reality TV and celebrity culture (check the complicity of the small screen audience, who cheer him on while keeping him in bondage), and quietly profound about escapism through media, the fetishisation of small-town values, and – most importantly – life itself. There's one particularly nice satirical moment in which Truman realises his entire life might be a sham, and all we can really focus on is the Ford logo on his car. My only complaint: Carrey’s performance feels too tied to its twin poles of fleeting, self-serious sincerity and his usual cartoonish shtick, though the final scene ties the two together with such panache that you wonder if that was always intentional.
15. Dream Lover (Nicholas Kazan, 1994) – *SPOILERS* Very much my sort of thing: a demonic-woman noir, with the most beautiful screen couple since Delon and Cardinale in The Leopard. It's from 1993, when everyone was fucking and you did business deals with the Japanese. James Spader plays a divorced architect who spills wine all over damaged, free-spirited Lena (Mädchen Amick), meets her again in a supermarket, spies on her (a bit), sleeps with her, marries her, and starts a family. Hurray: a half-hour movie with a happy ending! Oh wait. Someone is calling her Sissy and saying she's from Texas. Her parents don’t actually appear to be dead. Her friend Debby from dance class might not exist. And what are all these Visa charges for the Hotel Chantecler? I found this movie so deliriously entertaining. It's padded here and there (the carnival inserts, a home video sequence), it's tasteless and even immoral in its treatment of mental illness and domestic violence, and it has a strange last act culminating in a reshot ending that I don't think quite works. It is also regularly pilloried for being misogynistic, and while I'd argue that it's primarily absolved through being a fairly obvious and extremely vivid genre exercise, there really isn't any reason for Spader to punch his wife in the face, with the film's full blessing, and it arguably undermines both central characters, and the plot, to have him do so. However, for over an hour this is plotted like a Highsmith novel, and has one of the great fatales, who offers a sight we thought we'd never seen on screen, the beautiful Spader, with his fey delivery and those funny winces, being not just run rings around, but somehow out-prettied. I'm sorry if it's toxic to say so, but I would probably just give Lena a pass on all this stuff she's up to, she's gorgeous. It’s also fascinating how writer-director Kazan, son of all-time great filmmaker and ratfink, Elia, leans more on Pandora's Box here than he does on Double Indemnity or Leave Her to Heaven. Distracting point for any snooker fans: Spader’s character is called Ray Reardon.

16. The Holdovers (Alexander Payne, 2023) – *SOME SPOILERS* Nice: they fixed Dead Poets Society (kind of like how John Hughes fixed Pretty in Pink with Some Kind of Wonderful). At the moment of truth, Payne knows that selling out your fellow man is about the worst thing one can do, and there is always an alternative – though perhaps standing up is easier for an adult. The film is similar to Tom McCarthy’s Win-Win, and indeed to most of Payne’s mid-period movies, but it’s a lovely same, in its familiar, 2011-ish way. He doesn’t push too far, or expect his characters to transform themselves: a partial unfurling, sufficient to connect again, is enough. Then it's down to what was always there. When 'The Wind' by Cat Stevens kicks in, early in the second half, you feel that the song is making you feel in a way that the story hasn’t quite, save perhaps for during that Christmas dinner. But, by the end, the film has you.
17. Sinners (Ryan Coogler, 2025) – *A FEW SPOILERS* It’s all about the time-slip, isn’t it: the walls between past, present and future dissolving in a carousel of Black (and East Asian) culture, the camera swinging drunkenly, as energised as the people around it, and Coolger filling your ears with the devilish ecstasy of the blues, as he fills the screen with 1930s partygoers, hip hop dancers and a flying V. It’s particularly impressive as a feat of daring, since like so many great gambles it risks being silly, but is instead enough to give you a faint sense of hope for the state of mainstream cinema, added Rick melodramatically. I suppose this one just does the From Dusk Till Dawn trick, and yet doing so with a race relations drama isn’t the exercise in Biden-era handwringing you might fear. It’s a masterstroke. Because that supercharges the very vampire genre with race, rendering tempting the sense of belonging, while threatening the destruction of authentic Black culture through both intra-community moralising and excessive assimilation. Simply: if you give up your identity as a Black man, you lose your soul. No matter what the list of Best Picture winners tells you, genre films have always been the best medium for any message you might want to send. We don't want a pompous lecture, we want to have fun. And Sinners is FUN. It is also, at the most instant level, a battle between the blues and folk, though the former is depicted in its most exhilarating form, while the latter is bowdlerised into a joke. It’s a funny joke, though. While it might have been more authentic for the Klanpires to have been rooted in authentic southern folk music, it is hilarious (and close to exhilarating?) that they swing their banjos in unison, love ‘Blooming Heather’ and do an Irish jig to ‘The Rocky Road to Dublin’. The music is mostly stunning: the set-pieces possessing a similar energy and semi-factual feel to the ones in Luhrmann’s excellent Elvis biopic. Perhaps the best is Little Sammy’s blues song in the car, the entrepreneur’s jaw dropping at what he’s hearing, or perhaps just the money there is to be made. Hell he can play. Despite the obvious differences, Goransson’s ominous, pulsing synths seem to belong to the same world. Maybe Sinners didn’t need its five endings. The wish-fulfilment of the Blaxploitation-ish Klan shoot-out is understandable, but is also the part that doesn’t quite fit. A Fresh Prince-ish coda with Buddy Guy trades danger for quirky mawk, veering close to a cop-out. Sinners is a great time, though. It’s full of life and joy and imagination, with scarcely a piece of IP in sight (do the rules of vampirism count?), favouring instead sequences of taut, Tarantino-ish tension – in the negotiation of a juke joint purchase, in a doorman wanting to be let back into the building – vivid character sketches and quite a lot of chat about cunnilingus. An extra half a star for Miles Caton’s highly pleasing speaking voice.

18. A Real Pain (Jesse Eisenberg, 2024) – I felt a little queasy, and uneasy, about a Holocaust tour being used as the backdrop for a comedy-drama about a contemporary familial relationship; then I realised that Eisenberg is doing something remarkable here: not just combating generational trauma through the familiar defence of nebbish humour, and questioning the validity of modern pain in the shadow of unimaginable horrors, but purposefully reasserting a Jewish individuality, in its inevitably complicated and thorny nature, that is the antithesis of the Shoah. His film reminded me a little of The Darjeeling Limited, though with a much more coherent emotional background, and of Philomena, which offset the sins of the past with the same sort of shimmering wit. Though A Real Pain is apparently unambitious in its scale: a small cast, a small-ish canvas, its achievements are outsized. That extends to the photography. There's something about the visual framing of the Ghetto Heroes memorial at the start of the tour that took my breath away: its incongruousness in any setting, the idea that this should have happened anywhere at all, let alone where we're standing. Culkin's character, Benji, is showstopping, and he's very good in the role, but it does occasionally tip towards cliché (and I have the obvious reservations about a non-Jewish actor in the part). Where he really works is in keeping you on edge, and in the small moments: particularly that devastating intake of breath when he sees the shoes at the camp. Eisenberg's role is less showy, but he's even better, I think. His short speech about pain is a remarkable feat of writing and performance, but is there anything better than the moment of reconnection before the coming ordeal, which is nothing more than two men saying "Hey" to one another. The biggest laugh in the picture is probably the tour-guide, David, trying to share his facts about the oldest headstone in Poland while adhering to Benji's oppressive and almost arbitrary limitations, though I also loved that sequence at the grandmother's old house. Surely the only thing more Jewish than the ritual of leaving stones on her old doorstep is what happens next.
19. Obsession (Edward Dmytryk, 1949) – A superb thriller about cuckold Robert Newton embarking on an elaborate, extended scheme to murder his usurper. Newton is terrific, playing upper-middle far better than he ever did working-class, and sparring memorably with Naunton Wayne, as the polite, supposedly oblivious but in fact omniscient detective (an archetype pioneered by Alastair Sim in Green for Danger?). There’s a recurring theme in the film about visiting Americans being given precedence over Brits, which is fun, as this was directed by blacklisted US filmmaker Edward Dmytryk, prior to his 1950 jail-term; his artisanal skill augments every scene, right up until that embarrassing tacked-on ending.

20. Los Angeles Plays Itself (Thom Andersen, 2003) – This left-wing polemic about Los Angeles on film is highly entertaining and valuable if you’re a film location nerd, interested in the movie colony and the city that surrounds it, or just want to understand 20th century America. At its best, it calls to mind Caro’s ‘The Power Broker’, and I have no higher praise than that. The passages dealing with Los Angeles’ (never 'LA’s', we are cautioned) forgotten public history, and its phony ‘secret history’, are just dazzling, and there’s a great sincerity to Andersen’s bristling anger at the erasure of working class lives, both in mainstream film and from the razed community of Bunker Hill. But while this video essay is intellectually stimulating, provocative, pedantic in an anal way that I really don’t mind, and even waspishly funny, it is also overly grouchy. Our host knows an awful lot about movies, but he really doesn’t seem to like any of them (the sole exceptions, across almost three hours, are The Exiles, the original Gone in 60 Seconds, two porn films, and the calling cards of the tiresome, The Long Goodbye and the films of John Cassavetes). I would simply devote my life to something I enjoyed. I would also like to explain to him that all cities are misrepresented on screen – racially, culturally, geographically – and that Notting Hill was not neorealism, but then perhaps Los Angeles here is a prism through which we are meant to see the wider crimes of mass culture, and not a special case. There’s some of the inevitable pretension of the form, too, which seems to bring out an academic’s nascent egomania. Andersen throws in some truly puzzling contentions: the first teenagers with cars were in Rebel without a Cause (surely only true if you’re employing the fun argument that Ray invented the teenager); that some stag film is a "gay porn masterpiece"; and that “the greatest ‘low tourist’ director is, of course, Alfred Hitchcock”. Oh, of course. It's pretty great, though. It made me look at these movies in such a different way, from Hal Roach to Double Indemnity to Blade Runner, and who doesn’t want that.
21. Neotpravlennoye pismo (Mikhail Kalatozov, 1960) aka Letter Never Sent – Before Fitzcarraldo, before even Aguirre, but some time after Way Down East, there was Letter Never Sent, a hard-won picture about man vs nature (and fate), in which four Russian geological explorers try to get the hell out of the variously burning, flooding and snow-bound Siberian wilds with their discoveries – and their lives – intact. At its best, simply stunning, with astonishing location footage, Kalatozov’s jawdropping visual flourishes, and plotting that is both ineluctable and impossible to second guess. It is also admittedly a little uneven – at times plodding, almost by definition – but has explosions of unexpected joy, for which you, and these characters, really have to suffer.

22. The Gallant Hours (Robert Montgomery, 1960) – A reverential but riveting, unsentimental drama about the lead-up to the battle of Guadalcanal, largely following around Admiral ‘Bull’ Halsey (Cagney). The star is brilliant, obviously, and there’s one counter-intuitive scene between Halsey and a young flyer who wants to be relieved of command that is particularly special, explicitly disavowing speechmaking, and then offering something more profound.
23. The Shopworn Angel (H. C. Potter, 1938) – Margaret Sullavan is absolutely beguiling as a stroppy, hedonistic stage diva shaken to her senses by a guileless Texan soldier (Jimmy Stewart, so aww-shucks innocent he's almost simple). It isn't a straightforward love story, though – in fact, I might have liked it even more if it were – but an intriguing if not entirely successful melodrama in which he teaches her how to love, and she falls for a vaguely debauched Broadway financier (Walter Pidgeon), while feeling she owes the smitten doughboy a marriage before he ships off to France. The early courtship scenes between Sullavan and Stewart are something like the apogee of Hollywood romance, which makes the remainder slightly unsatisfying – and hard to parse, emotionally – though it still has magical moments. Waldo Salt's excellent dialogue helps. The idiotic dubbing of Maggie's singing doesn't, and undercuts the effectiveness of the critical final scene.

24. Unfinished Business (Gregory La Cava, 1941) – This is so nearly a great film, and certainly one with dazzling passages of modernity and maturity, as Irene Dunne – fleeing the fate of a spinster – takes a train out of her small town, and, on that train, fucks the first guy she meets (Preston Foster). She thinks he’s sincere, he’s anything but, and yet this is no creaking melodrama but a picture that’s touching, often incredibly funny, and, at its best, genuinely profound. In its greatest, far later scene, Dunne and her estranged husband (Robert Montgomery, playing Foster’s brother) sit on the stairs in her boarding house, and she explains the tenets of female desire that give the film its title. Even if the film ultimately backs away, terrified, from the conclusions it has unearthed there, that sequence remains a masterpiece of counter-intuition and complexity, and still looks at least 30 years ahead of its time. There are numerous special moments, though: a song at a piano, and the softening it engenders; by far Walter Catlett’s funniest work on screen (as a thinly-veiled Billy Rose); and Eugene Pallette’s performance as a squeaky-shoed butler, which mirrors the trajectory of the film in seguing from comedy to something far more affecting. There is, occasionally, something of Remember the Night about this film, and that’s not just the highest praise I can offer, but about the rarest. And there is too, a moment of erotic expression that drew an astonished gasp from an audience in 2025, followed hot on its heels by a fantastic moment of revelation, and then an inspired Mamoulian-ish flourish from La Cava, who pans up and down and across to find a succession of faces, each one afforded a snatch of gossip as it spreads like fire though a room. Such startling invention, though, and such daring, is at times undermined by moments of contrived characterisation, and some terrible plotting. The film first stutters when indulging in one of those drunk scenes that La Cava (a self-deluding alcoholic – is there any other kind?) thought so amusing and important to story construction, yet has there ever been a funny drunk scene? For a film with as many laughs as this one (and no light opera virtuoso was ever half as good at comedy as Dunne), it’s also strange that it requires such frequent recourse to jokes about people being fat and ugly. And there’s no question that the director’s vaunted improvisational approach is a double-edged sword, leading to some fascinating dynamics and fabulously unresolved scene endings, but also some extremely uneven – and even unconvincing – sequences. I wanted to love Unfinished Business unreservedly, and for a half hour I did, revelling in its balance of elements, and at the rare sound of a Code-era woman exhaling with horniness, as Foster puts the moves on Dunne. If, once the leads start drinking, the film becomes conspicuously inconsistent, its most extraordinary moments are nevertheless housed in that erratic remainder.
25. Acting on Impulse (Sam Irvin, 1993) – If an erotic thriller has at least two alternate titles, you know it’s going to make no apologies for itself. This one has three, being known variously as Eyes of a Stranger, Secret Lives, and Roses Are Dead. Fiorentino is just fantastic in it, warming up for The Last Seduction, playing a presumed murderess now wreaking sexual and emotional havoc at a hotel where a convention is on. She remains an utterly beguiling screen presence, quite unlike anything before or since. The film around her is imperfect but highly likeable: a spin on Bad Influence, but with the atmosphere of Something Wild, tons of horniness, and a cast that includes Nancy Allen, Isaac Hayes, Charles Lane, Dick Sargent, Zelda Rubinstein and Adam Ant! The meta stuff that it leads with barely works, the comedy is broad where it should be blackly funny, and the climactic reveal is dubious to say the least, but who among us doesn’t want a peak-era Fiorentino to come save/ruin our life? As in Bad Influence, we are presented with a corporate wimp (C. Thomas Howell) who is handed a backbone by a dark stranger, but this film is – deceptively – a far sweeter proposition. I enjoyed its scuzzy unpredictability, the fun score, and some unusual, very long and apparently improvised sex scenes. The direction is variable: there’s that lovely image of a departing motorbike reflected in a sports car, and the production detail of the bottom of Fiorentino’s sports socks being grey-black after a day of slobbing around the flat is impeccable, but I was less impressed by the single most cliched down-the-staircase shot I have ever seen. The sequence in a cowtown bar may as well be taking place 10 yards from the one in The Last Seduction, though it would take a little time, the star’s assertiveness and two noir obsessives to land on Fiorentino’s perfect persona. Yes there is a makeover scene in which Allen gets off with both male and female lead.

26. Maman Calibri (Julien Duvivier, 1929) aka Mother HummingbirdWhy Are Men?: The Movie. The first 45 minutes of this one, climaxing with a kiss, are intoxicating, closer to Lubitsch’s Student Prince than Fannie Hurst. The rest is rather too drawn-out, beginning with finger-pointing melodrama and ending with mawkishness, though it still has great moments growing out of the showy direction and incredible Algerian location photography. Hollywood films in 1930 couldn’t have SKIES like these. There’s also one notably excellent little scene in front of a mirror that predates The Substance by 90-plus years, and ends with a moment of magnificent and horrible awkwardness, all the better for being so low-key. Its story is something like The Graduate from Mrs Robinson’s point of view, and so hews close to tragedy. Maria Jacobini is the socialite housewife who tires of her repressive family life and begins an affair with her older son’s friend (Francis Lederer, in his slightly goofy ‘Franz’ days). She goes with him to Algeria, where he proceeds to fall in love with a woman his own age (Hélène Hallier). “He is charming,” Hallier tells Jacobini as Lederer rides past, “is he your son?” I’m not so sure about the moment in the same scene where the heroine saves her future love rival from a bunch of African children by chucking one coin into the dirt, though I think Duvivier just wanted the automatic montage of faces and fabrics. I imagine those elements will fade from my memory fairly quickly, as the carousel of movement (and delayed gratification) in the ball sequence continues to waltz around my brain.

***

10 OLD FAVOURITES
1. The Student Prince in Old Heidelberg (Ernst Lubitsch, 1927) – Yes, I would like my heart broken into a million fucking pieces again, please. This is my favourite silent, and I had it in my Sight & Sound ballot, even though I’d only ever seen it on a decrepit NTSC VHS from the ‘80s. What a joy, then, to watch it on the big screen, on film, with the Carl Davis score, with an in-person Kevin Brownlow introduction (!), and with an audience. Every choice Lubitsch makes is the right one, but how dearly I love the visual fluidity of Kathi’s first scene with the students. The first half of the film is just fantastically funny – Jean Hersholt, in his greatest performance, watching that final exam! – before the tragedy kicks in. The lesson, though, isn’t quite “never go back”; once reality punctures the idyll, perhaps returning just once more, only for a moment, is how you rescue what is left of the rest of your life.

2. The Searchers (John Ford, 1956) – I watched this for the millionth time, but this time in the new Warner Bros restoration, which looks incredible, so well done everyone. I wrote 4,000 words on this movie in my youth, I've since gone the other way, trying to pare down its magnificence to just a couple of pars. This time, a few stray thoughts:
- The way Ford shoots Wayne here: I've never seen anything like it. Mythmaking on the most gigantic scale: Ethan on a rearing horse, shot from below, enormous before the sprawling vista. Then those two horrifying later close-ups.
- I really think Ebert missed or misunderstood the point of the second storyline: "This second strand is without interest, and those who value The Searchers filter it out, patiently waiting for a return to the main story line," he says a little presumptuously. But it has at least four purposes: to counterpoint Ethan's loneliness, to paint an alternate history of the burned homestead, to offer societal context and a broader palette of emotions, and to provide that astonishing moment of whiplash near the close, when we realise that Ethan isn't some deranged outlier: the sweet, fun, feisty frontier girl thinks and feels the self-same thing that he does, he's just the man of action carrying out the job.
- Only Ford would cut from the most overwhelming moment of redemption ever realised on film to a shot of Ward Bond having a bullet removed from his arse.
- Frank Nugent's script can get overlooked by critics amid the rust-coloured soil and the groping towards a reckoning on race, but it has everything: terse poetry in the dialogue, a fondness for allusion that gifts you a dozen brooding, action-packed prequels, and a playfulness with the form that climaxes with that letter set-piece. Even the few elements I could live without, like the comedy 'squaw' sequence, do pay off, usually in the most subversive way; making her final actions unknown and unknowable is an unusually literary flourish that gives the film such a richness. Going through Letterboxd now, blocking every 21-year-old who has posted, "this movie is way racist??"
3. A Canterbury Tale (Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, 1944) – The Glue Man is at it again. His singular MO? Finding women who are out late and pouring glue in their hair. Enter three amateur detectives: a Tommy, a Yank and the Land Girl who just became the 11th victim. Yet which other rotters commit their crimes to protect the marriages of absent soldiers, increase attendance at educational lectures, and facilitate God’s present-day miracles? The Archers’ tale of wartime pilgrims is languorous, magical and fantastically strange, alive with the ghosts and games of the Garden of England, and illuminated by a unique imagination. The “halo” at the train station may be the most exciting five seconds in British film. And remember, if you get caught pouring glue on someone, you were “pouring knowledge into people’s heads … knowledge of our country and love of its beauty.” This review appeared in Little White Lies.

4. One Way Passage (Tay Garnett, 1932) – I always like to rewatch an all-time favourite on my birthday. Assorted virtues:
- Luminescent photography (seen like never before on the gorgeous Warner Archive Blu-ray): a film in which every shot is beautiful, but the travelling shots especially.
- The greatest ever second-leads in a movie. Frank McHugh doing his patented ‘one-two-three’ laugh – usually rationed to once per film – in virtually every scene. Aline MacMahon rat-a-tat-ing in Brooklynese. And yet the best scene in the picture is that masterpiece in which this ostensibly comic pair, essentially just doling out exposition, aided by brilliantly economical, flavourful dialogue, invest an eternity of emotion and beauty in their relationship with Bill Powell, a murderer about to be hanged.
- Francis’s softness.
- Powell raising a hand in farewell, then raising both hands with a gun in his back.
- Warren Hymer, cinema’s archetypal dumb, gurning crim, for once getting to be cool.
- The studio era's understanding that you don't need to bother going on location, you just need a song that sounds a lot like it comes from the country in question.
- That ending.
5. The Grapes of Wrath (John Ford, 1940) – “We crackin’ up, Tom. They ain’t no family now.” An astonishingly effective version of Steinbeck’s masterpiece: a little different to the text, a touch less daring thematically, and perhaps in technique, but still extraordinary on its own terms, and by far the most radical film of its period. Critics have complained that sometimes the cruelty is softened or snipped out, or the financial sector’s responsibility muddied, but I don’t really buy it. The film remains pretty much unflinching, and the lack of someone that Muley and the rest “can shoot” to resolve the situation only serves to accentuate the living nightmare facing them. While the story is reordered to end with the government camp (Grant Mitchell, as the manager, even looks like FDR), it’s only Ma’s rather trite triumphal peroration in the closing seconds that strikes the wrong note. Between the imposition of the Code in mid-1934 and the work of Abraham Polonsky in 1947-8, and ignoring a couple of pro-Soviet films made at the request of the government, there were arguably three truly radical Hollywood movies: Holiday (a rom-com written by a communist), The Little Foxes (a Southern gothic melodrama written by a communist), and this one; The Grapes of Wrath is easily the most confrontational of the three. The cops lie, a sheriff red-baits, the banks foreclose, the script refuses to say if commies is [sic] good or bad, and a radical is forged: ex-con Tom Joad, who delivers the socialist speech to end them all, which is somehow smuggled into cinemas because the book had sold millions, the Popular Front still held, and it was just a country boy talking to his maw. “I’ll be all around in the dark,” he says, still sporting the scar from when he killed that lawman. “I’ll be everywhere. Wherever you can look – wherever there’s a fight, so hungry people can eat, I’ll be there. Wherever there’s a cop beatin’ up a guy, I’ll be there." Read on, here.

6. The Shop Around the Corner (Ernst Lubitsch, 1940) – This just looked close to perfect this time. Lubitsch’s delicate handling of the most sensitive subjects, using the grammar of his door gags at the darkest moment. His transparent love of Felix Bressart, a fellow Jewish German émigré possessed of vast warmth and exquisite comic timing. Peggy Sullavan entering the film and immediately saying “Yiss” at least three times, in that strange and wondrous voice of hers. That close-up of her through the PO box. The film’s disgust at yes-men. And an ending that always rather confounds me, eschewing simple sentiment in favour of something almost cruel, before letting the floodgates open; I think what Lubitsch is trying to do there is something truly ambitious and unusual, in placing the fickle mystery of in-person chemistry on a par with the reality of our deepest selves: no more but certainly no less.
7. How Green Was My Valley (John Ford, 1941) – Life hack: convince people you’re Welsh by talking in an Irish accent and then saying “is it?” at the end. An exquisite Ford film, originally set to be a four-hour colour production in Wales – developed by William Wyler and screenwriter Philip Dunne – but ultimately shot in black-and-white in Malibu, and running under two hours. It’s sort of a test for how you feel about art, and what you prize within it, being utterly false in almost every literal detail, and utterly true in every emotion. At its best (and it remains the best thing Dunne ever did, with all of his virtues and few of his flaws), it is perhaps the greatest film ever made about childhood, and about memory, blessed with a remarkable sensitivity, and treating its young protagonist, Huw, with great sympathy and sincerity. He’s played by Roddy McDowall, who lights up the film with a miraculous performance – for me, still the standard by which all child actors might be judged. There are the familiar Ford touches too, the rhythm and the ritual, the beautiful work drawn from O’Hara (as Angharad) and the great Anna Lee (Bronwen). The first half is certainly disjointed, with some turgid dialogue scenes, Allgood and Crisp playing it too broad, and union stuff that barely works, but once O’Hara, Walter Pidgeon and McDowall are centre stage, it’s irresistible. There are eight or nine moments in the film that are simply extraordinary: Huw in the pew; Pidgeon breathing, “Angharad”; the brothers departing, unseen except by the camera… So much of the film’s great power comes from stoic, inky figures in the distance; Zanuck clearly cuts the departures to the bone, but still they haunt you. People will tell you that Kane is superior in every way, while lauding ‘innovations’ that Welles cribbed from Stagecoach and are continued here... But what if they’re both great? It is criminal that the UK version, with Rhys Williams doing the opening narration (as originally intended) isn’t more widely available.

8. Double Indemnity (Billy Wilder, 1944) – "I wonder if I know what you mean." "I wonder if you wonder." Watched for the dozenth time, I guess. It was a weirdly hard film to see in the '90s, but I've made up for that since. I still get a buzz from being able to do so. Every line is remarkable – or at least aims to be. It has the best names around, riffed on endlessly ever since: Walter Neff! Phyllis Dietrichson! Barton Keyes! And it has three unforgettable performance, which reveal a little more each time you see them. Wilder uses Stanwyck so sparingly, which is so smart. This isn't her best turn, but it's perhaps her last great one (there was still My Reputation, the Fuller, and the Sirks, but they can't dream of touching what came before). Man, the ugliness of her mouth in the reveal, but also the way she disarms Walter, and us, with those flashes of familiar sincerity, all false except (or including?) the last. One thing I've always loved about Wilder, and that often gets missed, is his instinctive need to swing towards humanism; he does it back-to-back here, at the end of his sourest film, and it is, in the modern parlance, a hell of a swing. Murray's smug, fatalistic white-collar shithell is a joy too. The leads are, except when cannily weaponising their screen baggage, completely unrecognisable as the soft-centred lovers of Remember the Night (five stars, check it out). As their near-omniscient shadow, Eddie G. was never better; if the first half is a story about the lust between a man and a woman, the second is a love story between two insurance men. And within each scene, momentum keeps shifting, keeping you constantly disorientated. All that and the atmosphere. The perfect L.A. locations, to augment the studio stuff. The sweat on MacMurray's brow. And Stanwyck extinguishing all the lights, under orders, ahead of the climactic confrontation, like the very spirit of film noir. Debits? I suppose Richard Gaines can't act, the "twisted hopes and crooked dreams" line sounds like placeholder text, and there’s a bit too much score. Hard to give a shit, though, isn't it.
9. The Roaring Twenties (Michael Curtiz, 1939) – A few stray thoughts:
- Is the government warehouse the single greatest set ever constructed? Would love to see the request from Hal Wallis. “A brutalist art deco head fuck, please. Make it far too big on the outside, just unaccountably enormous. A Dali prison, from the afterlife.”
- Don Siegel montages, Gladys George as a lovesick Texas Guinan, Cagney finding such gradations and shadings and complexity in Eddie (his broiling anger engendered by pain), so much deft dialogue in the unapproachable ‘30s style. Glorious.

10. Sunset Blvd. (Billy Wilder, 1950) – “Mabel Normand and John Gilbert must have swum in it, ten-thousand midnights ago.” Sunset Blvd. has a deep creepiness that nothing else has ever quite matched. It’s the flight from poverty into a world of rotting, Gothic glamour; it is rats in the pool, and Wilder’s revulsion at a 50-year-old woman bound for horny gaol; but it is also how inescapable Joe’s fate is, and how utterly we – and Waxman’s score – know it. In its way, it’s the most gruelling of the great films, so bitter and bilious, with the jaundiced shitheel as narrator, and Norma Desmond as spider (the way she pulls Joe in for that New Year’s kiss, fucking yikes): a fundamentally repulsive figure motivated by a deranged sexuality, and a corrosive, wounded vanity. There is pity here too. Yet while the sequence at Paramount – in which she is welcomed by the old-timers, before Wilder’s sick sense of humour kicks in – is so desperately moving, it is also warped by the writer-director’s hysterical ageism. His hero opines, in the shape of a belated olive branch, that there’s nothing wrong with being 50 unless you try to be 25, but what I mostly remember is Wilder getting misty-eyed at the idea of a sweet 17-year-old, and wanting to chuck his guts up at a menopausal woman with a baggy neck. And while there is some balance between the piteous and the monstrous, we land, always, on the latter; the final scene is no less ugly for being obliquely touched by God’s mercy. In it, Wilder breaks the fourth wall to make us all complicit in the raising and forgetting of icons, just as he has somehow twisted a Lubitsch door gag into the bleakest sight on earth (lights going off, through the holes of absent locks, removed because the occupant might otherwise kill herself). No one gets out of Sunset Blvd. whole: not Buster, Anna Q. Nilsson, Norma, Betty or Joe. But oh for those Gillis/Schaefer scenes, and the best insider references in Hollywood history.

***

SEVEN STINKERS*
1. The Chase (Paul Wendkos, 1991) – Feat. the worst soul patch in history. The only film this year that I've watched by accident. Amazon Prime have it listed as The Chase (1994). When Charlie Sheen hadn’t turned up after almost an hour, I became suspicious. Then I turned it off because it is dogshit. Worse even than The Chase (1966).

2. Black Mama, White Mama (Eddie Romero, 1973) – It’s so funny and/or pathetic that MGM doesn’t own any of its pre-1948 catalogue but does own an online casino and *this*. 'Cheers, Louis B. Mayer’s crying x' It’s basically just a soft-core porn film, masquerading as a gender-swap Defiant Ones, filmed haplessly and for almost no money in the Phillippines. Atrocious, sure, but worse than that: just boring - almost impossible to follow, and with no real development in that central relationship. Even its nude scenes aren’t very good, just weirdly infantilising or sadistic. The murder on the bus is so funny. From an original story by Jonathan Demme (see Discoveries, #2)!
3. Secretary (Steven Shainberg, 2002) – I too am clearly interested in masochism, having not switched this shit off after 20 minutes. It is astonishingly bad, despite Spader playing a freak. I’m actually struggling to think of another movie that deals with such complex and important issues in such a glib and superficial and unwarrantedly smug way. Freeway II (see below), perhaps? As a long-recovering self-harmer, Secretary really just made me very angry. The whole thing is so incoherent and unfunny and horribly mannered: a tonal and structural nightmare. Gyllenhaal seems to be playing her character as if she has learning difficulties, which completely undermines everything the script imagines itself to be doing. Two shades of Grey, at most. Zero stars. (Please note that I have further low-key registered my contempt for this film by not bothering to find a hi-res still.)

4. Freeway II: Confessions of a Trickbaby (Matthew Bright, 1999) – A remarkably terrible in-name-only sequel – so bad, in fact, that it makes you wonder if the original was a fluke. It’s loosely based, once more, on a fairy tale (this time Hansel and Gretel), and ultimately tries the same trick – seguing from bad-taste comedy to pathos – but trades for far too long in the former, which here is staggeringly thin and try-hard. From the moment John Landis appears in the first scene as a judge (because, lol, in real life he was contentiously cleared of killing three people), you know that the smugness:actual laughs ratio is going to be off the charts. I could list the other topics it ticks off in its episodic, audience-baiting way, but I’d rather just forget about a film this shit. Natasha Lyonne at least gives it her all as the riot grrrlish heroine, and if you do insist on watching the film, you may as well finish it, since its Taxi Driver-ish denouement is easily the best bit.
5. Species (Roger Donaldson, 1995) – A howlingly awful erotic sci-fi, in which a task force including scientist Ben Kingsley, man of action Michael Madsen and psychic empath Forest Whitaker keep just repeating the same things, while following horny alien psychopath Natasha Henstridge around LA. Each time she kills someone, they turn up shortly afterwards to look at the mess. It feels like a paranoid masculine fantasy about the dangers of casual sex, and so more in tune with the 1950s (or, in another way, the mid-1980s) than the era of the neo-noir. Its events are also in the wrong order, as if designed to offer the least possible emotional or dramatic satisfaction. Whitaker’s character, however, is unwittingly one of the funniest things I have ever seen in a film. H.R. Giger designed the monster, which even by the standards of interactions with HR is grotesque. A baby Michelle Williams, as the earlier of its human incarnations, acts everybody else off the screen; watching Henstridge play the character after that is like bringing off Maradona for Kevin Kilbane.

6. Labyrinth (Jim Henson, 1986) – Is the fuss around this one just a nostalgia thing? It's virtually plotless, and not in a good way. Its overpowering technical elements make it move as slowly as The Lady in the Lake (1944): so much of the film consists of characters just standing around on unconvincing soundstage sets. And it is quite profoundly unfunny, in a fascinatingly specific way, with the greatest incongruous regional Englishness this side of The Empire Strikes Back. What did I like? A few things here and there. The rocks that lined up to look like Bowie. A lovely teddy called Lancelot. The heroic, slow-witted monster, Ludo: undeniably good value. Little minions operating the terrifying death traps (a fun touch). The jump back to the bedroom. And Connelly's, "What have you done?", which has a strange power quite at odds with the rest of the film, and neatly circled back to with that touching apology and instance of forgiveness. I found the rest of it an almighty chore. It's like Return to Oz if it was a bit crap, a feeling that extends even to the ending, which junks a touching, promising melancholy for a party. This period of Bowie's career makes absolutely no sense to me.

7. Don’t Look Up (Adam McKay, 2021) – Not, you would have to say, terribly subtle.

***

SIX RE-APPRAISALS

Because sometimes my opinions are bad.

THREE UP
1. Witness (Peter Weir, 1985) – Is Witness a thriller, an art film, a hands-off romance or a form of cinematic, public-information anthropology? Yes. It is also a masterpiece, and we don’t get too many of those. I last saw the film in my early 20s, at which time I thought it was a solid 4/5. Forgive me. Harrison Ford is the frazzled city cop escorted, by the hand of fate, to an Amish community. That premise is utterly inspired and provides the perfect vehicle for Weir’s obsessions: the collision of modernity and tradition; the intersection of humanity and the natural world. He directs it all so beautifully, with great-use of child’s eye POV, and an effortless sense of command, guiding your thoughts in every shot, whether he’s being direct or allegorical. Best of all is that unforgettable barn-raising sequence, dusted with sweat, sawdust and sexual longing. And did anyone ever pine as poignantly as Kelly McGillis in this picture? The voice, the jutting jaw, the softening smile that communicates across cultures; the endless gazing at Ford through windows. It's one of Ford’s best performances too – if he’s caught pretending now and then, he’s clearly committed to the material, and when it matters, he delivers. His matter-of-fact but choked-up delivery of “If they find me, they find the boy” is just perfection. And the boy? Well he’s even better: little, mouse-like Lukas Haas, adorable in his irregularities, as opposed to Hollywood’s usual idea of a cutesy kid. And little of what’s going on here is recognisably Hollywood. The thriller beats that bookend the picture, perhaps, and a little wish-fulfilment in the ice-cream scene. But it’s kerazy what you could do within mainstream cinema in 1985 compared to now. The backdrop, the quietness, the pauses, the sensuality, the love of nature, the stretches of novelistic character development, the way Weir hops between Fanny and Alexander, Edith Wharton and Dirty Harry. The way you can see, in John Seale’s gorgeous cinematography, what the fuck is going on. A Maurice Jarre score that decides the best way to evoke a community rooted in 19th-century ways is a heap of synths. Just incredible.

2. Jackie Brown (Quentin Tarantino, 1997) – It is, really, just a heist movie with incredible dialogue, and Tarantino – barely believing his luck – truly indulging himself, turning Elmore Leonard into a blaxploitation homage. It’s the opening tune (Womack’s indelible ‘Across 110th Street’), it’s the font, it’s Sid Haig, it’s even the last acting credit done in the genre style: “and CHRIS TUCKER as Beaumont”. It’s the interest in bad smells and the telephone gag lifted from Truck Turner, it’s actual dialogue lifted from Bucktown (“I’m serious as a heart attack”). And it’s Grier, who sang to herself in that movie, and does so here, lip-syncing to perhaps the greatest of all blaxploitation theme songs (only Gaye’s 'Trouble Man' may have the edge). I don’t – and probably never will – understand the argument that this is Tarantino’s best film. Dogs and Pulp still feel revolutionary, and hit me in the heart far earlier. Not for them, either, that weird and dated predilection for Kangol caps. But it was all, still, at this stage, so swaggeringly confident, and so easy. The two sequences of Grier just walking. The first in a side-on travelling shot, before the song swerves into its climactic desperation, and she starts to run. The second, cut to ‘Street Life’. The scene with her in the clothing store: perfect in its pacing, cutting, framing, scoring, circling camera and climactic punchline. So many great lines. At least four massive laughs. De Niro brilliant as a slightly slow thug – still the most underrated thing he’s ever done on screen. It just seems a little light on genuine human feeling, in a way that QT’s first two weren’t... until Forster, his waistband close to his nips, bids goodbye, and walks into the other room.

3. The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008) – Pretty good, innit? Particularly in the sweep of Harvey Dent’s story, and in Ledger’s nervy, edgy and exciting performance, which reminds me a little of Dean in East of Eden, trying something every moment even if, sometimes, ironically, that something can be a little the same as the previous thing. Bale sometimes struggles to get any genuine warmth into his performances (there’s just that one scene in Batman Begins where it really comes through, from somewhere), but Caine and Freeman each generate enough for two people in their scenes with him. The beats of the story are just right: it’s so well assembled, so neatly divided between its various elements, with enough surprises up its sleeve, and an antagonist so far ahead of his pursuers that you really start to wonder how they’ll get to him. The answer, it turns out, is sentimental, the sentimentality rather ladled on, and the coda cribbed from Ford’s Fort Apache. It all feels a little forced, and with it a little false, but I’d never champion cynicism over idealism. Other elements, I do find frustrating. Nolan will always prioritise what he thinks of as an arresting image over something that is true to the character (why is the Joker picked up by his fellow bank robbers with his anonymising mask in his hand?); the convoy chase has some nice moments but is really hard to follow spatially; the fight scene at the party looks like it’s from a 1980s TV movie, and the writing still tends towards the overwritten: the Burma story; that awful climactic speech from Oldman, so self-serious that it feels like self-parody. But I liked this so much more than when I first saw it. It’s really entertaining for the most part, has more substance than most superhero flicks, if perhaps less than it imagines, and gets a shot in the arm from Ledger and (particularly in the earlier reels) Eckhart. Also a big fan of Nolan breaking one law of cinematic grammar by shooting Ledger right-side up when he’s dangling upside down from a rope, the kind of, "Fuck it, let's do it" flourish we could use more of in movies.

THREE DOWN
1. Batman Begins (Christopher Nolan, 2005) – “You need to get the love of my life into the alley urgently, before the damage to her mind becomes permanent, let me just fill your entire path with bats.” Batman, there, doing his thing. One of my hotter film takes has long been that Batman Begins is Nolan’s second best film (after The Prestige), whereas The Dark Knight is a bit of a mess. Well, if you thought the Batmobile made a lot of noise, wait until you hear the second screeching U-turn I'm about to make. Bits of this do still work. The scene in the literal bat cave. The old and wondrous device of Bruce having to disgrace himself in the eyes of those he loves in order to protect them. It gives us that beautiful scene at the hotel (“All this, it’s not me. Inside, I am... I am... more”, the emotional heart of these movies), the memorably excruciating birthday party scene, and the eventual reveal (“Bruce?”). His dad is really nicely played. There’s neat mythmaking at times, including that glorious shot of Bats, with wings spread, passing out of the back of the crashing train. And there are a couple of bits irresistible to a British viewer: a band of marauding cons led by the singer of James (!), and the way Oldman says “sorry” while driving, inescapably the behaviour of an English person. Look at the rest of it, though. It toys with iconography in that self-satisfied, very noughties way; the dialogue is alternately portentous and smugly glib; the action is really not great (shout-out to that terrible car chase); Neeson’s climactic speech goes on for fucking ever, and though the Scarecrow is a lot of fun, the principal villainy is really weak. The whole subplot of Bruce training with the vigilante monk-ninjas just seems so laughable and of its time. And I’m not sure the final act makes any sense at all. How weak, exactly, is this emitter? All in all, a pretty humiliating climbdown from Yours Truly. And did you see how I’ve reappraised The Dark Knight?

2. 辣手神探) (John Woo, 1992) aka Hard Boiled – “You’re a woeful undercover cop.” “There’s no good or bad, just personal style.” A near-mythic John Woo actioner, now back in circulation. In perfect late-capitalist style, it had ended up being owned by a construction company who refused to license it – before being finally rescued by Shout! Factory, and shared with Tubi and Criterion. Woo is, of course, more interested in destruction. The film can’t perhaps match its reputation – inevitably burnished by becoming almost impossible to see – but its fagpacket plot, music-video visuals and elements of uninteresting villainy are offset by spectacular flashes of action, which include Chow firing away while (a) sliding down a banister, (b) whooshing out of a slot in a morgue, (c) holding a baby. Some of the stuntwork is just incredible, and if you found, say, The Raid or Dredd irresistible rather than repetitive, this is going to knock your brain out of your open mouth. The film’s attendant weirdness, and passages of monotony, were largely down to its troubled production. Woo’s initial concept was for a gritty, demystifying policier about detectives pursuing a baby poisoner. But after that story upset everyone who read it, and his regular screenwriter suddenly died (not poisoned), he served up, partly off-the-cuff, a live action cartoon that features Bond-ish villains hiding arms in a hospital, one of the Tony Leungs playing an off-the-chain undercover cop, and the director himself dispensing wisdom as a sagacious former policeman who appears to live in a jazz club. If the moral grubbiness of going undercover is evoked, there is little revisionism applied to Chow’s character, a one-man army who still finds time to put cotton wool in babies’ ears during a siege. Woo’s tongue-in-cheek approach extends to neat in-jokes at either end of the film, which begins in a bird-café, with none of his trademark doves in sight. When you’re wondering, near the movie’s close, just when they might turn up, his camera lingers for a moment on a poster of a dove on a hospital wall, its message of peace counterpointing the utter mayhem exploding around it. Hard Boiled isn't as good as I remembered, which of course is a little disappointing, but it's still essential for anyone halfway interested in action cinema.

3. The Mad Miss Manton (Leigh Jason, 1938) – Barbara Stanwyck Nose Appreciation Club, sign in here. The Mad Miss Manton Appreciation Club, I'm afraid I've resigned. This one’s simply not the best use of Missy’s talents: playing the kind of dizzy debutante role you associate with Constance Bennett or Carole Lombard. In those moments where she and Fonda play it straight and soppy, it’s beautiful, but there's not nearly enough of that. The film is a curious confection made at RKO, and while both leads were unusual in the ‘30s in effectively freelancing across the different studios, it still feels weird to find them at this end of Gower Street, since Stanwyck had such a Paramount feel, and Fonda was pure Fox, the place where he eventually signed. Gotta love those insane RKO sets, though: did a cityscape and subway ever look more sanitised? What makes this all even odder, though (if you’re a massive fucking nerd), is that the script is by Philip Epstein, who spent almost his whole life at Warner, almost always working with his brother (they wrote large chunks of Casablanca). His script is, surprisingly, absolutely all over the fucking place, its central murder mystery being both hopelessly simplistic and unbelievably convoluted – the exact opposite of what it should be. Stanwyck’s ditzy sidekicks, meanwhile, are simply too trivial – one-dimensional characters whose decisions never seem real – and the film features an awful lot of people just screaming and shouting. I’ve always loved Sam Levene, and he’s quite funny in this when he’s not overdoing it, but that isn’t much of the time; ‘mugging’ barely does the rest justice. Thank goodness for the leads, then. Stanwyck, even miscast and at about half-power, has these moments that melt you, and that irradiating talent that has always rendered someone irresistible (also: that nose, man). Fonda didn’t like playing daft comedy, and rarely got a dafter part than this one, but did the doe-eyed dolt as well as anyone. Incidentally, Miss Manton’s lawyer here is called Hopsy, which perhaps gave Sturges the idea for The Lady Eve, the last and best of the stars’ three teamings. This one isn’t in the same league, even the same universe, with its choppy editing, slapdash use of stock footage (at one point mirrored, so all the shop frontages read backwards) and general noisy incompetence, but there are a finite number of pre-’45 Stanwyck films, and I do love them all in some way.

***

FIVE OBSESSIONS
1. John Ford. Always and forever my favourite director. His films bypass my critical faculties altogether, and hit me in the soul. I explained a little about it in this piece for the Guardian. I watched 14 of his films this year, four of them new to me (including Bucking Broadway, Hell Bent and Two Rode Together). Highlights, as well as those above, included a revelatory rewatch of 3 Godfathers, and Sergeant Rutledge on the big screen (with Swedish subtitles, as that was the only print the BFI could get at short notice).

2. Stanwyck. The greatest screen actor ever to walk the earth (Gish second, Cagney third, thanks for playing). I'm on 75 films now, so just seven to go. Then I imagine we go round again. This year's six new watches were close to the dregs, but she's very good in her first major role, trapped behind The Locked Door.

3. Blaxploitation. It was March, I had OG flu, and once I’d got past the not-being-able-to-do-anything stage, all that seemed to help was pimps being roundhouse-kicked in the head. Coffy, Foxy Brown, Across 110th Street, Friday Foster, Truck Turner, Bucktown... It was quite a week, you cracker-ass mutha.

4. Denzel Washington. On the film-logging website, Letterboxd, users can see which actors they have watched the most since joining. The only actor in my top 40 who is in colour is Denzel Washington. Do I understand why he has now taken to essentially playing Jason Statham across the three increasingly silly films in the Equalizer franchise? No, I do not. But as long as he’s happy. I love that guy.

5. Margaret Sullavan. I have been bewitched: it was the voice that did it. I dove deep on Sullavan while researching my Blu-ray essay on Little Man, What Now? last year, and have kept diving. Back Street and Next Time We Love didn’t quite come off, but in The Shopworn Angel (see Discoveries, #23), she is little short of astonishing. She made 16 films. I have seen 11, and I’m coming for the rest.

***

FOOTNOTE:
*'stinker' is a word I got from the great forgotten comedy of the 1940s, I Love You Again.

***

Thanks for reading

Saturday, 20 December 2025

Review of 2025: Part 1 – Books

Being a brief survey of the fiction and factual books I inhaled this year, in rough descending order of how much I liked them (though sometimes I just have to follow a thread). But first, as is customary, I force you to read things I wrote.

Here were my best bits of 2025:

1. After a half-decade of nagging, I got to sit down with my favourite writer, Adrianne Lenker, to talk about words and love and healing and sex. What a joy to do.
2. This long, long read with Tamara Lindeman of The Weather Station, in which she ruminates extensively on mental illness and the climate crisis, and is simultaneously a hoot.
3. A piece I've been unwittingly working on since I was four years old: a loving but revisionist take on Bob Dylan's extraordinary first five years, written to coincide with the release of that fucking terrible biopic.
4. Blurbs on four of my favourite lesser-known films of the '40s, for Little White Lies:
5. Some words for the Guardian about deeply loving John Ford, and his semi-obscure Western, Wagon Master.
6. My favourite hour of the year, watching Susanne Sundfør in Oslo.
7. My labour-of-love essay about tempestuous actor Margaret Sullavan and her remarkable partnership with the great romantic director, Frank Borzage, for Indicator's Blu-ray of Little Man, What Now?. In print only, in this limited-edition release, but here's an excerpt:


Now let's talk about some writers who are famous:

FICTION

My favourite novel of the year was also the most difficult in its way: Henry James's The Ambassadors (1903). It's an exercise in delayed gratification: like his contemporary and friend, Edith Wharton, James knows exactly what he's doing, and which button to push, but he won't do it until he's damn well good and ready, in this case because it takes an appropriate age for his hero to lay himself wide open. That figure, Strether, is a wonderful creation, an emissary from small-town America who finds in Paris that prudism was mostly something they tried to do to him. But as his worldview is changed by the miracle of the City of Light, so it is perhaps disfigured by desire. James writes here with such obscure and elusive syntax, though once your brain clicks into sync with his, your load lightens a little. I found the book emotionally overwhelming, and it came at a time when I needed it.

I also loved Small Bomb at Dimperley (2024) by Lissa Evans, whose historical novels are one of my great joys. It's such a beautifully-drawn book: moving and deftly funny, with at least three gloriously-rendered characters. Evans is able to conjure a world, and a specificity of emotion, in a way that is just remarkable to me, and her latest is second only in her oeuvre to Old Baggage. Here, the clarity of her characters' inner lives, and the deftness of her resolutions, is intoxicating, with the latter rooted in a sort of happy fatalism.
While that book takes place in the days just after the war, Ėric Vuillard's The Order of the Day (2017) shows us what came before, and how. It's a slim, profound and devastating book about cowardice and civility: their symptoms and their consequences. A brief chapter about Hollywood is crammed so full of factual errors as to be meaningless (the truth, which would fit the author's argument much better, is that America had barely breathed a word on screen against Nazism before 1939), and consequently puzzling in its implications, but the rest of the book is stunning.

Returning readers will know that at times of extremis I engage in my most Tory-coded behaviour: reading P.G. Wodehouse. Aside from The Code of the Woosters, which will surely never be beat, Summer Lightning (1929) is my favourite so far (I'm reading the Jeeves and Blandings series in order, then picking out the odd one from the rest of his canon). It took Wodehouse a while to perfect his voice and another while to misplace it: in between he wrote perhaps the funniest books in the English language. Almost every sentence here is honed to within an inch of its life, for the maximum comedic impact. How often do you laugh out loud reading a book? A few times a year? I laughed a half-dozen times during Summer Lightning. In his preface, the author winkingly addresses the quite rreasonable accusation that his books are all the same, and yes, it's once more doddering Home Counties patriarchs, rakish rogues, young love in peril, a butler, several thefts and a pig, and that's how we like it. About the purest escapism it's possible to find.

In comparison, Jeeves in the Offing (1960) rather paled, though it does have perhaps the single greatest joke of the series, an observation made in strikingly modern style, which I won't spoil here by saying anything other than that it refers to Lot's wife. Reader, I pissed myself. The novel's other great virtue is its sense of memory: the way Wodehouse brings in successful ruses from previous books, which here proceed to go uproariously awry, is thoroughly warming.
A startling realisation I made this year, while reading Deep Cuts (2025) by Holly Brickley, is that all I really want in a modern lit novel is for two perfectly-matched people to fall in love at college and then be kept apart by their flaws for 250 pages. Is that so wrong? My real-world interest in first-person arts writing is close to zero (you can do so much more interesting, creative things in the way you write about and tightly around the art), yet Brickley's heroine finds a way. The author's ventriloqiused musical opinions are interesting, her characters alive, and her relationships affecting. It's a book that really chucks your emotions around. That is, when you're not noticing the mannered and sometimes mundane writing. At the sentence level, it is all quite Creative Writing MFA, with a hotel room that's “all right angles and gunmental grey”, a boss who is “all sharp angles”, and an Eskimo having all those words for snow while we have just one for love. We're also asked to get dewy-eyed over a noughties indie scene that in contrast to the '90s of Dog Man Star and Dummy, produced almost nothing of value. But I'm now going to lay my cards down on this table and tell you that, in all honesty, it's hard to really care about trite phrasing or structural familarity or the idealisation of underwhelming music while I'm bawling my fucking eyes out. It really got its claws into me, this one.

If we know one another, I have probably chewed your ear off at some stage about my literary idol, Penelope Fitzgerald. For a while, I've been rationing her books to one a year, as there aren't many left. Innocence (1986) was the first of her four immortal period miniatures, and almost impossible to pin down, even if that is my job. It's a richly erotic book that begins in the 16th century with a tall tale about small people, then guides us through a series of misunderstandings, and visions of happiness, riotous love, and innocence for both better and worse. It didn't affect me quite like The Beginning of Spring or The Gate of Angels, but no-one else could have written it, and isn't that the point.
Jacqueline Harpman's I Who Have Never Known Men (1995) is the old down-in-a-dungeon dystopia, which here flowers into something spare yet impossibly rich, narrated by a character who struggles to see herself as human but is – and throws a bright light onto what that means. It's a simple story but the way Harpman compresses and expands time is something to be studied. In a way, The Brothers Karamazov (1880) also expanded time, in that it took me fucking ages to read. It's Dostoyevsky's 1,000-page familial saga of love, faith, betrayal, insanity and murder, which he had intended as a mere prologue to a greater work (lol), sadly cancelled by his death. The book (in the Ignat Avsey translation) is often dazzling in the moment, but as a whole it sways and sometimes plods on its way to... what, exactly? Beyond its diversions and highly literal asides, I found its purpose and meaning frustratingly elusive.

By contrast, I read Andrew Kaufman's All My Friends Are Superheroes (2003) in an hour or two. That one's touching, clever and extremely romantic, if just occasionally a little too pleased with its sense of neatly-wrapped whimsy.
That was also a flaw of The Unfinished Harauld Hughes (2024) by Richard Ayoade, whose books do seem to be the kind of thing you can get greenlit if you're on the telly. In this instance, though, the result was so enjoyable that that begins to resemble a solid commissioning strategy. Ayoade thought it would be funny to write the entire works of a fictional Angry Young Man playwright called Harauld Hughes (Pinter with a touch of Ted Hughes), and capped the project by penning this faux biography. It's essentially a literary collage within the neat framing device (with its many easy laughs) of the making of a BBC-style 'going on a journey' celeb-fronted doc, and with more absurd jokes than I was expecting. For the most part, it expertly pastiches, rather than thinly parodying, though it slips into the latter with details like And...? – a take-off of Lindsay Anderson's if.... – and a rehash of Michael Billington's mea culpa/obituary tribute to Pinter. The point, and the knack, is to satirise and, in this case, celebrate the milieu: what would the point be of simply changing a few words? For the most part, though, I liked it: just clever and funny and fun. Those are not words that one can apply to the author's 2014 book, Ayoade on Ayoade: A Cinematic Odyssey (2014), which is by contrast completely half-arsed, and extremely irritating. It contains six good jokes* and the unimprovable contention that Lucozade Sport is "medicine for athletes" but the basic gimmick doesn't work, the relentless comic self-deprecation begins to feel more like self-obsession, and the general air of "will this do" extends to regular fart jokes, sloppy copy editing and endless padding, including the nadir of the form, 'space for notes'. What's ironic is that Ayoade's sincere thoughts about film, as heard periodically as a podcast guest, are so much more interesting than his alter-ego's pseudo-comic ones. The author has often referred to himself a perfectionist, but if he had more than one pass at this, I would be very concerned.

I loved The House on Utopia Way (2025) by Stefan Mohamed, one of my favourite writers. It contains all of his trademarks: yes, the offbeat slang, DJ beats and regular ingestion of pharmaceuticals, but also that quiet and offbeat emotionalism, and his tentative and melancholy hope for something better than All This. The book is a satire of modern Britain, spliced with sci-fi noir, spiked with a playful spirit, and populated by talking magpies. There is one passage in particular that is so daring and so virtuosically brilliant, as the narrator gasses himself in a nest of Nazis, and the tenses and first/second/third person of the writing begin to wobble. Virtuosic brilliance is also the coin that Djuna Barnes seeks to trade in with Nightwood (1936), a story of doomed love expressed in often outrageously obscure prose. T.S. Eliot and Jeanette Winterson both said that the book reads differently each time you revisit it; on my first go around, I found its passages of wild garrulousness a challenge to both my intellect and my patience, yet it's a knowing context for moments of startling emotional directness, profound psychological insight and enduringly strange imagery. By the end, I wished it would go on forever.
Stella Gibbons' Cold Comfort Farm (1932) is a little like Northanger Abbey, in that it manages to succeed as a comedy even though it's spoofing books that none of us remember. It starts slowly but possesses a spiralling sense of absurdity, and some killer running gags. Gibbons' post-modern *** system for highlighting award-worthy passages is also such an amazing idea, and the passage in which our heroine is confronted by her pursuer’s man-centred revisionist take on Wuthering Heights is quite unbelievably funny.

And then there was Joseph Heller's Something Happened (1974), which is nothing if not a howl of despair. Finally following up his freewheeling, countercultural Catch-22, Heller essays the experience of being a human, at least a human within the management class of mid-'70s America, and has this question: what is it all for? The book is exhausting in both the incessant swelling of its stream of consciousness, and its purposeful unpleasantness. Here is every dark thought you've ever had, and many that you haven't. Now and then it is inspired: usually in its moments of sorrow, but occasionally in that wild and splenetic misanthropy. One gets the impression that the author is being mischievous on the subject of race, satirical about office life, and sincere in his misogyny, but honestly who knows? Behind the narrator, he wields a muscular libertarianism, lampooning the stultifying conformity all around, and smirking at what passes for freedom in this world (adultery and the chance to harbour dark impulses in secret). Women, and girls, are uniformly despised: sex objects deemed disgusting for their desire or for their lack of it. Yet there are flashes of beauty: in the realisation that his fat, spotty, vindictive teenage daughter is just a child; and that his adorable and adored nine-year-old son will stop when leading in a relay race to let the others catch up. There are, too, great reservoirs of pain, as that same son offers a second cookie to a new friend and is met with suspicion and balled-up violence, in a passage that is perceptive in a way I wish it wasn't. Heller is being (purposefully?) longwinded, and swaggering in that uncertain way you do when you're following up a masterpiece, breaking into mid-sentence brackets that last for seven pages. But by the end, his Difficult-with-a-capital-D book has accrued an unexpected cumulative impact, its tendency towards repetition being revealed as relentlessness, and its author chalking up a tally of occasional but dead-eyed potshots at the state of the nation. I'd be lying if I said I enjoyed the book, but I'm glad I read it. It is funny now and then, but dominated, in the memory, by the unapproachable vileness of its voice, and the haunting idea that something happened to these people, some time, but that they – and we – still don’t know quite what.
In a similar vein, though taking up far less space on the shelf, was The Lost Daughter (2006) by Elena Ferrante: a cleverly conceived and impressively chilly book, told from the interesting perspective of a cold and quietly sadistic mother, which I would struggle to recommend to anyone hoping to have a pleasant evening.

The Collected Works of Billy the Kid (1970) by Michael Ondaatje is exactly the sort of thing I like (a smashing together of real sources and fake, mixing shards of poetry with news reports and abstract prose), just not done as well as I wanted. At times it's startling but an air of pretentiousness regrettably invades, as the Bonney of the book swings wildly between uncouth illiteracy and having his mouth and mind filled with obscure imagery and improbably long words. My secondhand copy contained a touching inscription but I guess the recipient possessed my view of the book, and the manners of its anti-hero.

Gregory McDonald's comedy-mystery, Fletch (1974), is naturally dated in its sexual politics and provides barely a single laugh from its hero's endless, laboured quipping, but the more obscure details of its mystery are fun, and dialogue-heavy books are a pleasure of mine (as well as being what I write). I read the sequel too, Confess, Fletch (1976), which decamps to Rome, but does much the same thing. That'll probably be enough for me.

If you're an Orson Welles obsessive, then you'll have heard of Badge of Evil (1956) by the pseudonymous Whit Masterson, which was transmuted into the writer-director's 1958 masterpiece, Touch of Evil. Since I was writing a two-page feature on the film (coming soon!), I went first to the book: a pacy, well-plotted and rather banal pulp novel, absent the deep and resonant humanity that Welles began to pour into the project.
The Wishbones (1997) by Tom Perrotta is kind of hilarious. No, not in a good way, thank you for checking. This was his debut, and while I loved his second outing, Election, and largely enjoyed Little Children and The Leftovers, it is really desperate stuff. It feels, in fact, like a spoof of a certain type of book; the exhausted last breath of a terminally ill genre: the white male comic novel. The main character is a man struggling with the scaling down of his dreams. He’s a case of arrested development, deathly afraid of commitment and, after becoming engaged to his long-term on-off girlfriend in a panic, is drawn to a funny-looking free spirit. He smokes weed sometimes. Yet while almost every observation and turn of phrase seems to be hackneyed, just now and then, and within the narrow boundaries of the genre, Perrotta alights on something that does chime, say on the physical oddity that keeps us beguiled, granting a glimmer of the talent that, against almost all initial evidence, turned out to be there. The Wishbones is a quite aggressively unfunny book, with a nauseatingly mawkish final act. But it's easy enough to read if not to accept; curiously you broadly care what happens, even when what happens is so witlessly telegraphed.

I'd never read a John Grisham book before, but always imagined they'd make for fun escapism. Absolutely not! Because I've read few books in my life that are worse than The Last Juror (2010). It's all so clunkily-phrased, and resembles nothing so much as a bad first draft, while cursed with a desperately dull 200-page midsection that simply consists of killing time until we can get to the twist. Everything that happens is so studiously, piously and exhaustingly liberal, and yet so unwittingly misogynistic. There are lots of descriptions of food.
Somehow, though, that wasn't the worst novel I read this year, Because Samantha Harvey's Orbital, winner of last year's Booker Prize (!), was an almighty fucking chore. I think two pages are enough to grasp and appreciate its perspective, after which it goes on for another 135 that feel more like 8,000. It is a book that often uncannily and unwantedly approximates the experience of having someone peer at a globe and describe bits of it to you. "I wanted to write A Month in the Country in space," Harvey said. Yet it's hard to imagine two books more different than J.L. Carr's perfectly-balanced novel, with its bucolic background and exquisite, intimate story of being renewed and ripped apart by love, and Orbital, which consists of an almost perpetual extreme-long-shot of the Earth, interrupted now and then by unmemorable and distant characters. At risk of sounding philistinic or simply unpleasant, I thought it was unspeakably bad.

FOOTNOTE:
*the racist, the end of the chubby alien's speech, Ayoade being capable of great acts of kindness, the Polanski joke, the space midges, the index

***

NON-FICTION
My favourite non-fiction book of the year was Street-Level Superstar (2024) by Will Hodgkinson, who spent a year with cult indie artist, Lawrence, a shambolic and self-sabotaging hero, cursed by ill luck but occasionally rescued by angels. Its subject is not a cosy or an easy figure, but lifelong fan Hodgkinson is clear-eyed about Lawrence's faults and misty-eyed about his lyrical brilliance, writing with a love that comes blazing through. The book doubles as a tour of unloved Britain, taking an obscure pride in this perverse and perplexing place.

Here's everything else, grouped handily by themes such as 'film' and 'misc':

History and politics
The pick of the bunch here was Andy Beckett's magisterial history of the New Left, The Searchers: Five Rebels, Their Dream of a Different Britain, and Their Many Enemies (2024), which begins with socialist MP Tony Benn's moment of revelation in 1968, and interweaves his story with those of four Labour politicians from Greater London who followed in his wake: Corbyn, John McDonnell, Ken Livingstone and Diane Abbott, all of whose lives will take the most improbable twists. It's an astute, witty, even-handed and consistently inspiring book, finding shreds of hope in a litany of failure, as my side of the argument is generally required to. While Beckett arguably has a rose-tinted view of Benn (as indeed do I), the author makes a case that the MP was little short of a seer, anticipating and forecasting the possibilities and the maladies of the future, without ever being quite able to build the consensus to meet them. Certainly the privileged Benn seems a class apart (no pun intended) from his political inheritors: Corbyn's flaws are depicted as vividly as his strengths, while Abbott comes across fairly poorly, her trailblazing credentials somewhat undermined by the fact that she is constantly late. It is a frequently dazzling work, and the section on Livingstone and O'Donnell's Greater London Council, expanded from Beckett's Promised You a Miracle, is scintillating: model historical writing, making the complex not just understandable but pulsatingly exciting. Yet the subject that all early historians of the Corbyn era struggle with is antisemitism, since acknowledging that it was a major problem would serve to undermine every meaningful tenet of the movement. Beckett treads a line, implying that the issue was exaggerated without ever explicitly saying that.
The three books I read focusing on the Corbyn/Starmer years all took different stances on that issue (which I will not be relitigating here, as I don't have a being-shouted-at kink), and all have fairly obvious virtues and vices. Get In: The Inside Story of Labour Under Starmer (2025), written by broadsheet political reporters Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund, is probably the best of the three: a compelling, chilling pageturner, phrased and paced like a thriller, though transparently part of the gossipy 'insider' ecosystem that is leading us to calamity. It's also weighted lazily against the genuine left, though flattering labels and a proximity to the authors don't provide much cover when the 'moderates' behave like this. There remains something singularly embarrassing about that wing of the party, who insist on speaking in stylised, terse obscenities and seem to imagine they're in The Thick of It or The War Room. The fact that neither they, nor their appointed leader, apparently believe in anything beyond the factionalism detailed here rather explains everything that has happened since. The book also has a few prosaic flaws. Its very framing is somewhat misleading (though perhaps that's how you write a bestseller), the story told as if Labour came from nowhere, via a miracle of organisation, rather than cradled their Ming vase while the Tories repeatedly shot themselves in the face. And while Get In is dramatically written, it was apparently done so in such a hurry that several passages are almost indecipherable, and others not fact-checked (Maguire has since read a book about Huey Long, and is now positioning himself as an authority on 1930s America, but refers here to the FDR anthem, 'Happy Days Are Here Again', as "a Barbra Streisand song"). I found reliving this raw recent history rather depressing, so quite why I then read two other books on largely the same subject is beyond me.
Owen Jones' This Land (2020), variously subtitled as The Story of a Movement and The Struggle for the Left is a polemic, the point of which is to argue that the appetite is there for left-wing ideas, but that Jeremy Corbyn’s operation as leader between 2015 and 2020 was largely pathetic. Jones makes a vaguely convincing case, but while he’s right that Brexit was a major reason for Labour’s catastrophe in 2019, it also probably helped them two years earlier. I canvassed a lot during that campaign, and can't quite square my own impressions of Momentum activists with the wet-eyed depiction of them here, though the organisation's Beth Foster-Ogg does provide the book's biggest laugh, explaining just how badly the Conservatives mangled their own platform: "The only Tory policies you could sum up in 10 seconds were fox hunting, legalising hunting rhinos, and the dementia tax." It's the rhinos, isn't it. The chapter on antisemitism is painful, because of what it lays out, the author's transparent anxiety, and his contortions. It also seems incomplete on both sides, omitting the Panorama documentary, swerving some of Corbyn's most unsavoury former contacts, and declining to mention Simon Heffer (the sympathetic biographer of his close friend, Enoch Powell) claiming on LBC that Corbyn wanted to re-open Auschwitz. Jones was once a caseworker for John McDonnell, the left-wing veteran who served as Corbyn's chancellor and is portrayed extremely sympathetically here. While Jones is right that McDonnell did grow into his role, it also remains true that the shadow chancellor's stunt during the 2015 budget response in which he waved Chairman Mao's Little Red Book around was quite possibly the stupidest thing that anybody in Britain did during that decade years. During the Corbyn period, Jones turned from a journalist into a media outrider and external spin doctor. I can understand why, but it did damage his credibility; this is his attempt to reclaim it, by revealing and acknowledging things he had previously sought to explain away. He is also trying desperately to find silver linings, but the truth is that, while the playing field was certainly comically unlevel, and while I'm determined not to stop trying, it does feel rather like we had one chance and we blew it.

The Fraud: Keir Starmer, Morgan McSweeney, and the Crisis of British Democracy (2025) by Paul Holden would have worked well as an eight-page pamphlet outlining the startling new information that this South African investigative reporter uncovered about current UK chief of staff Morgan McSweeney soliciting undeclared billionaire funding of his Labour Together project, which he used to undermine the then leadership of his own party through the use of secret astroturfing projects. Unfortunately, this information is housed in a 600-page, conspiracy-tinged monument to left-wing cope, its author fixated on a wider 'stabbed in the back' myth, and incapable of acknowledging that we also made a lot of mistakes. As I said in last year's round-up, any writer who keeps saying, "Remember..." or "Recall..." is heading down the rabbit hole. He thinks the antisemitism was mostly made up. His book has a separate footnotes section online.
Along with Karamazov, the biggest book of the year and the one that I spent most time with was Richard Ben Cramer's What It Takes: The Way to the White House (1992). Like Get In, it's the story of a political campaign: in this case the 1988 US presidential primaries. Unlike Get In, it regards the start of the campaign as being during World War Two. It is slightly overwritten, and certainly overlong, but also revealing and insightful, interested primarily in the psychology of the candidates, rather than their policy platforms, and has obvious peaks and troughs dictated by whether the author is wrangling scandals, fuck-ups and defining moments of courage, or the more mundane business of running, or living. Throughout, Cramer writes in a distinctive, almost breathless style, his clauses piling upon one another with cumulative effect, and sentences littered with his singular vernacular of 'diddybops', 'big-feet' and ‘Hart facts’. Bob Dole is surely the most interesting character: a funny, (mostly) right-wing hatchet man with an astonishing back story, though Gary Hart too is fascinating: an ideas guy with a brilliant mind and a tragic flaw so vast and unatoned for that no-one will ever trust him again. The other candidates each have their moments, and if they aren't such vivid company, most of them have been touched by a humanising tragedy (perhaps because we all are, or because it gives these men a motivation that is ultimately What It Takes). George H. W. Bush, who will win, is a privileged, clubbable oil man who believes in nothing beyond civility, love of those in his immediate vicinity, and his right to govern; a young(ish) Joe Biden is an orator searching for ‘connection’ with concepts and people; Dukakis, who will get the Democratic nod, prizes process and political cleanliness over everything else, and can never accept he got it wrong; and Dick Gephardt is the presentable, insinuating congressman trying desperately to locate his killer instinct. We don't even get to Bush v Dukakis, or Bush's first term, until the epilogue and afterword, but that is rather Cramer's point.

My interest in American politcians of the interwar era continues unabated, but despite the shape of its story, and the familiar faces in support (Frances Perkins! Robert Moses! FDR!), Empire Statesman: The Rise and Redemption of Al Smith (2001) by Robert A. Slayton mostly scratches around on the surface. Its best moments deal with the notorious Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire of 1911 (still the reason workplace doors open outwards), and Smith's estangement from, and subsequent reconnection with, the man who bestowed upon him his nickname of "The Happy Warrior": Franklin Delano Roosevelt. After reading, and treasuring, Team of Rivals last year, I narrowed my focus to Lincoln and Douglas: The Debates That Defined America (2008) by Allen C. Guelzo, but found it disappointingly dry. It's a thoroughly researched volume, impressively analytical on the content of the speeches, and just occasionally drops you vividly into the centre of the action, but it's also full of pointless digressions, and written in often strangulated prose. It's the sign of a poorly-written history book when you can picture the author shuffling his sources in the archive, rather than feeling them push you gently you into the distant past.
I'm a glutton for books about historical hoaxes, mysteries and conspiracy theories. The best this year was Selling Hitler (1986) by Robert Harris, an author who I gather is mates with Roman Polanski, which is a strange thing to be. Still, it's an uproariously entertaining caper of hubris and self-delusion, and how that affects and infects at least five people involved in the creation, verification and exploitation of the phony 'Hitler diaries', the most expensive literary hoax of all time. It's a complicated story transformed into a pageturner and told with staggering panache, as Harris effortlessly marshals the facts, and his gallery of grotesques: a relentlessly cheery, womanising forger who can't tell the truth to save his life, a gaggle of hapless, self-interested publishers, and a deranged Neo-Nazi reporter who owns Goering's old yacht and dreams of one day meeting Martin Bohrmann, whom he imagines is still alive.

Geoffrey Gray's Skyjack: The Hunt for D. B. Cooper (2011) was a lot of fun too: familiar in format, but highly enjoyable, as it regales us with the story of the titular figure, who hijacked a plane, demanded an exorbitant government ransom, then parachuted out with his winnings, never to be definitively identified. Gray does a fair job of outlining the various candidates for the role of the skyjacker, though the revelations do begin to bleed into conspiracy theories, and a conceit about the author losing his mind as he tries to uncover the truth seems a little forced.
One can't say the same about CHAOS: The Truth Behind the Manson Murders (2019) by Tom O’Neill, in which a journalist is assigned by Premiere magazine to write a feature about Charles Manson, and instead goes decidedly bananas across 20 years, racking up half a million pounds of debt, while disappearing down various rabbit holes, some markedly more convincing than others. It's a feat of research, certainly: O’Neill at one point proves beyond any doubt that the CIA fabricated the documents it submitted to a congressional inquiry; and at another that Terry Melcher (Doris Day’s son and the producer of The Byrds’ ‘Mr Tambourine Man’) was far closer to Manson than he ever admitted. He also methodically demolishes the chief prosecutor and true crime author Vincent Bugliosi’s credibility. But in the end it is not the chronicle of a coherent investigation leading to concrete conclusions, it is a book about an author facing the unimaginable, and spinning wildly out of control, few of his many threads leading anywhere but to still more questions. In the end, he had to hire a co-author to help him pare down half-a-million-pounds' worth of research to something small you could buy in a shop. Incidentally, I cannot read or watch anything that focuses on the details of the Manson murders, as I just find it too upsetting, but this one deals with those elements in 2-3 pages and then moves on to the investigation. The recent Netflix adaptation of the book, directed by the great documentarian Errol Morris (more of whom below), apparently does much the opposite.

Ghosts of Iron Mountain: The Hoax of the Century, Its Enduring Impact, and What It Reveals About America Today (2025) by Phil Tinline has attracted raves but didn't do much for me. It traces how a prank by the editorial team of the left-wing satirical magazine, Monocle (led by Victor Navasky, whose Naming Names was a favourite book of 2015) became a touchstone for generations of Holocaust deniers, survivalists and terrorists. The story, which was new to me, is fairly interesting, but some of the resultant connections feel pretty tenuous, and the book is written in a plodding style that consists largely of ticking off facts.

Film and music
By far my favourite film book of 2025 was Memo from David O. Selznick (1972), compiled by the film historian, Ruby Behlmer. It was the other contender for my non-fiction book of the year, and is among the best ever published about the movies. Had someone concocted it as an epistolary novel, it would be a work of genius. As it is, it's a considerable feat of scholarship and incisive editing, giving us incomparable access to the mind of megalomaniac speedfreak, David O. Selznick: brilliant creative producer, pass-agg personal-sleight-compiler, and world-class keyboard warrior (even if he did have a stenographer). It is not, though, just a great portrait of a fascinating figure, but a window onto the making of landmark cinematic works, most commercially Gone with the Wind and Rebecca, but also lesser-known gems like The Prisoner of Zenda and Portrait of Jennie. Selznick emerges as a remarkably astute and incisive observer not merely of industry trends and cinematic finessing, but of the very art of story construction. I don't agree with him, though, that recycling classical music for film scores is better than creating original material, and I think he only wanted to do that because it would save him money.

I really liked The Friday Afternoon Club (2024), the 'family memoir' of Griffin Dunne, who I knew as the star of Scorsese's nightmare-logic masterpiece, After Hours, but is also, variously, the son of the true crime journalist and closet homosexual, Dominick Dunne; the nephew of Joan Didion and the guy who wrote The Studio; the best friend and deflowerer of Carrie Fisher; the producer of Chilly Scenes of Winter; and the brother of Dominique Dunne, who starred in Poltergeist and was murdered by her ex-boyfriend at the age of 22. His memoir, which covers all of these things, but lingers longest on the last, is wise, honest, beautifully balanced when dealing with the complexities of human nature, and cheerily unrepentant about all the whoring and coke.
For me, the high points of cinematic biography are Joseph McBride's Searching for John Ford, John Kobler's Damned in Paradise: The Life of John Barrymore, David Stenn's books on Jean Harlow and Clara Bow, and Lee Server's borderline legendary Robert Mitchum: Baby, I Don't Care. I've gone back to Server repeatedly since reading that as a student, but none of his other books compare. Handsome Johnny: The Criminal Life of Johnny Rosselli, The Mob’s Man in Hollywood (2018) is probably the least of them. Given my fixation on 20th Century Fox in the '30s, I knew Rosselli as the walking-red-flag-of-a-husband to their contract player, June Lang (seen to best effect as a Hawksian woman in Road to Glory), but his mad life took him from Hollywood strikebreaking to Vegas to trying to kill Castro for the CIA. It's written in the argot, and from the viewpoint, of his subject, one of the great virtues of Server's style, and there are these fantastic little references, such as to Luise Rainer's Oscar-winning telephone call in The Great Ziegfeld, that treat film historians like fellow insiders. Yet it has few of the direct quotes that daub biographies with their colour, and all feels less authentic than usual, with padding and imprecision in the writing. As for 'Handsome Johnny' – I suppose these things are relative.

Quentin Tarantino is one of the greatest filmmakers of his generation and, as friends of Paul Dano can tell you, a bellend. His ruminations on the films that made him (rather than the films he made), Cinema Speculation (2022), is just that: a succession of personal reflections and piping hot takes. It is, like the author himself, both irritating and brilliant, being at once self-indulgent, self-parodic, unsual, entertaining and slightly embarrassing. He lauds Pauline Kael, patronises Bernard Herrmann's Taxi Driver score, dismisses The Friends of Eddie Coyle with the adolescent parentheses "(overrated)" (in fact, the best crime film of the New Hollywood era), and rejects both '50s and '80s cinema as repressed and repressive, without considering how those decades are defined by the puncturing of societal norms in films like Bigger Than Life, Man of the West and To Live & Die in L.A.. Yet when he isn't making absurdly oversized statements and then having to either double down or undercut them with anxious asides, he can also grant you an entirely new perspective, memorably arguing that Don Siegel "didn't shoot action, he shot violence", and making a strong if peculiar case for The Outfit as the best Parker adaptation. Most of the other titles he celebrates are fairly obvious, but the notable exception is a superb chapter on John Flynn's excoriating, Rolling Thunder (a film I will return to in my round-up of the year's best movies).
It's hard to envisage the sort of strange soul who wouldn't be entranced by the story of Kevin Jarre, the winner of the 1989 Oscar for Best Original Screenplay (Glory), subsequently booted from his first film as writer-director, Tombstone, partway through filming, to be replaced by a boorish, perma-swearing, blockbuster-minded Greek called George Cosmatos. The question is: was Jarre – whose screenplay gives the film most of its special feeling – a meticulous Fordian stylist whose authenticity and old-fashioned sensibility would have created a Western masterpiece were it not for meddling studio beancounters, or a novice director completely out of his depth, who micro-managed his cast to the point of distraction, and wasn’t shooting enough coverage to successfully edit a movie? The Making of Tombstone: Behind the Scenes of the Classic Modern Western (2018) goes some way to answering that question, only for author John Farkis to get distracted telling us things like the names of all the horses pulling a stagecoach on set, and the names of most of the saloons in Tombstone. It doesn't help that the bulk of people he interviews are extras recruited from a society of Civil War re-enactors, which at first affords us an interesting viewpoint, but ultimately means a lot of detail about exactly which revolvers were used by various people in 1881, a subject that rather outstays its welcome. While the making of the film remains a remarkable (and sad) story, the effect is muted by that muddled execution. As for Jarre's dialogue, we could have done with more showing and less telling. For more on the film, you can read my review here. I would love to have seen Jarre's version, but if I had to trade away Val Kilmer's Doc Holliday to get it, sight unseen, I'm not sure I'd dare risk it.

I found Michael F. Blake's The Cavalry Trilogy: John Ford, John Wayne, and the Making of Three Classic Westerns (2024) frustratingly flat. It felt like a typed synopsis of what can be found in the various archives, rather than a book, and comes saddled with a maddening structure that essentially walks you through each film, confusingly, three times. As a reference for those who can’t get to those archives, though, it is valuable, with a focus on the changes between script and finished product that clue you into Ford’s method, gifts and predilections, while the author’s close friendship with Harry Carey, Jr. allows Dobe to add a few nice details and anecdotes along the way. My rewatches of the three films are here: Fort Apache (1948), She Wore a Yellow Ribbon (1949), and Rio Grande (1950).
Twenty Thousand Roads: The Ballad of Gram Parsons and His Cosmic American Music (2007) by David N. Meyer is a deeply moving biography, equipped with punchy opinions (its author loathes The Eagles and Jim Morrison), a searing moral clarity, and some exquisite phrasing. But though Meyer knows how to start a chapter with a bang, his writing and editing gets looser as he progresses, while a musical taste that at first appears agreeably discriminating leads to him dismissing or ignoring a lot of his subject's work. Yes, Gram squandered some of his potential, but you can argue that and still recognise the 50-odd classic songs he left behind for us. While music is, of course, subjective, it does also seem bizarre that the author is so fascinated by the blending of country and soul, yet doesn't write in any detail about Parsons' landmark covers of 'Do Right Woman' and 'Dark End of the Street' (the latter surely the greatest synthesis of those genres), focusing at their expense on the self-penned, satirical, misunderstood but entirely disposable ‘Hippie Boy’, and finding space to criticise the production of The Gilded Palace of Sin no fewer than four times. There's the odd error too (a reference to Harry Smith's field recordings, which they were not), but then we all make those. Despite those minor flaws, Twenty Thousand Roads does give us a sense of the man, and some explanation of his self-destructive lifestyle, born of simple hedonism, a romantic idea of the fucked-up poet, and an inheritance of vast psychic and emotional pain. The two moments that stay with you, months after reading, are the way he somehow meets the moment at guitarist Clarence White's funeral, and the letter that he wrote to his sister, Little Avis, following the deaths of their parents: "The best thing we can do is learn from the past and live our lives the right way, so, in time ... we will be real people, not sick or haunted by what life has done to us."

There was one other great talent to come out of The Byrds, but John Einarson's 2005 book about him (Mr. Tambourine Man: The Life and Legacy of The Byrds' Gene Clark) doesn't quite do him justice. It's ironic that an artist renowned for his inexplicably literate turn of phrase should get such a functionally-written biography, and one where the lack of editing applied to quotes can make it read like an accidental oral history. The narrative we're usually fed about Clark is that he quit the band because he was the Byrd who wouldn't fly (being scared of aeroplanes), but went on to make the cult album, No Other, in a coke blitz; it failed and that broke him. In fact, as this well-researched book shows, he was a bipolar alcoholic for whom success was generally more destructive than failure. Though we got extraordinary music along the way, and sometimes from the most inauspicious circumstances, Clark's life was really one long downward slide, pausing only in Mendocino, where he found the simplicity he craved; going back to LA periodically for career reasons tended to end very very badly. He was dead at 46.
Julian Palacios's Syd Barrett and Pink Floyd: Dark Globe (2010) has similar strengths and failings. Pink Floyd's original frontman was a progenitor of Englishness in rock, undone after a fleeting heyday by what was probably drug-induced schizophrenia. Palacios's attempt to make some sense of it all is, at once, valuable and mystifying. His book is deeply researched, which is its great virtue, while also being digressive, repetitive, moving, ambitious and pretentious, as well as littered with typos and grammatical howlers (the author frequently contradicts himself, has an aversion to the definite article, applies clauses to the wrong words, introduces characters only after they've first appeared, and at one point adds a full stop to Chuck Berry's name). Dark Globe goes huge on context, with an incredible agglomeration of detail affording many new insights, but an enormous cast of characters who frequently obscure or take us away from Syd. Just occasionally, Palacios places you right there at the UFO club or the Roundhouse, with Syd before you on the stage, a gift that is not to be underestimated. Barrett fans continue to bicker over whether that or Rob Chapman's Syd Barrett: A Very Irregular Head (2010) is the definitive work. Certainly Chapman's book has the most remarkable sting in its tail, with two startling and profoundly moving revelations worthy of Janet Malcolm. One involves the discovery of Syd’s annotions in a psychology textbook (the suggestion being that he was, belatedly, grasping for an understanding of what had happened to him, perhaps even trying to heal himself), while the other reveals the lifelong survival of his madcap sense of humour. I wasn't entirely persuaded by the book's argument that Barrett was pushed out of the Floyd because of uncommercial intransigence rather than losing large parts of his mind (having made this point, it’s then difficult for Chapman to square Syd’s subsequent insanity), and Dark Globe does study the causes and symptoms of the artist's’s mental illness at far greater length. But Chapman's grounding in the history of literature and particularly poetry offers a valuable new perspective on the art, finding parallels with John Clare, William Cowper and Gerard Manley Hopkins during an extensive study of Syd’s lyrics. When Barrett's old friend, and replacement in the band, Dave Gilmour, helps Syd complete his solo records, I always get all choked up.

The other great purveyor of Englishness in '60s beat music gets the Johnny Rogan treatment (unnecessarily long) in Ray Davies: A Complicated Life (2015). It is a book in which Davies the man, as opposed to Davies the artist, fails to do a single pleasant thing or exhibit a single positive trait until the tail-end of the 1980s, and, after that, only rarely. Rogan hammers away endlessly at the idea that his subject is driven, manipulative and miserly, though the author is, admittedly, aided in his efforts by virtually every interviewee, several of whom have an obvious axe to grind, and many of whom don’t. While the writing lacks both poetry and emotion, the book is expertly researched, easy to read and neatly argued, with some fresh reaction from Ray and his brother Dave, and instances of welcome detective work (were the sales of The Kinks Are the Village Green Preservation Society really as bad as the reappraisal narrative always implies? It seems not). I came out of this one feeling rather exhausted and a little sad. Perhaps I didn’t need to meet the man, at least this version of him, since I have the songs. There’s a poignant moment in the book when he says much the same thing.
"Bored shitless" is a strong phrase, so let's just say that you can tell Allan Kozinn and Adrian Sinclair's mammoth The McCartney Legacy: Volume 1 – 1969-73 (2022) began life as a detailed log of Macca's studio recordings. If you want to know which instrument was on which Paul McCartney track of the 4/8/16 track recording, which tracks were then bounced to free up others, which takes were marked best, and which mixes were then preferred and pulled to master, then I have some great news for you. Do we need to know the names of all the members of the public (and yet nothing else about them) who feature in the JPMcCartney TV special? Apparently you do. It's undeniably a formidable feat of research, as far as tracking Macca's movement and activities is concerned, but it is seriously anal and delivered in the most repetitive factual prose. Most damagingly, while you get a sense of what it's like to be around Macca (he's grumpy, stingy, and frequently threatening to be naff, whether in interviews or on record), you rarely get under his skin. Always, though, there is that miraculous gift for melody. And while this is not a period where he created a large amount of great music (and nor did he really do so ever again), there are six or seven songs with moments of brilliance ('Maybe I'm Amazed', 'Little Lamb Dragonfly', a couple of tracks on both Ram and Band on the Run), usually stitched together from several unfinished pieces. The problem narratively is that this music is never approaching an artistic apotheosis, nor even getting noticably better, so there is no satisfying arc. Nor are there many opinions about the songs, aside from discussions about which elements make up for which other elements. So, yeah, mostly bored shitless. Also, Linda may be navigating a sexist world, but she nevertheless comes across appallingly.

Sport
Unlike most journalists, Duncan Hamilton really cares about the writing, and his noted love of J.L Carr shines through in the wonderful, gently experimental and deeply moving final chapter of Provided You Don’t Kiss Me: 20 Years with Brian Clough (2007). This memoir, based on those decades as a regional sports reporter frequently embedded with Old Big 'Ead, is thematic, which sometimes works well and is at others a shortcoming, since Clough changed so much over time, and the stories and quotes often aren't sourced to any period in particular. Hamilton says he doesn't really know what Clough was like, even if at times he understands what makes him tick, and while his book can be insightful and intuitive, that depiction of his subject as a mass of unresolved contradictions manages to be both mature and frustrating. How many of these quotes, too, are half-remembered or reconstructed at a distance of decades? And how curious to name the book not after one of Clough's many legendary sayings, but one of your own lesser witticisms. He knew him, though. One unexpectedly enjoyable side detail: the former England stalwart Billy Wright 'catching strays', in the modern parlance, being depicted as a snivelling creep whose century of national caps was largely a result of his cringing obsequiousness.

All I did before the age of 14 was read books, play football and watch football. My favourite players were Bryan Robson and Lee Sharpe, and the latter's autobiography, My Idea of Fun (2005), is of course next to Karamazov on my ranked list for 2025. I would argue it is more consistent overall, and also has a clearer viewpoint (his idea of fun). It's written from Sharpe's mildly jaundiced and indignant viewpoint that he was seen as someone who threw it all away (I didn't think that, but had heard the rumours that he was on drugs and his 'viral meningitis' was a cover for being caught dealing at United). Rather, he was my childhood idol: it was his goals I celebrated most avidly, and his goal celebrations I copied in the playground. Despite the cheery title, Sharpe's book is a poignant read (it forms an interesting triumvirate with Ben Thornley's autobiography and that immortal biography of Adrian Doherty). I knew about the injuries and Alex Ferguson's mismanaging of him, but not the complete lack of technical training he received and his resulting insecurity at a time before sports psychology was in vogue. The ending also plays a little sad, since he expects to be embarking on a glittering new career in TV, which at this point was almost over. Some googling, though, suggests that a young family and a second career as a golf pro has been a more than adequate replacement. I've always loved, and will always love, those players who care about the magic of the moment, not their salary or the number of squad-member medals they accrue. Sharpey was one of those. And he was always lovely with starstruck kids hanging around the dressing-room door (Richard Burin, aged seven).
That view of football also powers Danish Dynamite: The Story of Football’s Greatest Cult Team (2014) by Rob Smyth, Lars Eriksen and Mike Gibbons. The book does rather read as if it was written in one draft, with some clunky puns and metaphors, but the story is pretty good, there are great intros to each new chapter, and the climactic moral about glory (as opposed to success) is how I see sport – and life. Sensational cover too.

England currently seem surprised by how badly the Ashes is going. If only they had read the title of The Toughest Tour: The Ashes Away Series, 1946 to 2007 (2010) by Huw Turbervill. I wouldn't advise reading the rest of it, though, it's kind of crap. I was expecting something psychological and piercing, full of insight and telling detail. Instead I got a by-the-numbers trawl through postwar overseas Ashes matches, series-by-series, published by Telegraph Books as an obvious cash-in ahead of the 2010-11 contest. There are a few new interviews with old players but a book on this subject has no right to be this dull.

Misc
I continued the noble work of Janet Malcolm completism by devouring The Purloined Clinic (1993), her first collection of essays, and for the longest time a curiously unsatisfying one, until at last you see her genius begin to blossom. It starts with a wodge of four pieces on her favourite topic of psychoanalysis, which are all fairly technical, and written in strangely straightjacketed prose. The book reviews that follow are better, but limited as art in themselves, until Malcolm gets around to Michael Fried and lands on not only a scales-from-the-eyes observation about the theatrical nature of cultural criticism, but on another that displays her gift for the beautifully rendered epigram, as she ridicules "the illusion that art is natural and involuntary as breathing rather than as wrought and as willed as cheating at cards". Then finally we get to the really good stuff: three instances of the showboating long-form journalism upon which her considerable reputation rightly lies. 'One Way Mirror', about the phenomenon of family therapy, is still too tied down by theory, but shows how much more memorable and enjoyable her work is when mixing analysis with reportage. The other two pieces are classics. 'A Child of the Zeitgeist' (also included in her second essay collection, 'Forty-One False Starts') was her first masterpiece: a deep, intuitive and gossipy feature about the New York arts scene; 'The Window Washer' is her astonishing examination of post-communist Prague, with Malcolm returning to the city of her birth, and writing with extraordinary intimacy and perception. It focuses on her relationships with a rude and abrupt hero of the struggle, and a dignified professor tortured by his earlier cowardice, while allowing space for the Proustian rush caused by a guidebook that Malcolm had packed by mistake, and the sight of a swan surrounded by rats in a city park, the bird's plight, its defiance and its hostility an unforgettable metaphor for landlocked and unlovable Czechslovakia.

Reading Chekhov (2001) disappointed, though. It's by far the least effective of the writer's three literary biographies, feeling curiously forced, and oddly turgid in places.
Malcolm's greatest and most provocative work was The Journalist and the Murderer, about the court case between a convicted killer, Jeffrey MacDonald, and the reporter Joe McGinniss, who pretended to believe in his subject's innocence, before using his subsequent access to obliterate him in the book, Fatal Vision. The case continues to fascinate. MacDonald was a Green Beret doctor who, a few months after the Manson killings, claimed that a group of hippies chanting, "Acid is groovy, kill the pigs", had killed his wife and two infant children. When the case finally reached a jury in 1979, they didn't believe him; he's been in jail for the murders ever since. Enter Errol Morris, the greatest documentary maker of our era, who has become characteristically obsessed with the case. In the '80s, he wanted to make a documentary that would have mixed scenes from the TV adaptation of Fatal Vision (which featured On the Waterfront alumni, Karl Malden and Eva-Marie Saint) with alternate versions reflecting MacDonald's defence, and starring the same actor, Gary Cole. The problem, TV executives told him, was that MacDonald was guilty. Instead Morris spent decades compiling a book, The Wilderness of Error (2013), which combines trial transcripts, his own incisive background interviews, ruminations on the wider significance of the case (judicially, morally) and a handful of typically memorable tangents. He also occasionally shows his arse, stumbling in his analysis of the stab marks on a pajama top, and omitting two notable DNA findings (a bloodied hair under Colette MacDonald's fingernail; the identity of the nighttime urinator who might have precipitated the attack). The author isn't quite trying to convince us of MacDonald's innocence, though (a good job, really, since MacDonald almost certainly did it), which at this stage isn't possible. Rather, he's arguing that there's no way the suspect received a fair trial. And he's right: evidence was suppressed, a witness gagged, no motive even credibly suggested. This beautifully and imaginatively designed book is full of piercing insights, righteous anger and unforgettable detail, all of it in a potentially questionable cause, but utterly irresistible all the same. The result is the greatest documentary that Morris never made.
Don’t Burn Anyone at the Stake Today (2025) by Naomi Alderman was among the most thought-provoking things I read this year: a deeply compassionate guide to navigating this age of 'information crisis', full of fascinating connections, novel perspectives, and qualities like empathy that currently seem in short supply, if just occasionally straying into the realm of "I reckon".

And, finally, I read the first non-fiction book from Small Bomb at Dimperley (see above) author, Lissa Evans: Picnic on Craggy Island: The Surreal Joys of Producing Father Ted (2025). It's a warm anecdotal memoir, broken down by episode, that might not mean much to anyone who doesn't know every episode inside out from their teenage years, but who cares about them?

***

Thanks for reading. Part 2 will be about movies, and out any day now.