Movie of the Year

YourPopFilter.com
  • 4.4 (14)
  • Film Reviews
  • Updated Weekly

Movie of the Year is on the hunt to find the best film of each and every year, in the only way that matters: brackets. Join Greg, Mike, and Ryan, as they discuss what makes a film matter now vs when it came out. There will be games. There will be drinks. There will be points. There will only be one Movie of the Year. ", "Movie of the Year is on the hunt to find the best film of each and every year, in the only way that matters: brackets. Join Greg, Mike, and Ryan, as they discuss what makes a film matter now vs when it came out. There will be games. There will be drinks. There will be points. There will only be one Movie of the Year.

  1. 21h ago

    2006 - Slither

    Movie of the Year: 2006Slither The Slither Podcast Brings Body Horror to the 2006 BracketThe Slither podcast episode unleashes the first true horror movie on our Movie of the Year 2006 bracket. After opening the season with Tristram Shandy: A C**k and Bull Story, the Taste Buds trade metafiction for meteorites. Consequently, things get slimy fast. Ryan, Mike, and Greg welcome producer and festival programmer Drea Clark to dig into James Gunn's gleefully gross directorial debut. Together, the panel asks whether a movie full of alien slugs deserves a deep run in the bracket. Above all, they ask whether Slither has more on its mind than exploding deer and tentacled husbands. About the FilmSlither is a 2006 science fiction horror comedy written and directed by James Gunn. A meteorite crashes outside the small town of Wheelsy, South Carolina, carrying an alien parasite. The parasite infects wealthy local Grant Grant, played with squirming brilliance by Michael Rooker. Soon, Grant transforms into a tentacled monster, and slug-like creatures spread through the town. Meanwhile, police chief Bill Pardy (Nathan Fillion) and Grant's wife Starla (Elizabeth Banks) try to stop the invasion. Universal released the film on March 31, 2006. Notably, it flopped at the box office, grossing under $13 million against a $15 million budget. However, critics largely embraced it. Roger Ebert praised its Troma-loving spirit in his RogerEbert.com review, and the film became a cult favorite on home video. In addition, it launched the directing career that eventually gave us Guardians of the Galaxy and the new DC Universe. Guest Panelist: Drea ClarkThis week the Taste Buds welcome Drea Clark, a true film industry polymath. Drea co-hosts Maximum Film! on the Maximum Fun network, the long-running movie podcast she shares with film critic Alonso Duralde. Furthermore, her credentials behind the scenes run deep. She has served on the Sundance Film Festival programming team, led narrative feature programming at Slamdance for over a decade, spent ten years with the LA Film Festival, and curated Geena Davis's Bentonville Film Festival. As a producer, her features include The Last Time You Had Fun, Lake Los Angeles, and No Light and No Land Anywhere, the latter executive produced by Miranda July. In short, few guests are better equipped to judge a scrappy genre debut from a first time director. James Gunn as a First-Time FilmmakerBefore Slither, James Gunn was a writer with a strange resume. He cut his teeth at Troma on Tromeo and Juliet, then wrote the live action Scooby-Doo movies and the 2004 Dawn of the Dead remake. Consequently, Slither arrived as his first chance to direct his own material. The panel debates what the film reveals about Gunn as a filmmaker. Specifically, they trace the DNA that later shows up in Guardians of the Galaxy, The Suicide Squad, and Superman. The needle drops, the found family of misfits, and the sincere heart under the gross-out gags all start here. Moreover, Drea brings a programmer's eye to the question of how debut features signal a career to come. Sex and Violence on the Slither 2006 PodcastSlither earns its R rating with enthusiasm. The Taste Buds tackle how the film weaponizes both sex and violence, often in the same scene. Grant's infection plays like a grotesque infidelity story, and the alien's reproductive plans push body horror into genuinely uncomfortable territory. However, the violence stays cartoonish enough to keep the comedy alive. The panel asks where Gunn draws that line, and whether the bathtub scene, the barn scene, and that infamous bursting body still shock today. Ultimately, the conversation lands on a bigger question. Does the film use its excess for a purpose, or is the excess the point? Is Slither an Allegory?Every great monster movie smuggles in a meaning, or so the theory goes. Therefore, the panel puts Slither on the couch. Is the film an allegory for toxic marriage, with Grant's transformation literalizing a controlling husband? Is it about small town conformity, as a hive mind absorbs an entire community? By contrast, maybe Gunn simply loves slugs and explosions, and the search for subtext misses the joke. Drea, Ryan, Mike, and Greg each stake out a position. Nevertheless, the debate keeps circling back to Starla, whose arc gives the film its surprising emotional weight. TriviaNo Movie of the Year episode is complete without Trivia. This week's round digs into Slither's production and its B-movie family tree. Expect questions about the practical effects, the casting, and the film's connections to Troma legend Lloyd Kaufman, who cameos in the movie. Additionally, the segment tests whether the panel can untangle Slither from the movies it lovingly rips off, including Night of the Creeps and Shivers. Play along and see if you can outscore the Taste Buds. Dream Blunt RotationNew season, new games. In Dream Blunt Rotation, the panel assembles the ultimate smoke circle from the world of Slither. Which characters make the cut, and which get left outside the garage? Mayor Jack MacReady seems like a chaotic invite, while Bill Pardy might be the chillest hang in Wheelsy. Meanwhile, the conversation drifts toward the cast and crew themselves. Listen to find out who earns a spot in the rotation and whose vibes get vetoed. Awards and RecommendationsThe episode closes with Awards and Recommendations, the segment where the Taste Buds hand out honors to the film's cast, crew, and creatures. Nominees this week range from Michael Rooker's fearless physical performance to the effects team behind the slugs. As a result, expect passionate cases and at least one baffling pick. The winners stay a surprise, so you will have to listen for the results. Afterward, the panel shares recommendations for what to watch next if Slither leaves you hungry for more horror comedy. Why Slither Still MattersTwenty years later, Slither looks like a turning point hiding in plain sight. It kept practical creature effects alive at a moment when Hollywood was abandoning them. Furthermore, it proved that horror comedy could carry real emotion, a balance Gunn has chased ever since. The film's box office failure also tells a story about 2006 itself, a year when audiences ignored a future superstar director. In practice, the Slither podcast episode asks the question this whole season exists to answer. Does cult status and influence make a movie a contender for the best film of 2006? Listen and judge for yourself. Related Episodes from Movie of the Year: 2006Movie of the Year: 2006 — Intro, Part 1Movies of 2006: The Bracket RevealTristram Shandy: A C**k and Bull StoryAll Movie of the Year episodes FAQ: Slither Podcast and FilmWhat is this episode of the Slither podcast about? Ryan, Mike, and Greg debate whether James Gunn's Slither deserves to advance in the Movie of the Year 2006 bracket. Guest panelist Drea Clark joins to discuss Gunn's debut, the film's sex and violence, and its possible allegories. What is Slither (2006) about? An alien parasite crash-lands near the small town of Wheelsy, South Carolina, and infects a wealthy local named Grant Grant. He mutates into a tentacled monster while slug-like creatures take over the town. A police chief and Grant's wife fight to stop the invasion. Who directed Slither? James Gunn wrote and directed Slither as his feature directorial debut. He later directed the Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy and now co-runs DC Studios. Who stars in Slither? The cast includes Nathan Fillion, Elizabeth Banks, Michael Rooker, Gregg Henry, and Tania Saulnier, with a small role for Jenna Fischer. Full credits are on IMDb. More Questions from the Slither 2006 PodcastWas Slither a box office success? No. The film grossed under $13 million against a $15 million budget. However, strong reviews and home video sales turned it into a cult classic. Is Slither a remake? No, but it wears its influences proudly. Gunn openly drew on Night of the Creeps, Shivers, The Blob, and the Troma catalog, where he started his career. Who is the guest on this episode? Drea Clark, producer, festival programmer, and co-host of the Maximum Film! podcast on Maximum Fun. Why does Slither still matter? It launched James Gunn's directing career, championed practical effects, and perfected the horror comedy tone that countless films have imitated since. The Slither podcast episode makes the full case.

    1h 46m

  2. Jun 4

    2006 - Tristram Shandy

    Movie of the Year: 2006Tristram Shandy: A C**k and Bull StoryThe Tristram Shandy Podcast Opens the 2006 BracketThe Tristram Shandy podcast episode kicks off our brand new 2006 bracket on Movie of the Year. After crowning our way through 1971, the Taste Buds turn to a fresh film year. Moreover, we start with one of the strangest comedies of the decade. Michael Winterbottom's Tristram Shandy: A C**k and Bull Story is a film about making a film of an unfilmable book. Consequently, it makes a perfect launch title for a show that loves movies about movies. In this episode, Ryan, Mike, and Greg dig into metafiction, gender, and the prickly chemistry between Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon. Additionally, two new segments make their debut. Above all, we want to set the tone for a wild 2006 season. About the FilmLaurence Sterne published The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman in nine volumes between 1759 and 1767. The novel is famous for being playful, digressive, and nearly impossible to adapt. Notably, the narrator barely manages to get himself born across hundreds of pages. Winterbottom and his team turned that problem into the whole joke. As a result, the movie follows a fictional crew trying to film the book. Steve Coogan plays a vain version of himself, plus Tristram and his father, Walter. Meanwhile, Rob Brydon plays a needling version of himself and Uncle Toby. The screenplay carries the pseudonym "Martin Hardy," although Frank Cottrell-Boyce actually wrote it. Furthermore, the cast includes Keeley Hawes, Shirley Henderson, Dylan Moran, Naomie Harris, Kelly Macdonald, and Jeremy Northam. Gillian Anderson and Stephen Fry also appear as heightened versions of themselves. You can read more at Wikipedia or the original Roger Ebert review. This is the first film episode of our 2006 season. To explore the wider bracket project, visit the Movie of the Year archive. If you enjoy this Tristram Shandy podcast deep dive, our A Clockwork Orange episode from the 1971 run pairs nicely with this conversation about cinematic form. Want to hear how the season began? Start with our 2006 season intro, then dig into the 2006 bracket reveal before this episode. Metafiction and the Unfilmable NovelMetafiction sits at the center of our first discussion. Sterne wrote a novel that constantly reminds you it is a novel. Similarly, Winterbottom built a movie that keeps reminding you it is a movie. The crew breaks the fourth wall, argues about the script, and screens its own dailies. Therefore, the film becomes a hall of mirrors about storytelling itself. The Taste Buds ask a simple question. How do you adapt a book that mocks the idea of adaptation? Furthermore, we trace the lineage from Sterne to modern self-aware comedies. Films like Adaptation and Day for Night come up as obvious cousins. Ultimately, we argue that Winterbottom found the only honest solution. He filmed the failure instead of the book. Consequently, the movie respects Sterne by refusing to tame him. The Battle of the Sexes on ScreenNext, we turn to gender and how the film portrays men and women. The male characters chase status, sex, and screen time with comic desperation. Coogan, in particular, frets about his shoe lifts and his billing. Meanwhile, the women in the film often hold the real power. Kelly Macdonald plays Jenny, who grounds Coogan with calm clarity. Naomie Harris plays Jennie, a production assistant who runs circles around the panicking men. Gillian Anderson arrives late and instantly reshapes the production. By contrast, the men flail and posture. So the Taste Buds debate a thorny point. Does the movie satirize male ego, or does it quietly indulge it? Additionally, we weigh how the battle of the sexes plays inside an 18th-century story. The novel and the film both poke fun at male pride. As a result, the gender comedy spans two very different centuries. Coogan and Brydon Anchor the Tristram Shandy PodcastAbove all, the Coogan and Brydon double act drives this Tristram Shandy podcast conversation. The two comedians play exaggerated, petty versions of themselves. Their rivalry over billing, teeth, and impressions fuels the funniest scenes. Notably, this dynamic later powered the beloved series The Trip. The Taste Buds dig into why their friction feels so real. Brydon needles, Coogan bristles, and the comedy snaps into focus. Furthermore, we discuss how improvisation shapes their banter. The closing Al Pacino impression duel becomes a highlight. Meanwhile, we ask whether the pair actually like each other on screen. The answer stays gloriously unclear. Consequently, their chemistry gives a chilly intellectual film a warm, human pulse. Rushmore: The Mount Rushmore of 2006 TelevisionOur Rushmore segment asks each host to carve a Mount Rushmore of 2006 television. The year was loaded with future classics. For instance, The Wire aired its acclaimed fourth season. Meanwhile, The Office, 30 Rock, and Friday Night Lights were all finding their feet. Additionally, prestige newcomers like Dexter and Heroes premiered to big buzz. The hosts each pick four shows and defend their choices. Naturally, the debate gets heated fast. Listen to the episode to hear which four faces each Taste Bud sets in stone. I Never Metacritic I Didn't LikeThis episode debuts a brand new game called "I Never Metacritic I Didn't Like." The premise is simple and a little dangerous. We pull up a film's Metacritic profile and put the critical consensus on trial. Specifically, we test whether the aggregate score matches our own gut reactions. Tristram Shandy earned strong reviews from critics on release. However, strong scores do not always survive a Taste Buds cross-examination. Therefore, the game lets us argue with the wider critical record in real time. Expect this segment to return throughout the 2006 season. Above all, it gives us a structured excuse to fight about numbers. Why Tristram Shandy Still MattersTristram Shandy still matters because it cracked a problem that had defeated everyone before it. Winterbottom proved you can film an unfilmable book by filming the attempt. Moreover, the movie launched a now-legendary comic partnership. The Coogan and Brydon collaboration grew into The Trip and its many sequels. Additionally, the film remains a sharp, funny lesson in adaptation. Film students and Sterne scholars both still cite it today. Ultimately, the Tristram Shandy 2006 podcast discussion shows why this small comedy punches far above its weight. Notably, it kicks our 2006 bracket off with brains and mischief. Related Episodes from Movie of the Year: 2006The 2006 season is just getting started, so this list will grow each week. For now, revisit the episodes that set up the bracket, plus a favorite from our 1971 run. Movie of the Year 2006: Season IntroThe 2006 Bracket RevealMovie of the Year archiveThe Last Picture Show (1971) FAQ: Tristram Shandy Podcast and FilmWhat is this Tristram Shandy podcast episode about? In this episode, Ryan, Mike, and Greg launch the 2006 bracket by breaking down Michael Winterbottom's comedy. They cover metafiction, gender, the Coogan and Brydon dynamic, and two new segments. What is the movie Tristram Shandy about? The film follows a crew trying to adapt an unfilmable 18th-century novel. As they struggle, the actors' egos and offscreen lives take over the production. Who directed Tristram Shandy: A C**k and Bull Story? Michael Winterbottom directed the film. Frank Cottrell-Boyce wrote the screenplay under the pseudonym "Martin Hardy." Is Tristram Shandy based on a book? Yes. Laurence Sterne wrote The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman across nine volumes between 1759 and 1767. You can read more on Wikipedia. Do Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon play themselves? Yes, mostly. Both actors play exaggerated, fictional versions of themselves, and they also play characters in the film within the film. See the full cast on IMDb. Is Tristram Shandy connected to The Trip? Yes, in spirit. This film first paired Coogan and Brydon with Winterbottom, and that chemistry...

    1h 30m

  3. May 28

    2006: The Sweet 16 Revealed

    Movie of the Year: 2006The Sweet 16 RevealedThe Best Movies of 2006 Enter the BracketThis episode puts the movies of 2006 on the clock, as Ryan, Mike, and Greg reveal which 16 titles advance to the bracket season. The Taste Buds have spent weeks wrestling with a starting field of 64 films, and the cuts have been real. The debates ahead will be worth every minute. Getting from 64 films to 16 requires real conviction. Every cut involves films with legitimate credentials, passionate defenders, and strong arguments in their favor. Consequently, this episode does more than announce a list. It reflects a set of choices the Taste Buds are prepared to defend all season long. About Movie of the YearMovie of the Year is a PopFilter podcast built around one question: what was the best film of a given year? Ryan, Mike, and Greg select a year, assemble a 64-film bracket, and argue their way to a champion. The format rewards deep cinematic knowledge, honest disagreement, and a willingness to change your mind when the argument demands it. The show has built a catalog of bracket seasons that reward both longtime listeners and newcomers. Each season has its own personality, shaped by the films in contention and the friction those films generate in debate. The 2006 season carries that tradition forward with a year that has only gotten more interesting with time. 2006: A Year Worth Arguing AboutFew years in recent memory offer the range that 2006 does. Prestige dramas, international films, genre pictures, and independent features all had strong years, and the critical consensus at the time did not always hold up. Some films that dominated awards conversation look different now. Meanwhile, others that were overlooked at release have since built lasting reputations. Roger Ebert captured the energy of 2006 well. His review of The Departed reflected a year when ambitious filmmaking found real audiences, and when the line between commercial and prestige cinema blurred in productive ways. Additionally, 2006 produced genuine disagreement between critics and general audiences, which is exactly the kind of tension that makes a bracket season compelling. The Taste Buds considered films across every genre and profile when building the 64-film field. Notably, some titles with strong critical support did not survive the early cuts, while others with devoted fanbases made a stronger case than expected. That tension runs through every round of the bracket. How the Movies of 2006 Bracket WorksThe bracket is central to what makes Movie of the Year function as a podcast. The Taste Buds begin with 64 films, then work through rounds of debate until one film stands alone. Each episode focuses on a specific matchup or group of films, with Ryan, Mike, and Greg arguing for and against each contender. The Sweet 16 revealed in this episode seeds the season ahead. From there, head-to-head matchups determine which films advance through the Elite Eight, the Final Four, and ultimately the championship. However, seeding does not guarantee anything. A well-argued case can always change the outcome, and upsets are part of the format. For listeners new to the show, this episode therefore serves as an ideal starting point. The Taste Buds make each debate accessible and entertaining, regardless of how familiar you are with any individual film. The Road to the Sweet 16Cutting 64 films to 16 means making hard calls. The Taste Buds apply consistent criteria across every cut: rewatchability, cultural staying power, craft, and genuine argument value within the bracket. A film that cannot generate a compelling debate does not serve the season well, regardless of its pedigree. Above all, the goal is a Sweet 16 that produces great arguments. A bracket full of obvious consensus picks would make for a dull season. Consequently, the Taste Buds deliberately include films that create friction, titles where reasonable and informed people genuinely disagree about their value and legacy. Some of the 16 films advancing will surprise listeners. Others will feel inevitable. The full reveal happens in this episode, and the reasoning behind each selection is part of what makes debating the movies of 2006 so worthwhile from start to finish. A Starting Field Built for DebateThe 64-film field the Taste Buds assembled for 2006 reflects the full range of what the year produced. Genre range mattered in the curation process. So did the desire to include films that cut against consensus and force the bracket to reckon with less comfortable choices. Specifically, the films that survive into the Sweet 16 represent a cross-section of 2006 that rewards close attention and strong opinions. Why the Movies of 2006 Still MatterThe Movie of the Year podcast treats film debate as something worth doing seriously. The 2006 season carries that forward with a year whose critical reputation has shifted meaningfully since its release. Films that seemed certain to endure have faded. Others that barely registered in awards conversation have grown into genuine touchstones. The bracket format demands accountability that casual film lists do not. When you argue for a film head-to-head against another specific film, you have to articulate why you believe what you believe. Furthermore, you have to hold that position under pressure from two other opinionated co-hosts who may disagree entirely. Specifically, 2006 sits at a cultural inflection point. Studio filmmaking, independent cinema, and international film all competed for serious critical attention that year, and the market rewarded each in different ways. The season will reflect that range, and the debates will run deep. The movies of 2006 have a lot left to say, and this season is where they say it. Related Episodes from Movie of the YearMovie of the Year — Full Episode ArchiveThe Last Picture Show — Movie of the Year: 1971A Clockwork Orange — Movie of the Year: 1971The French Connection — Movie of the Year: 1971Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory — Movie of the Year: 1971 Note: Add 2006 episode URLs to this list as they are published. FAQ: Movies of 2006 and the Bracket RevealAbout the Episode and the ShowWhat is this movie's 2006 podcast episode about? Ryan, Mike, and Greg reveal the 16 films advancing to the 2006 bracket season. They narrow a starting field of 64 films down to the Sweet 16, setting up the full season of head-to-head debates ahead. What is Movie of the Year? Movie of the Year is a PopFilter podcast where hosts Ryan, Mike, and Greg debate and rank films from a single year using a bracket format. Each season covers one year of cinema and ends with one film crowned champion. Who hosts Movie of the Year? The show is hosted by Ryan, Mike, and Greg, collectively known as the Taste Buds, on the PopFilter podcast network. Each host brings a distinct critical perspective to every debate. How does the Movie of the Year bracket work? The Taste Buds begin each season with 64 films from the chosen year. Through debate-style episodes, films compete head-to-head until one film is crowned Movie of the Year. The Sweet 16, Elite Eight, Final Four, and championship rounds each produce their own episodes. About the 2006 SeasonWhy is 2006 a significant year in film history? 2006 produced a strong and varied field of films across genres and profiles. Prestige dramas, international cinema, genre filmmaking, and independent features all had notable years, making 2006 an ideal year for bracket debate. How did the Taste Buds select the 64-film starting field? The Taste Buds curated the field based on critical reception, cultural staying power, rewatchability, and argument value within the bracket format. The goal was a field that represents the full range of 2006, including some selections that will surprise listeners. Where can I listen to Movie of the Year? Movie of the Year is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and wherever you listen to podcasts. Full episodes and archives are also available at popfilter.co. What films made the 2006 Movie of the Year Sweet 16? The 16 films advancing to the bracket are revealed in this episode. Listen to find out which films survived and how the Taste Buds justify every selection.

    1h 9m

  4. May 21

    2006: A New Season Begins

    Movie of the Year: 2006A New Season Begins The Movies of 2006 Podcast Begins: 128 Films Enter the BracketThe movies of 2006 podcast is officially underway, and the Taste Buds are ready to take on one of the richest film years of the 21st century. Ryan, Mike, and Greg kick off the 2006 season on PopFilter by introducing the year, explaining the bracket structure, and beginning the first round of eliminations. Furthermore, Part 1 of the intro sets the tone for a season packed with genuine heavyweights, unlikely contenders, and some of the most debated films of the decade. 2006 delivered a field that refuses to cooperate with easy rankings. The Departed sits alongside Pan's Labyrinth, Children of Men, and Little Miss Sunshine in the same calendar year. Additionally, Casino Royale, The Prestige, Babel, Borat, and Idiocracy all arrived in 2006, representing wildly different visions of what cinema can accomplish. The Taste Buds have their work cut out for them. About the 2006 Film Year2006 stands as one of the most celebrated film years of the decade. Martin Scorsese's The Departed swept the Academy Awards, winning Best Picture and earning Scorsese his first Oscar for Best Director. Meanwhile, Guillermo del Toro delivered Pan's Labyrinth, a Spanish-language dark fantasy that works equally as a fairy tale and a historical horror. Alfonso Cuarón's Children of Men earned near-universal acclaim for its singular, one-take-heavy vision of a dying civilization. The box office reflected 2006's breadth. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest topped the global charts. Casino Royale relaunched the Bond franchise with Daniel Craig in his debut as 007. Cars kept Pixar's winning streak intact. Moreover, the comedies were just as crowded: Borat, Talladega Nights, Idiocracy, and Clerks II each built devoted audiences. Consequently, building a bracket from this year means making choices that will draw genuine disagreement from all directions. International cinema contributed heavily to 2006's depth. Alejandro González Iñárritu's Babel earned seven Academy Award nominations after competing at Cannes. Pedro Almodóvar's Volver brought Penélope Cruz one of her most celebrated screen performances. The year also produced major releases from Darren Aronofsky (The Fountain), Sofia Coppola (Marie Antoinette), Christopher Nolan (The Prestige), and Mel Gibson (Apocalypto). In practice, few years in recent memory offer this density of debate-worthy titles across this many genres. The movies of 2006 represent a year when every corner of the industry produced something worth arguing about. How the Movie of the Year Bracket WorksMovie of the Year uses a bracket format borrowed from sports tournaments. The Taste Buds seed 128 films from a given year and match them head-to-head across multiple rounds until one earns the title of best of the year. The movies of 2006 provide an especially deep pool to draw from. Each round cuts the field in half: 128 to 64, 64 to 32, 32 to the Sweet 16, and on through the Elite Eight, Final Four, and championship. Notably, the bracket covers the full range of the year — prestige titles, genre pictures, comedies, blockbusters, and deep cuts all compete on equal footing. The seeding and matchups drive the conversation. A high-seeded favorite facing a scrappy underdog often produces the most spirited debates, because the Taste Buds evaluate every film on its own terms. No film earns an automatic pass based on reputation alone. A beloved blockbuster can fall in round one. A smaller film can advance much further than anyone expects. Therefore, the bracket functions as a pressure test for every assumption the hosts carry into the season. The format also distinguishes Movie of the Year from a standard best-of list. The hosts cannot simply rank their favorites and close the debate. Instead, they defend each pick against a direct opponent, round after round. Above all, the bracket produces arguments that a list never could, because every vote carries immediate consequences. To see what this process looks like across a full season, the Movie of the Year archive includes complete coverage of every year the Taste Buds have tackled, including the recently completed 1971 season. The 2006 First Round: Inside the Movies of 2006 Podcast BracketThe first round of the 2006 season pits 64 matchups against one another and cuts the field in half. Part 1 of the intro covers the opening set of battles, with Part 2 completing the round. Even the quickest first-round decisions carry weight, because an early upset can remove a major contender long before the serious rounds begin. 2006 gives the hosts no shortage of compelling first-round scenarios. High-profile releases like Superman Returns, X-Men: The Last Stand, and Blood Diamond arrive as recognizable titles but face real scrutiny on merit. Films like Half Nelson, Brick, and Thank You for Smoking represent the indie side of the year with strong critical backing. Moreover, the international titles — Pan's Labyrinth, Volver, Perfume: The Story of a Murderer — introduce a different set of criteria into the matchups entirely. The documentary field adds another dimension. An Inconvenient Truth became one of 2006's most discussed releases and earned Al Gore an Academy Award. Jesus Camp generated controversy and critical notice in equal measure. Additionally, the horror entries, the prestige dramas like United 93 and The Good Shepherd, and the awards-season crowding all create pressure across the bracket from the opening round. Roger Ebert's four-star review of The Departed captures the critical consensus around 2006's most decorated film. Nevertheless, the first round is only the beginning. Why 2006 Still Matters2006 represents a pivotal moment in 21st-century cinema. The year demonstrated that prestige filmmaking and mass entertainment could share a single calendar without one displacing the other. The Departed and Pan's Labyrinth both belong to 2006. Borat and Children of Men arrived the same year. That range matters because the best film years do not produce one kind of great film — they produce many kinds simultaneously. Moreover, 2006 produced titles that have only grown in cultural stature since their release. Idiocracy arrived with little fanfare and now functions as a widely cited cultural reference point. Children of Men drew modest theatrical audiences and currently ranks among the most admired films of the decade in retrospective criticism. The Prestige built a devoted following that continues to generate debate about its structure and its final image. Additionally, Casino Royale remains the gold standard for modern Bond films nearly two decades later. The movies of 2006 podcast gives these films a structured arena to compete. That structure reveals something a ranked list cannot: which films hold up under sustained comparison, which reputations survive direct opposition, and which consensus picks turn out to be more fragile than they appear. 2006 deserves this treatment. The Taste Buds are the right crew to find out which film earns the crown. Related Episodes from Movie of the YearMovie of the Year — Full Episode ArchiveThe Last Picture Show — Movie of the Year: 1971A Clockwork Orange — Movie of the Year: 1971 More 2006 episode pages will be linked here as the season progresses. FAQ: Movies of 2006 Podcast and Film YearWhat is the movies of 2006 podcast intro episode about? This episode launches the 2006 season of Movie of the Year on PopFilter. Ryan, Mike, and Greg introduce the 2006 film year, explain the bracket format, and work through Part 1 of the first round, taking the field from 128 films down toward 64. How does the Movie of the Year bracket format work? Movie of the Year seeds 128 films from a given year into a tournament-style bracket. Films compete head-to-head across multiple rounds — from 128 to 64, then 32, the Sweet 16, Elite Eight, Final Four, and championship — until one film earns the title of best of the year. The format produces arguments that a simple ranked list cannot, because every vote has immediate consequences. What films are in the 2006 Movie of the Year bracket? The 2006 bracket includes 128 films from across the year: prestige dramas like The Departed, Babel, and Letters from Iwo Jima; international titles like Pan's Labyrinth and Volver; genre films like Children of Men and The Prestige; comedies like Borat, Idiocracy, and Little Miss Sunshine; and blockbusters like Casino Royale and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest. What won Best Picture for the 2006 film year? The Departed, directed by Martin Scorsese, won the Academy Award for Best Picture at the 79th Academy Awards in 2007. The film also earned Scorsese his first Best Director Oscar. However, Oscar history and the Movie of the Year bracket determine their...

    1h 35m

  5. May 14

    1971 - The Finale, Part III

    Movie of the Year: 1971The Finale, Part IIThe 1971 Film Finale Podcast: One Champion RemainsThe 1971 film finale podcast brings the Taste Buds' most ambitious bracket season to its definitive conclusion. Ryan, Mike, and Greg have debated, dismissed, and championed their way through a remarkable field — and now eight films remain. In this episode, four Elite Eight matchups collapse into a single champion, and five major awards close out the season before the final verdict arrives. Furthermore, this finale caps a season that has included some of the most provocative, challenging, and enduring films ever made. From Stanley Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange to William Friedkin's The French Connection, the 1971 bracket has consistently rewarded listeners willing to sit with difficult, boundary-pushing work. The season also covered Straw Dogs, Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song, and Dirty Harry — each one generating strong arguments before falling short of the Elite Eight. Additionally, five competitive award categories — Best Sex, Best Violence, Musical Moment, Best Actor, and Best Actress — draw nominees from across the full season. Consequently, this episode stands as the richest and most content-dense installment of the year. ContentsThe Elite Eight MatchupsThe 1971 AwardsWhy the 1971 Film Finale Podcast Still MattersRelated EpisodesFAQ The Elite Eight MatchupsEight films enter. One leaves as the 1971 champion. The Taste Buds structured the Elite Eight around four head-to-head matchups, and each one forces a different kind of critical argument. A Clockwork Orange vs. The DevilsTwo of the year's most transgressive films meet in the first matchup. A Clockwork Orange arrived as a season-long frontrunner — a Kubrick film operating at the height of his formal powers, one that the Taste Buds covered in depth on their dedicated episode. Ken Russell's The Devils, meanwhile, delivers a fever dream of religious hysteria and state violence that stands as one of the most divisive films the Taste Buds have discussed all season. Moreover, this matchup poses a pointed question: which film earns its provocation more honestly? Both demand something from the viewer. However, only one advances. Harold and Maude vs. McCabe and Mrs. MillerHarold and Maude represents the season's most warmly beloved film — a dark comedy about love, death, and radical living that generated some of the most enthusiastic podcast discussion of the year. By contrast, Robert Altman's McCabe and Mrs. Miller offers a revisionist Western suffused with melancholy and moral exhaustion, its beauty inseparable from its grief. Both films carry passionate advocates among the Taste Buds. Consequently, this matchup ranks among the tightest and most personal bracket debates of the entire season. Above all, it asks whether warmth or ache makes the stronger lasting impression. Wanda vs. The ConformistBarbara Loden's Wanda — a micro-budget American independent masterwork — faces Bernardo Bertolucci's The Conformist, a visually ravishing Italian political drama. Notably, both films center on characters adrift in systems designed to diminish them. Nevertheless, they arrive at very different emotional endpoints: Wanda drifts, the Conformist spirals. The Taste Buds' arguments in this matchup reveal as much about their own critical values as about the films themselves. In practice, this is the bracket's most purely cinephile debate. The French Connection vs. The Last Picture ShowThe bracket's most commercially dominant film — The French Connection, winner of five Academy Awards including Best Picture — faces Peter Bogdanovich's elegiac The Last Picture Show. In practice, this matchup pits Hollywood's muscular genre filmmaking against its more introspective New Wave ambitions. As a result, the debate cuts to the heart of what 1971 cinema actually achieved. Gene Hackman's Popeye Doyle and the dusty streets of Anarene, Texas, represent two entirely different ideas of what a great film should do — and the Taste Buds have strong opinions on which idea wins. The 1971 AwardsBefore the bracket champion is named, the Taste Buds present five awards covering the full sweep of the season. This Movie of the Year 1971 podcast segment features each host nominating the moments they found most memorable, daring, or essential — and the resulting field spans an extraordinary range of films and tones. Best SexThe nominees range from the tender to the violent to the surreal, drawing from three different films and three distinct registers of human sexuality. Jacy and Abilene — The Last Picture ShowThe Pool Party — The Last Picture ShowThe Rape of Christ — The DevilsThe Sex Duel with the Biker Gang — Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss SongYoung Sweetback and the Sex Worker — Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song Best ViolenceThe nominees span the full tonal range of 1971 action filmmaking — from Dirty Harry's iconic bank robbery standoff to the slow, aching finality of McCabe dying alone in the snow. The Car Chase — The French ConnectionHarry Foils a Bank Robbery — Dirty HarryThe Kid Kills the Cowboy — McCabe and Mrs. MillerThe Ludovico Technique — A Clockwork OrangeMcCabe Dies Alone in the Snow — McCabe and Mrs. Miller Musical MomentThe nominees here demonstrate just how varied 1971's soundtrack was — Cat Stevens, Beethoven, and Gene Wilder all make the shortlist. Maude Sings "If You Want to Sing Out, Sing Out" — Harold and MaudeOpening Funeral March — A Clockwork Orange"Pure Imagination" — Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory"Singin' in the Rain" — A Clockwork OrangeThe Tango — The Conformist Best Actor The five nominees represent the full range of 1971 male performance — from Hackman's coiled rage to Wilder's heartbreaking wonder. Additionally, this category generated some of the most contested debates in the entire 1971 film podcast season. Warren Beatty — McCabe and Mrs. MillerGene Hackman — The French ConnectionOliver Reed — The DevilsJean-Louis Trintignant — The ConformistGene Wilder — a...

    1h 4m

  6. May 7

    1971 - The Finale, Part II

    Movie of the Year: 1971The Finale, Part IIThe 1971 Film Bracket Podcast Reaches the Elite EightThis 1971 film bracket podcast returns with its most dramatic episode yet. Ryan, Mike, and Greg — the Taste Buds — work through the bottom half of the Sweet 16, producing four matchups that nobody saw coming. Furthermore, the episode hands out two major awards: Comedic Performance and Biggest S******d. The results set the stage for Part III, where the Elite Eight will be whittled down to a single 1971 champion. If you missed Part I of the finale, start there first. The bracket has been full of upsets throughout the season. Consequently, no outcome here should be taken for granted. The Sweet 16: Bottom Half of the 1971 Film BracketThe bottom half of the 1971 Sweet 16 is stacked. These four matchups pit some of the most beloved and argued-over films in the entire bracket against one another. Moreover, the range of cinema on display — from Hollywood blockbusters to European art films to New Hollywood grit — illustrates exactly why 1971 is one of the most fertile film years ever put to a bracket. The Taste Buds debate each matchup using their standard evaluative framework: craft, cultural impact, rewatchability, and gut feeling. Above all, they trust their instincts — and their instincts have produced surprises at every turn this season. Tune in to find out which four films advance to the Elite Eight. Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory vs. WandaThis matchup pits one of cinema's most beloved fantasies against one of its most criminally underseen gems. Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory needs little introduction — Gene Wilder's performance alone has kept it in the cultural conversation for over fifty years. Nevertheless, Wanda is no pushover. Barbara Loden's Wanda (1971) is a raw, naturalistic landmark of American independent cinema, and its inclusion in the bracket has been a point of pride for whoever seeded it. This is a clash of tone, scale, and intention. One film is a spectacle engineered for maximum delight. The other strips cinema down to its bones. However, the Taste Buds must pick one — and the pick will tell you something about where their tastes landed by the time the 1971 season reached its final stretch. The French Connection vs. Brian's SongTwo films that defined what mainstream American cinema could do with raw emotional and procedural intensity. The French Connection won the Academy Award for Best Picture in 1971. It features one of the most celebrated car chases in film history and a career-defining performance from Gene Hackman as the relentless, morally compromised Popeye Doyle. Additionally, William Friedkin's direction remains a masterclass in gritty, kinetic storytelling. Brian's Song, meanwhile, hit American living rooms as a TV movie and destroyed everyone who watched it. The story of Gale Sayers and Brian Piccolo remains one of the most emotionally devastating sports films ever made. Notably, the Taste Buds covered both films earlier this season — so this rematch in the 1971 film bracket carries the weight of all those prior arguments. The Last Picture Show vs. KluteTwo of New Hollywood's most enduring films square off here, and neither one will go quietly. The Last Picture Show is Peter Bogdanovich's elegiac black-and-white portrait of a dying Texas town — a film the American Film Institute has called one of the greatest ever made. Furthermore, its ensemble cast, including Jeff Bridges, Cybill Shepherd, Cloris Leachman, and Ben Johnson, delivers some of the finest performances in the bracket. Klute, however, has Jane Fonda. Her performance as Bree Daniels earned her the first of her two Academy Awards, and it remains one of the most psychologically intricate portrayals of a woman in crisis in American cinema. Alan J. Pakula's direction is coiled and paranoid in all the right ways. Consequently, this matchup may be the most difficult call in the entire bracket. The Conformist vs. The Panic in Needle ParkThe final Sweet 16 matchup is the most arthouse of the four — and arguably the most fascinating. Bernardo Bertolucci's The Conformist is a landmark of European cinema. Vittorio Storaro's cinematography is among the most studied in film school history, and the film's meditation on fascism, identity, and moral cowardice has only grown richer with time. You can read more about the film at Roger Ebert's review on RogerEbert.com. The Panic in Needle Park, by contrast, is bracingly American — a gritty, unglamorous portrait of heroin addiction on the streets of New York. It introduced Al Pacino to mainstream audiences. Moreover, Jerry Schatzberg's unflinching direction makes the film feel almost documentary in its honesty. These two films represent opposite ends of world cinema in 1971, and the Taste Buds must choose one. Award: Best Comedic Performance — 1971 Film Bracket PodcastThe Taste Buds hand out individual performance awards throughout the season, and the Comedic Performance category drew a fascinating and eclectic field of nominees. The 1971 bracket is not short on laughs — from the anarchic fantasy of Willy Wonka's chocolate factory to the dark comedy of Harold and Maude. Furthermore, the nominees represent a range of comic registers, from broad physical performance to pitch-black wit. The nominees are: David Battley — Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (Mike's pick)Julie Dawn Cole — Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (Greg's pick)Bud Cort — Harold and Maude (Mike's pick)Michael Gothard — The Devils (Ryan's pick)Gene Wilder — Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (Greg's pick) David Battley's turn as the hapless Mr. Turkentine in Willy Wonka is a masterwork of bewildered reaction comedy. Julie Dawn Cole's Veruca Salt is a full-throttle comic creation — spoiled, relentless, and somehow sympathetic. Additionally, Bud Cort's Harold is a genuinely difficult comic achievement: deadpan to the point of catatonia, yet somehow enormously warm. Michael Gothard's Father Barre in The Devils is Ryan's wild-card choice — a performance of manic, committed intensity that functions as dark comedy whether or not Ken Russell intended it. Meanwhile, Gene Wilder's Willy Wonka remains one of cinema's great comic performances — menacing, whimsical, and deeply strange all at once. The winner is waiting for you in the episode. Award: Biggest S******d of 1971One of the Taste Buds' most beloved recurring awards, the Biggest S******d category recognizes the most memorably awful person — or entity — in the bracket. Notably, this award rewards commitment. Nominees do not simply do bad things. They do bad things with style, conviction, and a complete lack of self-awareness. The nominees are: Baron de Laubardemont — The Devils (Greg's pick)The Lady at Snakearama — Duel (Ryan's pick)The Motorcycle Cop — Harold and Maude (Greg's pick)Mr. Deltoid — A Clockwork Orange (Mike's pick)Veruca Salt — Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (Mike's pick) Baron de Laubardemont, the cold bureaucratic villain of The Devils, brings state-sanctioned cruelty to the category. The Lady at Snakearama from Duel is Ryan's inspired choice — a brief but indelible portrait of someone who simply should not be in this movie. Furthermore, Harold and Maude's Motorcycle Cop is a monument to institutional pettiness. Mr. Deltoid from A Clockwork Orange is a sweaty, oleaginous masterpiece of ineffectual authority — Mike's nomination is well-argued. Veruca Salt, however, may be the category's most pure entry: a child who has elevated wanting things to an art form. The winner, as always, is in the episode. Why This 1971 Film Bracket Podcast Still MattersThe Sweet 16 is where bracket tournaments reveal their true character. By this stage, the obvious candidates are mostly gone. What remains are the films that survived not on reputation alone but on genuine argument. Moreover, the bottom half of the 1971 Sweet 16 contains some of the season's most debated films — which means every matchup result carries real emotional weight. The year 1971 is one of the most remarkable in cinema history. New Hollywood was hitting its stride. European art cinema was pushing form to its limits. Genre filmmaking was getting stranger, darker, and more personal. Consequently, any bracket drawn from this year produces matchups that feel genuinely impossible to call. The Taste Buds do not pretend otherwise — they argue, they agonize, and they vote. Part III is coming. The Elite Eight will determine the Movie of the Year: 1971 champion. Above all, this episode is the last chance to see which films survive before the final reckoning. Subscribe to PopFilter and follow along — the 1971 film...

    53 min

  7. Apr 30

    1971 - The Finale, Part I

    Movie of the Year: 1971The Finale, Part IThe Movie of the Year 1971 Podcast Reaches Its ReckoningThe Movie of the Year 1971 podcast has arrived at its moment of reckoning. Ryan, Mike, and Greg — the Taste Buds — open the three-part finale with a full awards ceremony, a frank assessment of what 1971 means to cinema history, and the first wave of bracket eliminations. Sixteen films entered this season. Not all of them survive Part 1. This is a different kind of episode. There is no single film to defend or dissect. Instead, the Taste Buds are doing something harder: accounting for an entire year, making choices that cannot be unmade, and sending some of the finest films ever made home without a championship. The bracket is merciless. So, it turns out, is 1971. Part 2 continues the eliminations next week. Part 3 crowns the champion the week after. However, before any of that — the awards begin. About This Season: Sixteen Films, One ChampionThe Movie of the Year podcast runs a bracket-style competition each season, selecting the best film from a given year. This season, the Taste Buds covered sixteen films from across the full spectrum of 1971 cinema — studio blockbusters, guerrilla filmmaking, European art cinema, and Hollywood at its most unguarded. The field represents not just a great year in film, but an ongoing argument about what movies are for. The sixteen contenders are: A Clockwork Orange — Stanley KubrickSweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song — Melvin Van PeeblesThe Devils — Ken RussellDuel — Steven SpielbergHarold and Maude — Hal AshbyStraw Dogs — Sam PeckinpahDirty Harry — Don SiegelMcCabe & Mrs. Miller — Robert AltmanWilly Wonka and the Chocolate Factory — Mel StuartWanda — Barbara LodenThe Conformist — Bernardo BertolucciThe Panic in Needle Park — Jerry SchatzbergThe French Connection — William FriedkinBrian's Song — Buzz KulikThe Last Picture Show — Peter BogdanovichKlute — Alan J. Pakula For every episode from this season, visit the Movie of the Year podcast archive on PopFilter. What Does 1971 Mean to the Movies?Before any film is eliminated, the Taste Buds take a step back and ask the question the whole season has been building toward: what does 1971 actually mean to the history of cinema? The short answer is that 1971 is the year movies stopped asking permission. The Production Code was dead, and New Hollywood was at full velocity. The studios were desperate. The filmmakers who had spent the late 1960s learning a new visual language were suddenly free to use it without restraint. Consequently, the films of 1971 are not polished products. They are arguments — about violence, about sexuality, about power, and about who gets to survive. Moreover, 1971 is uniquely international in its ambitions. Bertolucci's The Conformist brought a European grammar of fascism and desire to mainstream audiences. Meanwhile, Melvin Van Peebles made Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song entirely outside the studio system — financing it with his own money and changing the economics of Black independent filmmaking permanently. These were not films that happened alongside American culture. They actively reshaped it. Furthermore, the year produced an unusual number of films that resist a single reading. Dirty Harry is simultaneously a fascist power fantasy and a critique of one. Straw Dogs refuses to let its audience off the hook. The French Connection makes a hero out of a man who may not deserve the title. As a result, 1971 is defined not by its answers but by the quality of its questions. Above all, the Taste Buds argue that 1971 matters because it remains unresolved. These films are still being debated, still being taught, still being felt. That is the mark of a year that did something real — and the reason a bracket this competitive is so hard to close. Movie of the Year 1971 Podcast Awards: Best Supporting ActressThe first award of the finale is Best Supporting Actress. The nominees represent five performances that each, in their own way, stole scenes from films that were already remarkable. Notably, two nominees come from the same film — a testament to how fully The Last Picture Show populated its world with fully realized human beings. The nominees for Best Supporting Actress are: Ellen Burstyn — The Last Picture ShowCloris Leachman — The Last Picture ShowJulie Dawn Cole — Willy Wonka and the Chocolate FactoryVivian Pickles — Harold and MaudeStefania Sandrelli — The Conformist Historically, the Academy nominated both Burstyn and Leachman at the 1972 Oscars — and Leachman won. However, the Taste Buds are not the Academy. Their winner reflects their own criteria, their own arguments, and a full season of watching these performances in context. Who walks away with the award? Listen to the episode to find out. Movie of the Year 1971 Podcast Awards: Best Supporting ActorThe second award is Best Supporting Actor — a category that reads, in 1971, like a catalog of actors doing the most demanding and least comfortable work of their careers. The nominees include debut-level performances and career-defining turns alike. The competition is, by any measure, extraordinary. The nominees for Best Supporting Actor are: Dudley Sutton — The DevilsMichael Gothard — The DevilsJeff Bridges — The Last Picture ShowBen Johnson — The Last Picture ShowGastone Moschin — The Conformist Ben Johnson's Sam the Lion is among the most quietly devastating performances in American film — a man who embodies everything a dying town loved and then lost. Jeff Bridges, in his first major role, announced his entire career in a single film. Gastone Moschin made fascist complicity feel not monstrous but ordinary, which is considerably more frightening. The Devils, meanwhile, sent both its nominees into material that demanded everything an actor has. To find out who wins, listen to the episode. The Eliminations: The Bracket Does Not ForgiveThe awards are only half of Part 1 of the Movie of the Year 1971 podcast finale. The other half is the bracket — and the bracket is not sentimental. In this episode, the Taste Buds make the first wave of cuts. Films that have defined the conversation all season, films that generated genuine argument and genuine love, are sent home. This is the nature of the format. Nevertheless, that does not make it easy. 1971 is not a year with obvious fodder. Every film in this bracket earned its place. Consequently, every elimination in this finale is a real loss — and a real statement about what the Taste Buds believe cinema can do at its best. Which films survive? Which ones go home in Part 1? That, you will have to hear for yourself. Parts 2 and 3 continue the process — and by the end of the three-part finale, only one film from 1971 will be left standing. Why the Movie of the Year 1971 Podcast Finale MattersA season finale is never just a conclusion. It is an act of criticism — a declaration about what mattered, what lasted, and what deserves to be remembered. The Movie of the Year 1971 podcast finale is doing that work for one of the most important years in the history of film. Furthermore, the bracket format makes that work visible in a way that traditional film criticism rarely does. The Taste Buds cannot hedge. They cannot say everything is great and leave it there. They have to rank, eliminate, and ultimately choose. In doing so, they reveal something true about how they experience cinema — and they invite every listener to push back. Above all, this three-part finale is a love letter to a year that refused to behave. 1971 did not make comfortable films. It did not offer easy consolations. It asked audiences to look directly at things they would have preferred to avoid. The Taste Buds have been doing the same thing all season. Now, in three parts, they are going to decide which film did it best — and which one deserves to be called the Movie of the Year. Related Episodes from Movie of the Year: 1971a...

    1h 18m

  8. Apr 23

    1971 - Straw Dogs (feat. Erik from the Cradle to the Grave pod!)

    Movie of the Year: 1971Straw Dogs (feat. Erik from the Cradle to the Grave pod!)The Straw Dogs Podcast: Peckinpah's Most Dangerous FilmThe Straw Dogs podcast episode of Movie of the Year confronts one of 1971's most debated, disturbing, and relentlessly provocative films — Sam Peckinpah's psychological siege thriller starring Dustin Hoffman and Susan George. Ryan, Mike, and Greg are joined by Erik Hanson of the Cradle to the Grave podcast. Together, they examine the film's violence, its contested rape scene, and the gender dynamics at the heart of Peckinpah's vision. Consequently, no other episode this season demands more from its hosts — or from its audience. Moreover, the 1971 film Straw Dogs arrived in remarkable company. A Clockwork Orange, Dirty Harry, and The French Connection all hit theaters the same year — forming a cluster of films that fundamentally altered what Hollywood was willing to show. Furthermore, Straw Dogs distinguished itself from all of them. Filmed entirely in a Cornish village, it replaced the city's noise with something quieter and more suffocating. Ultimately, it is a film that has never stopped demanding conversation — and that is exactly what the Taste Buds deliver. About the FilmSam Peckinpah directed Straw Dogs (1971), starring Dustin Hoffman as David Sumner, a mild-mannered American mathematician who relocates with his English wife Amy (Susan George) to her rural hometown in Cornwall. David hires local men to repair their farmhouse. Almost immediately, however, the couple faces escalating harassment, intimidation, and violence from the villagers — including Amy's former boyfriend Charlie (Del Henney). Peckinpah and screenwriter David Zelag Goodman adapted the film from Gordon M. Williams's 1969 novel The Siege of Trencher's Farm. Peckinpah famously dismissed the source material. The film builds to a harrowing siege in which David, pushed past every limit, defends his home with escalating brutality. Additionally, the title derives from the Tao Te Ching, which describes straw dogs as ceremonial objects — used briefly, then discarded without feeling. The Criterion Collection edition includes a discussion of this symbolism in its supplemental materials. Released theatrically in the UK in November 1971, the film earned a nomination for the Academy Award for Best Original Score. It was later issued as a Criterion Collection release featuring new critical scholarship. The British Film Institute also maintains an entry on the film. The British Board of Film Classification banned it for home video release for years after its UK theatrical run. Guest Panelist: Erik HansonJoining the Taste Buds for this Sam Peckinpah film discussion is Erik Hanson, the creator and host of Cradle to the Grave — a horror movie podcast built around a distinctive structural premise. Starting with 1971, his own birth year, Erik ranks and discusses his Top 10 horror films from every year of his life, covering each in depth with rotating guests. The show has developed a devoted following for Erik's knowledgeable, laid-back, and genuinely funny approach to the genre. In addition to podcasting, Erik is the author of Death Machine, a debut horror novel set in 1987 Northern California that reimagines the Zodiac Killer returning to terrorize a group of kids. Based in Sacramento, California, Erik is also a musician. His work across fiction and podcasting reflects a lifelong relationship with horror that goes well beyond fandom and into genuine craft. Notably, the fact that Cradle to the Grave begins precisely with 1971 makes Erik an especially fitting guest for a deep dive into one of that year's most unsettling films. You can pick up Death Machine on Amazon. Peckinpah and Violence: A Director Pushed to the EdgeBy 1971, Sam Peckinpah had already established himself as Hollywood's most uncompromising chronicler of violence. The Wild Bunch (1969) had rewritten the grammar of the Western, deploying slow-motion carnage in a way that made violence impossible to process cleanly. Straw Dogs, however, moved in a very different direction. Furthermore, Warner Bros. had effectively exiled Peckinpah from Hollywood following a chaotic falling out, which is why he filmed this Straw Dogs 1971 production entirely in England, far from his natural terrain. The violence in Straw Dogs is not operatic like The Wild Bunch. Instead, it is domestic, intimate, and deeply uncomfortable. Peckinpah builds menace through accumulation — small humiliations, loaded glances, minor intrusions — before releasing it all in the siege. Additionally, the film implicates the audience in David's rampage by making it feel, at least in the moment, cathartic. That troubling catharsis is entirely the point. As a result, the Straw Dogs podcast discussion centers on Peckinpah's central question: whether violence is ever truly civilized, or whether it simply waits beneath the surface of every man who believes he is better than it. Roger Ebert, writing for the Chicago Sun-Times in 1971, gave the film two stars and called it a film committed to the pornography of violence while laying on moral outrage with a shovel — a dissent worth hearing even for those who disagree. The Rape Scene: Context, Controversy, and CriticismNo discussion of Straw Dogs is complete without addressing its most contested sequence. Charlie, her former boyfriend, first assaults Amy — then a second attacker follows. What makes the scene so difficult to analyze is the way Peckinpah films the first assault. Many critics interpreted Amy's shifting emotional response during the rape as suggesting consent or complicity. That reading fueled decades of fierce feminist criticism of the Sam Peckinpah film. Moreover, the British Board of Film Classification rejected the film for home video release for years, specifically over this content. The studio cut the scene for the US release to secure an R rating. Susan George has spoken in interviews about her complex relationship to the role and the sequence. Notably, film scholar Linda Williams frames the film within the longer history of misogynistic representation in cinema. Her analysis appears in the Criterion Collection release. She argues that Straw Dogs belongs in conversation with works that are technically significant but ethically compromised. Consequently, the scene is not a matter of simple condemnation or simple defense. It is the central wound around which the entire film's meaning turns, and the Taste Buds treat it accordingly. David, Amy, and Gender in Straw Dogs 1971At its core, Straw Dogs is a film about masculinity in crisis. David Sumner is an intellectual — passive, avoidant, and seemingly incapable of the physical authority the Cornish village treats as natural male behavior. The film, however, refuses to position his bookishness as a virtue. Dustin Hoffman understood his character as a man who unconsciously provokes the violence around him — a pacifist whose repressed aggression the siege finally unlocks. Amy occupies an equally impossible position. The film's gaze codes her as provocative — bare feet, no bra, conspicuous in the village — while simultaneously punishing her for that very visibility. Nevertheless, Susan George's performance introduces ambiguity and depth that the script does not always earn on its own. The dynamic between David and Amy is as much a source of tension as the men gathering outside. They seem genuinely ill-suited and miscommunicate constantly. Above all, Straw Dogs asks what gender roles cost everyone involved. Specifically, the film suggests that masculinity, however dormant, will ultimately assert itself through violence. That is Peckinpah's most unsettling argument — and one that the A Clockwork Orange episode of Movie of the Year covers from a very different angle. Career Retrospective: Dustin HoffmanBy the time the Straw Dogs podcast era film was released in 1971, Dustin Hoffman had already fundamentally changed what a movie star could look like. His breakthrough in The Graduate (1967) — neurotic, unhandsome, deeply searching — made him a voice for a generation that distrusted certainty. Midnight Cowboy (1969) proved he could disappear entirely into character, earning his first Academy Award nomination. Little Big Man (1970) demonstrated his ability to age through an entire life on screen. Straw Dogs, therefore, marks something different in his catalog: not charm or pathos, but something colder and harder to forgive. Hoffman's Career After...

    1h 51m
See All (214)

4.4
out of 5
14 Ratings

About

Movie of the Year is on the hunt to find the best film of each and every year, in the only way that matters: brackets. Join Greg, Mike, and Ryan, as they discuss what makes a film matter now vs when it came out. There will be games. There will be drinks. There will be points. There will only be one Movie of the Year. ", "Movie of the Year is on the hunt to find the best film of each and every year, in the only way that matters: brackets. Join Greg, Mike, and Ryan, as they discuss what makes a film matter now vs when it came out. There will be games. There will be drinks. There will be points. There will only be one Movie of the Year.

Information

  • Creator
    YourPopFilter.com
  • Years Active
    2018 - 2026
  • Episodes
    214
  • Rating
    Explicit
  • Copyright
    © 2022 Movie of the Year
  • Show Website
    Movie of the Year

You Might Also Like