Movie of the Year

The Letters from Iwo Jima Podcast Enters the 2006 Bracket Welcome to the Letters from Iwo Jima podcast episode from Movie of the Year: 2006. This week, Ryan, Mike, and Greg take on Clint Eastwood's Japanese-language war film. The movie tells the story of the Battle of Iwo Jima from the side that lost it. Moreover, it arrived just two months after Eastwood's own Flags of Our Fathers, which showed the same fight through American eyes. As a result, the Taste Buds have plenty to unpack. Specifically, they debate the general who planned the defense, the baker who tried to survive it, and the American filmmaker who brought both to the screen. They also explore the real letters that gave the film its title. Notably, the season has already featured heavy hitters like Almodóvar's Volver and Little Miss Sunshine. Therefore, this war epic faces stiff competition. Can a quiet, grief-soaked combat film earn a deep run in the Movie of the Year 2006 bracket? About the Film Letters from Iwo Jima premiered in Japan on December 9, 2006. Warner Bros. then opened it in limited U.S. release on December 20 to qualify for the Oscars. Iris Yamashita wrote the screenplay from a story she developed with Paul Haggis. Meanwhile, Steven Spielberg co-produced alongside Eastwood and Robert Lorenz. The story opens in 2005, when Japanese archaeologists explore the island's tunnels and find something buried. From there, the film jumps back to 1944. General Tadamichi Kuribayashi arrives to command a doomed garrison. He orders his men to stop digging beach trenches and to tunnel into the mountains instead. Consequently, the Marines who land on the island face a hidden, underground enemy. The film earned four Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture and Best Director. Ultimately, it won the Oscar for Best Sound Editing. It also took the Golden Globe for Best Foreign Language Film. For the full production history, visit the film's Wikipedia page or its IMDb listing. Kuribayashi and Saigo on the Letters from Iwo Jima Podcast Ken Watanabe plays Kuribayashi with calm, weary authority. The real general spent time in the United States as a young officer in the late 1920s. As a result, he knew exactly how much industrial power Japan was up against. The film treats that knowledge as quiet tragedy. Kuribayashi fights a battle he expects to lose, and he fights it smartly anyway. Saigo gives the film its ground-level view. Kazunari Ninomiya, a member of the Japanese pop group Arashi, plays the conscripted baker. Saigo misses his wife and his shop. Furthermore, he openly grumbles about the island, which nearly earns him a beating. Unlike Kuribayashi, Saigo is a fictional character. However, he stands in for every ordinary soldier who never chose this war. On the Letters from Iwo Jima podcast, the Taste Buds dig into how these two men mirror each other. Kuribayashi saves Saigo's life more than once. In return, Saigo carries out the general's final request. Additionally, the panel discusses Baron Nishi, played by Tsuyoshi Ihara. Nishi was a real Olympic gold medalist in show jumping. His scenes with a wounded Marine give the film one of its most humane moments. By contrast, officers like Lieutenant Ito cling to the suicidal code Kuribayashi rejects. The film lets these philosophies collide inside the caves. In practice, honor itself becomes the real battleground. An American Director Tells a Japanese Story Clint Eastwood built his legend as the Man with No Name and Dirty Harry. So how did that icon end up directing a film almost entirely in Japanese? The Taste Buds wrestle with that question directly. Eastwood shot the movie back to back with Flags of Our Fathers. Most of the production took place in Barstow and Bakersfield, California. Additionally, Ken Watanabe filmed some scenes on Iwo Jima itself. The crew needed special permission from the Tokyo Metropolitan Government to work there. The island still holds the remains of more than 10,000 missing Japanese soldiers. In Japan, the film became a major hit and spent five weeks at number one. Notably, Japanese critics praised its use of native Japanese actors. Earlier Hollywood films often cast non-Japanese performers in Japanese roles. Consequently, those films often sounded wrong to Japanese audiences. Eastwood's film avoided that trap. Still, the panel asks harder questions too. Can an American filmmaker fully grasp the Japanese experience of this war? Moreover, does the film soften the realities of imperial Japan? Aaron Gerow's essay on Eastwood's balancing of perspectives offers useful context. Meanwhile, Jim Emerson's review at RogerEbert.com captures the film's stark visual power. Listen to hear where each Taste Bud lands. The Actual Letters Behind the Letters from Iwo Jima 2006 Podcast The title is literal. The film draws on Picture Letters from the Commander in Chief, a collection of Kuribayashi's real correspondence. Tsuyuko Yoshida edited the volume, and Shogakukan published it in Japan in 2002. The production also drew on Kumiko Kakehashi's book So Sad to Fall in Battle, which reached English readers in 2007. Kuribayashi wrote home often. As the collection's title suggests, many of his letters included his own small drawings. Furthermore, his messages from the island dwelt on ordinary family matters rather than glory. That gentle voice shaped Watanabe's performance. The Taste Buds explore how the film turns these documents into its emotional spine. Soldiers read letters aloud in the dark. Others write letters they will never send. Additionally, a letter from an American mother changes how Nishi's men see their enemy. Ultimately, the buried bag from the 2005 prologue pays off in the final scene, and the dead finally speak. For listeners who want more of the season, the 2006 season intro explains how the Taste Buds built this year's field. Genre Blast: The War Movie In Genre Blast, the Taste Buds step back and look at a film's genre as a whole. This week, that means the war movie. Letters from Iwo Jima sits in a long line of World War II combat films. Specifically, it arrived eight years after Saving Private Ryan reset the genre's standard for battlefield violence. However, Eastwood takes a different approach. Cinematographer Tom Stern drains most of the color from the image. Much of the action also stays inside cramped tunnels. As a result, the film often feels closer to a chamber drama than a combat spectacle. Tune in to hear how the panel sizes it up against the genre's greats. Why Letters from Iwo Jima Still Matters Two decades later, Letters from Iwo Jima still stands apart. Few Hollywood war films tell their story entirely from the enemy's side. Moreover, few manage it with this much respect. The National Board of Review named it the best film of 2006. Critics have kept returning to it ever since. The film also remains a high point of Eastwood's late career. Above all, it asks a question that never ages. What does a soldier owe his country, and what does he owe his family? That question makes it ideal bracket material for Movie of the Year: 2006. Related Episodes from Movie of the Year: 2006 Movie of the Year 2006: Intro Part 1 The Movies of 2006 Bracket Reveal 2006 Mixtape Part I Volver Podcast: Movie of the Year 2006 Little Miss Sunshine Podcast: Movie of the Year 2006 Browse Every Movie of the Year Episode FAQ: Letters from Iwo Jima Podcast and Film What is the Letters from Iwo Jima podcast episode about? In this episode, Ryan, Mike, and Greg debate Clint Eastwood's 2006 war film for the Movie of the Year 2006 bracket. They discuss Kuribayashi and Saigo, Eastwood's approach as an American director, and the real letters behind the story. The episode also includes a Genre Blast segment on war movies. What is Letters from Iwo Jima about? The film depicts the 1945 Battle of Iwo Jima from the Japanese perspective. General Kuribayashi leads a doomed garrison against an American invasion. Meanwhile, a young baker named Saigo simply tries to survive and return to his family. Who directed Letters from Iwo Jima? Clint Eastwood directed the film. He also co-produced it with Steven Spielberg and Robert Lorenz. Iris Yamashita wrote the screenplay from a story by Yamashita and Paul Haggis. Is Letters from Iwo Jima based on a true story? Yes, in large part. The battle and several commanders, including Kuribayashi and Baron Nishi, are real. The film also draws on Kuribayashi's actual letters to his family. However, some characters, including Saigo, are fictional. More Letters from Iwo Jima Questions Was Saigo a real person? No. Saigo is a fictional character. Nevertheless, he represents the many ordinary conscripts who fought and died on Iwo Jima. How is Letters from Iwo Jima connected to Flags of Our Fathers? Eastwood made the two films as companion pieces and shot them back to back. Flags of Our Fathers shows the battle from the American side. By contrast, Letters from Iwo Jima tells it from the Japanese side. You can watch them in either order. Why is Letters from Iwo Jima in Japanese? Eastwood wanted the Japanese soldiers to speak in their own language. Therefore, the film plays almost entirely in Japanese with English subtitles. Native Japanese actors fill nearly every major role. Why does Letters from Iwo Jima still matter? It remains one of the few Hollywood war films told entirely from the enemy's point of view. Furthermore, it treats both sides with empathy. That humane approach keeps it relevant two decades later. Where can I listen to Movie of the Year? Movie of the Year streams on all major podcast platforms through the PopFilter network. Additionally, full episodes and archives live at popfilter.co.

Movie of the Year: 2006 The Departed (feat Adam Kempenaar!) Inside The Departed Podcast Episode Welcome to The Departed podcast episode of Movie of the Year: 2006, where the Taste Buds take on Martin Scorsese's Boston crime epic. Ryan, Mike, and Greg welcome Filmspotting co-host Adam Kempenaar to the panel. Together, they dig into a film about cops, crooks, and the men who raise them. Moreover, the conversation covers fatherhood, gender, and the rough racial politics of Scorsese's South Boston. Additionally, the crew delivers a Career Retrospective on Leonardo DiCaprio, the jittery star at the film's center. Ultimately, the episode asks whether this Best Picture winner still earns its reputation twenty years later. New to the season? Start with our Movie of the Year 2006 intro episode, then catch up on the full 2006 bracket reveal. About the Film: The Departed (2006) The Departed opened in theaters on October 6, 2006. Martin Scorsese directed, and William Monahan wrote the screenplay. Specifically, Monahan adapted the 2002 Hong Kong thriller Infernal Affairs. The story follows two moles working on opposite sides of the law. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Billy Costigan, an undercover cop inside the Irish mob. Meanwhile, Matt Damon plays Colin Sullivan, a mob plant rising through the Massachusetts State Police. Jack Nicholson rules over both men as crime boss Frank Costello. Notably, the supporting cast includes Mark Wahlberg, Martin Sheen, Vera Farmiga, Alec Baldwin, and Ray Winstone. The film became a major critical and commercial hit, earning more than $290 million worldwide. In addition, it won four Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay. Scorsese finally won Best Director after five earlier nominations. Thelma Schoonmaker also took home Best Film Editing. Roger Ebert gave the film four stars in his original RogerEbert.com review. For full cast and crew credits, visit The Departed on IMDb. Guest Panelist: Adam Kempenaar Adam Kempenaar co-founded Filmspotting, one of the longest-running film podcasts in the medium. He launched the show in March 2005 with Sam Van Hallgren. Since 2012, he has co-hosted alongside Josh Larsen. Filmspotting has now passed 1,000 episodes and has also aired on WBEZ in Chicago. Furthermore, Kempenaar teaches at the University of Iowa, where his courses cover film criticism, sports and cinema, and podcasting. He is also a longtime member of the Chicago Film Critics Association. Additionally, he consults on marketing and content for the Chicago International Film Festival. For twenty years, he also led marketing and content for the Chicago Blackhawks. In 2025, he and Larsen celebrated two decades of the show with the first Filmspotting Fest in Chicago. Notably, Filmspotting was barely a year old when The Departed opened. That timing gives Adam a rare firsthand view of the 2006 film conversation. Find his reviews, Top 5 lists, and Sacred Cow episodes at filmspotting.net. Father Figures on The Departed Podcast Fathers haunt every corner of The Departed. Costello grooms young Colin Sullivan from childhood, handing him groceries and shaping his loyalty. By contrast, Billy Costigan grows up with a dead father and a family split between Southie and the North Shore. Captain Queenan, played by Martin Sheen, becomes the steady parent Billy never had. Consequently, Queenan's death lands as the emotional turning point of the film. Meanwhile, Sullivan chases approval from every authority figure around him, from Costello to Ellerby. The film even closes on an open paternity question surrounding Madolyn's pregnancy. The panel digs into how Monahan's script treats the police and the mob as rival families. In practice, both institutions recruit sons, reward obedience, and punish betrayal. Above all, the Taste Buds and Adam ask which surrogate father does the most damage. Gender and Masculinity in The Departed The Departed is a crowded film about men performing toughness. Cops trade insults about each other's mothers, sexuality, and manhood. Costello, meanwhile, treats women as property and punchlines. Against that backdrop, Vera Farmiga's Madolyn stands nearly alone as a major female character. Interestingly, Monahan built her from two separate women in Infernal Affairs, one for each mole. As a result, she becomes the hinge between Billy and Colin. That choice raises real questions for the panel. Is Madolyn a fully realized character, or a device that links the two leads? Additionally, the crew considers how Sullivan's private failures mirror his fractured identity. The conversation also weighs whether Scorsese critiques this macho culture or simply enjoys it. Boston, Race, and Tribalism: The Departed 2006 Podcast Debate Scorsese sets his story in South Boston, a neighborhood with a fraught racial history. Costello opens the film with a monologue about the Irish, the Italians, and Black Bostonians. Throughout the film, characters toss slurs as casually as they throw punches. Nevertheless, the panel debates what the film actually says about that bigotry. On one hand, the dialogue captures the tribal loyalties behind decades of city tension, including the 1970s busing crisis. On the other hand, some viewers argue the film treats ethnic insults as local color rather than subject. Furthermore, Costello's crew and the state police both run on in-group loyalty and suspicion of outsiders. Therefore, that tribalism powers the entire mole plot. The Taste Buds and Adam ask whether the film interrogates Boston's prejudices or leans on them for authenticity. Career Retrospective: Leonardo DiCaprio This episode also features a Career Retrospective on Leonardo DiCaprio. The Departed marked his third collaboration with Scorsese, following Gangs of New York and The Aviator. Notably, 2006 was a banner year for him, and Blood Diamond earned him a Best Actor nomination that season. His early work stretches from This Boy's Life and What's Eating Gilbert Grape to Titanic. Later highlights include Catch Me If You Can, Inception, Django Unchained, and The Wolf of Wall Street. DiCaprio finally won the Best Actor Oscar for The Revenant. Since then, he has worked again with Quentin Tarantino, Scorsese, and Paul Thomas Anderson. In total, he has made six feature films with Scorsese. The panel walks through the full filmography, from child actor to elder statesman. However, you will have to listen to hear how the Taste Buds and Adam rank his work. Why The Departed Still Matters The Departed endures as the film that finally won Scorsese his Oscar. Moreover, it proved a Hollywood remake of a Hong Kong crime film could stand on its own. Its double-agent structure still echoes through crime thrillers and prestige television. Additionally, its performances remain endlessly quotable, especially Wahlberg's profane Sergeant Dignam. Alongside Mystic River and Gone Baby Gone, it helped define the Boston crime cycle of the 2000s. Ultimately, the film still sparks arguments about Scorsese's best work. Those arguments make it perfect bracket material for Movie of the Year: 2006. Related Episodes from Movie of the Year: 2006 Movie of the Year 2006: Intro Part 1 The Movies of 2006 Bracket Reveal 2006 Mixtape Part I Browse every Movie of the Year episode FAQ: The Departed Podcast and Film What is The Departed podcast episode about? This Movie of the Year: 2006 episode features the Taste Buds and guest Adam Kempenaar discussing Martin Scorsese's The Departed. Topics include father figures, gender, and the film's portrait of race in Boston. The episode also includes a Leonardo DiCaprio Career Retrospective. What is The Departed about? The Departed follows two moles in Boston. Billy Costigan goes undercover inside Frank Costello's Irish mob. Meanwhile, Colin Sullivan secretly works for Costello inside the Massachusetts State Police. Each man races to expose the other first. Who directed The Departed? Martin Scorsese directed The Departed. William Monahan wrote the screenplay, and the film won Scorsese his first Academy Award for Best Director. Is The Departed based on a true story? No, the plot comes from the 2002 Hong Kong film Infernal Affairs. However, Jack Nicholson's Frank Costello draws loose inspiration from real Boston gangster Whitey Bulger. Did The Departed win Best Picture? Yes. The Departed won Best Picture at the 79th Academy Awards. It also won Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay, and Best Film Editing. Why wasn't Leonardo DiCaprio nominated for an Oscar for The Departed? The Academy nominated DiCaprio for Blood Diamond that year instead. Mark Wahlberg earned the film's only acting nomination, for Best Supporting Actor. What does the rat at the end of The Departed mean? The final shot shows a rat crossing Sullivan's balcony railing. It works as a blunt visual joke. The real rat has been inside the building the whole time. Who is guest panelist Adam Kempenaar? Adam Kempenaar co-founded and co-hosts the film podcast Filmspotting. He also teaches film criticism and podcasting at the University of Iowa. Why does The Departed still matter? The film won Scorsese his long-awaited Oscar and defined the 2000s Boston crime movie. Additionally, it remains one of the most quotable and debated crime films of its era. Where can I listen to Movie of the Year? Movie of the Year streams on the PopFilter network. Browse every season on the Movie of the Year episode archive.

Movie of the Year: 2006 Children of Men The Children of Men Podcast from Movie of the Year The Children of Men podcast episode of Movie of the Year takes the Taste Buds to the end of the world. Ryan, Mike, and Greg dive into Alfonso Cuarón's 2006 dystopian thriller. The film imagines a Britain where no child has been born in eighteen years. Furthermore, it turns that bleak premise into one of the most gripping chase movies of the decade. This week, the panel breaks down Cuarón's camerawork and the uneasy bond between Theo and Nigel. Meanwhile, they ask how close the film's future really feels. Additionally, the episode brings two games to the table. Notably, this entry in the 2006 bracket packs plenty of argument into one grim, gorgeous movie. What's in This Episode About Children of Men (2006) Cuarón and Camerawork Theo and Nigel The Future Is Now I Never Metacritic I Didn't Like Dream Blunt Rotation Why Children of Men Still Matters Related Episodes FAQ About Children of Men (2006) Children of Men is a 2006 dystopian thriller co-written and directed by Alfonso Cuarón. The screenplay adapts P. D. James's 1992 novel The Children of Men. The story unfolds in 2027, after nearly two decades of global infertility. Clive Owen stars as Theo Faron, a burned-out former activist who now works a government desk job. His ex-wife Julian, played by Julianne Moore, pulls him into a dangerous mission. Specifically, she needs transit papers for Kee, a young refugee with a secret. Kee is pregnant, and nobody has seen a pregnancy in years. Theo must escort her across a collapsing Britain to a mysterious group called the Human Project. The supporting cast includes Michael Caine, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Pam Ferris, Charlie Hunnam, Danny Huston, and Peter Mullan. Universal released the film in the UK in September 2006 and in the US on Christmas Day. However, it failed to earn back its reported $76 million budget at the box office. Critics responded far more warmly. Roger Ebert gave it a four-star review and praised its convincing performances. Moreover, the film earned three Academy Award nominations, for Adapted Screenplay, Cinematography, and Film Editing. You can explore the full cast and crew on IMDb. Cuarón and Camerawork: The Children of Men Podcast Goes Long Few films of 2006 look anything like Children of Men. Cuarón and cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki built the movie around long, unbroken takes. As a result, the camera rarely lets the audience look away. The Taste Buds start with the famous car ambush. That sequence plays out almost entirely inside a moving vehicle as attackers swarm the road. Notably, the crew used a custom Doggicam rig built into a modified Fiat Multipla. The camera could glide between passengers while a stunt driver steered from a hidden position. In practice, visual effects artists stitched several takes into what looks like one seamless shot. Then comes the battle in the Bexhill refugee camp. Theo runs through gunfire, rubble, and tanks while the camera stays glued to him. At one point, fake blood splatters across the lens. Cuarón reportedly called cut, but the chaos drowned him out. Consequently, the take continued, and the accidental blood stayed in the film. In this Children of Men podcast conversation, the panel asks a key question. Do these long takes deepen the story, or do they show off? Furthermore, we discuss how this style carried into Lubezki's later work on Gravity and The Revenant. Ultimately, the camerawork makes 2027 feel like live news footage. Theo and Nigel: Two Cousins at the End of the World Theo and Nigel share one short scene, yet it lingers long after the credits. Desperate for transit papers, Theo visits his powerful cousin. Danny Huston plays Nigel, a government official who runs the Ark of the Arts. The program collects the world's masterpieces while the rest of civilization burns. For instance, Michelangelo's David stands inside, and Picasso's Guernica hangs beside the dining table. Meanwhile, an inflatable pig floats above Battersea Power Station outside, a nod to Pink Floyd's Animals. The Taste Buds dig into what separates these two men. Everyone in this world has reasons to give up. Theo lost his young son Dylan to a flu pandemic, and grief hollowed him out. By contrast, Nigel copes by hoarding beauty behind locked doors. His teenage son sits at the table, absorbed in a handheld device and barely present. Theo asks his cousin how he keeps going when no one will be left to see the art. Nigel's answer amounts to a shrug. Therefore, the scene frames a central debate. Is Nigel's shelter for culture an act of hope or pure denial? Additionally, we ask whether Theo's real journey starts at that table. Above all, this pairing shows two ways to face the end: comfort or courage. The Future Is Now: A Children of Men 2006 Podcast Look at 2027 Here is a sobering detail. Children of Men takes place in November 2027, which now sits barely a year away. When the film premiered in 2006, that date felt comfortably distant. However, the film turned twenty this month, and its future has nearly arrived. The Taste Buds take stock of what Cuarón imagined and what the real world delivered. The film's Britain is a police state built on fear. Soldiers round up refugees and hold them in cages. Public screens urge citizens to report illegal immigrants. Additionally, a bomb tears through a London coffee shop in the opening scene. News reports claim that every other nation has collapsed. Cuarón deliberately avoided sleek, futuristic design. Instead, he filled 2027 with worn-out cars, aging billboards, and familiar technology. As a result, the world feels less like science fiction and more like next week. Critics have tied the film to real events for two decades. Specifically, writers have linked it to refugee crises, border debates, and falling birth rates. Meanwhile, the panel weighs which predictions landed and which missed the mark. We also compare it to earlier screen dystopias, including the one in our A Clockwork Orange episode from the 1971 season. Ultimately, this segment asks why a twenty-year-old movie still feels like a warning. I Never Metacritic I Didn't Like Our recurring game returns for another round of arguing with the critics. In I Never Metacritic I Didn't Like, the Taste Buds pull up a film's critical profile on Metacritic. Then we put that consensus on trial against our own reactions. Children of Men arrived with strong reviews and plenty of year-end praise. Notably, a few critics still found its politics underdeveloped. So the panel tests whether those high marks hold up twenty years later. Listen to the episode to hear how the critical record fares under Taste Buds cross-examination. Dream Blunt Rotation: Who Would You Party With from Children of Men? Dream Blunt Rotation asks a simple question. Which characters from the film would you most want to kick back with? Children of Men might seem like a tough fit for this game. However, the movie hands us an obvious frontrunner. Michael Caine's Jasper is a retired political cartoonist who grows his own weed in the woods. Caine reportedly drew on his friendship with John Lennon for the role. Meanwhile, Miriam brings a former midwife's calm and a spiritual streak to a grim road trip. Luke and the Fishes, by contrast, might make for a much tenser evening. Each Taste Bud makes a pick and defends it. Naturally, the debate drifts into strange territory fast. Why Children of Men Still Matters Children of Men still matters because its craft and its message remain inseparable. Cuarón uses every long take to trap viewers inside a crisis. Consequently, the audience feels the stakes instead of simply watching them. Notably, its single-take action sequences remain a reference point for filmmakers and film students. Moreover, Cuarón went on to win Best Director Oscars for Gravity and Roma. In 2016, a BBC poll of international critics ranked the film 13th among the best of the 21st century. Above all, hope sits at the center of this Children of Men podcast discussion. A newborn's cry briefly silences a war zone. That single moment explains why audiences keep returning to this bleak masterpiece. For more debates like this, browse the full Movie of the Year archive. Related Episodes from Movie of the Year: 2006 If you enjoyed this Children of Men podcast, catch up on the rest of the 2006 season. These episodes set up the bracket and the year's biggest debates. Movie of the Year 2006: Season Intro Part 1 The Movies of 2006 Bracket Reveal The 2006 Mixtape: Part I From the 1971 Season: A Clockwork Orange Browse Every Movie of the Year Episode FAQ: Children of Men Podcast and Film What is this Children of Men podcast episode about? In this episode, Ryan, Mike, and Greg break down Alfonso Cuarón's 2006 dystopian thriller. Topics include Cuarón's camerawork, the relationship between Theo and Nigel, and how close the film's 2027 now feels. The episode also features two games: I Never Metacritic I Didn't Like and Dream Blunt Rotation. What is Children of Men about? Children of Men follows Theo Faron, a disillusioned former activist in 2027 Britain. Humanity has faced nearly two decades of infertility. Theo agrees to escort Kee, a pregnant refugee, to safety. Along the way, he must survive a violent police state and warring rebel factions. Who directed Children of Men? Alfonso Cuarón directed Children of Men and co-wrote the screenplay. Emmanuel Lubezki served as cinematographer. Cuarón later won Best Director Oscars for Gravity and Roma. Is Children of Men based on a book? Yes. The film adapts P. D. James's 1992 novel The Children of Men. However, the filmmakers changed the story significantly. In the novel, men lose the ability to father children, and Julian becomes pregnant. By contrast, the film makes Kee, a refugee, the expectant mother. Was the car ambush in Children of Men one continuous shot? It looks like one shot, but it isn't quite. The crew filmed with a special camera rig inside a modified car. Visual effects artists then blended several takes into one seamless sequence. Was the blood on the camera lens in Children of Men an accident? Yes. During the Bexhill battle sequence, fake blood splattered onto the lens. Cuarón reportedly called cut, but the noise of the scene drowned him out. The crew kept rolling, and the moment stayed in the final film. What year does Children of Men take place? The film takes place in November 2027. Its story begins when the world's youngest person, an 18-year-old known as Baby Diego, dies. Who plays Nigel in Children of Men? Danny Huston plays Nigel, Theo's cousin and a high-ranking government official. Nigel runs the Ark of the Arts, a program that stores the world's great artworks. Why does Children of Men still matter? Children of Men still matters for its groundbreaking long takes and its vision of a fearful, divided society. Its 2027 setting now feels uncomfortably close. Furthermore, critics continue to rank it among the best films of the 21st century.

The Casino Royale Podcast: Bond Starts Over Welcome to the Casino Royale podcast episode from Movie of the Year: 2006. This week, the Taste Buds sit down at the high-stakes table with Daniel Craig's first mission as 007. Ryan, Mike, and Greg break down why a 53-year-old spy novel became the freshest action movie of 2006. Furthermore, they ask a bigger question. Can a franchise that old truly reinvent itself, or does it just change tuxedos? Casino Royale arrived at a strange moment for Bond. The Pierce Brosnan era had ended with invisible cars and digital tidal waves. Meanwhile, Jason Bourne was proving audiences wanted bruises instead of gadgets. Consequently, the producers went back to the very first Ian Fleming novel and started from zero. The result is a film that still shapes the Movie of the Year conversation about what a reboot should be. About the Film Casino Royale is the 21st official James Bond film and the first to star Daniel Craig. Martin Campbell directed from a screenplay by Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, and Paul Haggis. The story adapts Ian Fleming's 1953 debut novel, the only major Fleming book the official series had never filmed. The plot follows a newly promoted Bond as he earns his double-0 status. After a chase through a Madagascar construction site and a bombing attempt in Miami, he tracks the money to Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen). Le Chiffre is a banker for terrorists who has lost his clients' funds. To recover them, he stages a poker tournament at the Casino Royale in Montenegro. MI6 sends Bond to beat him, alongside treasury agent Vesper Lynd (Eva Green). Judi Dench returns as M, and Jeffrey Wright debuts as Felix Leiter. Casino Royale opened in November 2006 and ran 144 minutes, the longest Bond film at that point. Critics embraced it almost immediately. Roger Ebert, catching up on the film in 2007, awarded it four stars and praised its return to visual clarity. Additionally, the film earned a BAFTA nomination for Craig and grossed roughly $600 million worldwide. More details are available on the film's IMDb page. This Casino Royale podcast episode covers all of that history before the debate begins. New to the season? Start with the 2006 season introduction to hear how the Taste Buds set up the year. A New Bond: Daniel Craig Takes the Tuxedo The first topic on this Casino Royale 2006 podcast is the man himself. When Eon announced Daniel Craig in October 2005, the reaction was ugly. Fans launched protest websites over his blond hair and blunt features. Notably, some tabloids reported that he could not drive a manual car. By contrast, the film opened to some of the best reviews in franchise history. The Taste Buds dig into what Craig actually changed. His Bond bleeds, sweats, and makes mistakes. Above all, he seems dangerous in a way that Brosnan's polished agent never did. The black-and-white cold open tells us everything in two minutes. Specifically, we watch Bond earn his first two kills, and one of them is a brutal bathroom fight rather than a clean shot. The episode also asks whether the film is a reboot, a prequel, or something stranger. Judi Dench carries over as M, so the continuity is deliberately loose. Ultimately, the hosts debate whether that looseness helps or hurts. The famous swimwear shot gets its due, too. Craig rising from the ocean flips the Ursula Andress beach moment from Dr. No, and the film knows it. Vesper Lynd and the Bond Girls of Casino Royale Eva Green's Vesper Lynd is the emotional engine of the film. Consequently, this section of the Casino Royale podcast spends real time on her. Vesper is not a conquest. She is a treasury accountant who matches Bond insult for insult on the train to Montenegro. Moreover, she is the only person in the film who forces him to show weakness. The hosts compare Vesper to the women who came before her. Caterina Murino's Solange fills the more traditional Bond girl role, and the film treats her fate with unusual seriousness. In practice, that contrast is the point. Casino Royale keeps the old glamour but refuses to let it be weightless. The shower scene is the key example. Bond finds Vesper shaking on the bathroom floor after the stairwell fight, still in her evening gown. Rather than seduce her, he sits down in the water beside her. Nevertheless, the film never turns soft. The Venice finale delivers one of the coldest endings in the entire series. Eva Green won the BAFTA Rising Star Award in 2007, and the Taste Buds argue she earned it. Martin Campbell, Parkour, and Poker The third topic on the Casino Royale podcast is the director. Martin Campbell had already saved Bond once. GoldenEye (1995) launched the Brosnan era after a six-year gap. Therefore, bringing him back in 2006 was a statement of intent. The hosts discuss what a Campbell action scene looks like. His camera holds still. His geography is clear. In addition, his stunts are real, which mattered enormously after Die Another Day. The Madagascar chase is the proof. Sébastien Foucan, one of the founders of parkour and free running, plays the bomber Mollaka. He flows over the construction site like water. Bond, however, just crashes through walls. That difference is characterization through stunt work. As a result, the sequence became the most imitated action scene of the decade. Then there is the poker. Fleming's novel used baccarat, but the film switched to Texas hold'em at the height of the poker boom. Specifically, the producers wanted a game audiences actually understood. The hosts break down how the tournament works as a three-act drama inside the larger movie. Bond loses, gets poisoned, nearly dies in the parking lot, and returns to the table. Meanwhile, the stairwell fight and the poisoning keep the stakes physical. The Aston Martin DBS crash even set a Guinness World Record for cannon rolls. State of the Franchise: Bond in 2006 Every season, the Taste Buds step back and check the health of a major series. This time, the Casino Royale 2006 podcast State of the Franchise segment looks at 007 on the eve of Casino Royale. Die Another Day (2002) made money but embarrassed longtime fans. Meanwhile, The Bourne Identity (2002) and Batman Begins (2005) showed that audiences would reward a gritty restart. The hosts trace the corporate side as well. MGM finally secured the rights to the Casino Royale title in 1999 after decades of legal tangles. Furthermore, Sony's purchase of MGM in 2005 brought new studio money and a new marketing push. The segment asks a simple question. In 2006, was Bond a franchise in crisis or a franchise in transition? Notably, the answer shapes how the film should be judged. Listen to the episode to hear where each host lands. For a wider look at how 2006 blockbusters stacked up, revisit the bracket reveal episode. Casino Royale 2006 Podcast Trivia The Trivia segment puts the hosts' Bond knowledge on the line. Some sample questions from this week: Which actor played James Bond on American television in 1954, in the very first Casino Royale adaptation? Which Czech spa town stood in for Montenegro during production? Which rock frontman recorded the theme song "You Know My Name"? Which luxury villa on Lake Como appears as the recovery clinic near the end of the film? How many Bond films had Martin Campbell directed before Casino Royale? Answers, arguments, and at least one wrong guess are all on the episode. Additionally, the hosts settle an old debate about the 1967 David Niven spoof and whether it counts. Why Casino Royale Still Matters Nearly two decades later, Casino Royale remains the template for franchise reinvention. Every studio that has rebooted a hero since has borrowed from it. Specifically, the film proved that audiences will accept a stripped-down origin story if the character still feels dangerous. The Craig era ended with No Time to Die in 2021, and the series has yet to replace him. Consequently, the search for a new Bond keeps sending fans back to this film. It also matters within the 2006 bracket, which is why this Casino Royale podcast episode runs long. Few blockbusters of that year combine craft, star power, and genuine emotion so completely. However, the Taste Buds never hand out free passes. Whether Casino Royale advances or falls is a surprise reserved for the audio. For more from the season, add the 2006 Mixtape to your queue. Related Episodes from Movie of the Year: 2006 Enjoyed the Casino Royale podcast? These earlier 2006 episodes set the table. Movie of the Year 2006: Intro Part 1 Movies of 2006: Bracket Reveal 2006 Mixtape Part I All Movie of the Year episodes FAQ: Casino Royale Podcast and Film What is the Casino Royale podcast episode about? In this Movie of the Year: 2006 episode, Ryan, Mike, and Greg discuss Daniel Craig's debut as Bond, Vesper Lynd and the film's women, Martin Campbell's action direction, the parkour chase, and the poker tournament. The episode also includes a State of the Franchise segment and a round of Trivia. What is Casino Royale (2006) about? A newly promoted James Bond must bankrupt Le Chiffre, a banker for terrorists, by beating him in a high-stakes poker game in Montenegro. Along the way, Bond falls for treasury agent Vesper Lynd, with devastating consequences. Who directed Casino Royale? Martin Campbell directed the film. He also directed GoldenEye in 1995, which launched the Pierce Brosnan era. Is Casino Royale a reboot or a prequel? It is generally described as a reboot. The film shows Bond earning his double-0 status for the first time. However, Judi Dench continues as M from the Brosnan films, so the continuity is intentionally loose. Why did Casino Royale use poker instead of baccarat? Ian Fleming's novel features baccarat. The filmmakers switched to Texas hold'em because the poker boom of the mid-2000s meant far more viewers understood the game. Who played the parkour runner in Casino Royale? Sébastien Foucan, a founder of parkour and free running, played the bomber Mollaka in the Madagascar chase. Was Daniel Craig the first blond James Bond? Yes. Craig's casting drew heavy criticism in 2005, partly over his hair color, but his performance was widely acclaimed once the film opened. Why does Casino Royale still matter? It set the modern standard for rebooting a long-running franchise. The film restored Bond's credibility after Die Another Day and launched the fifteen-year Daniel Craig era. Where can I listen to the Casino Royale podcast? Use the player at the top of this page, or subscribe to Movie of the Year wherever you get podcasts.

Movie of the Year: 2006 Stranger Than Fiction Stranger than Fiction Podcast: Harold Crick Hears a Narrator This week's Stranger than Fiction podcast episode asks a simple question: what happens when a comedy star stops being funny on purpose? In 2006, Will Ferrell stepped away from Ron Burgundy and Ricky Bobby to play Harold Crick, an IRS auditor who hears a British novelist narrating his life. Consequently, the Taste Buds had a lot to untangle. Ryan, Mike, and Greg welcome Cecilia Dillon and Rafiq Taylor of the Tubi or Not Tubi podcast to the panel. Together, the five of them debate Ferrell's restraint, the film's shaky romance, and its clever games with authorship. Above all, they ask whether Marc Forster's fable deserves a deep bracket run in the 2006 Movie of the Year bracket. About the Film Harold Crick lives by the numbers. He counts his toothbrush strokes, times his walk to the bus, and audits taxpayers with quiet precision. One Wednesday, however, a voice starts describing his every move. The voice belongs to Karen Eiffel, played by Emma Thompson, a celebrated novelist with a decade-long case of writer's block. Her books always end with the hero's death. Harold, therefore, has a problem. Zach Helm wrote the screenplay, and Marc Forster directed after Finding Neverland and before Quantum of Solace. Dustin Hoffman plays Professor Jules Hilbert, a literature scholar who helps Harold figure out whether he lives in a comedy or a tragedy. Maggie Gyllenhaal plays Ana Pascal, a baker Harold is auditing, and Queen Latifah plays Eiffel's publisher-assigned assistant. Notably, Helm named nearly every character after a scientist or mathematician, from Francis Crick to David Hilbert. You can read the full production history on Wikipedia. Roger Ebert called the film a fable in the mode of Eric Rohmer in his original 2006 review. Additional cast and crew details live on IMDb. Guest Panelists: Cecilia Dillon and Rafiq Taylor of Tubi or Not Tubi Ceci Dillon and Rafiq Taylor host Tubi or Not Tubi, a podcast devoted to the strange, forgotten, and occasionally brilliant films buried in Tubi's free streaming library. Their show launched in 2020 and has now run for more than six seasons. In practice, that means hundreds of movies nobody else would watch so that you do not have to. Their catalog ranges from micro-budget Tubi Originals to cult favorites like Hundreds of Beavers, and they have interviewed filmmakers such as Coherence director James Ward Byrkit. Ceci and Rafiq bring quick wit and a real affection for overlooked cinema, which makes them ideal guests for a Stranger than Fiction podcast conversation. After all, this is a movie about a character who fears he is a footnote in someone else's story. Moreover, both hosts know the 2006 landscape well, and they arrive ready to argue. Harold and Will: Ferrell Plays It Straight The first topic tackles the elephant in the room. Will Ferrell built a career on volume, chaos, and grown men screaming in their underwear. Here, by contrast, he speaks softly, stands still, and lets Emma Thompson's voiceover do the shouting. The panel asks whether this is a great performance or simply a great casting trick. Mike argues that Ferrell's comic instincts never fully disappear. Instead, they hide in small gestures, like the way Harold holds a guitar or stares at a plate of cookies. Greg wonders whether the film needs Ferrell at all, or whether any capable dramatic actor could play Harold. Meanwhile, Ceci and Rafiq weigh Harold against other 2006 comedians going straight. The panel also compares this turn with Ferrell's later dramatic work in Everything Must Go. Ultimately, the question is whether audiences ever separate Harold from Will, and whether they should. Romance or Not? Harold and Ana Second, the panel puts the love story on trial. Ana Pascal is an anarchist baker who deliberately underpays her taxes. Harold is the man sent to audit her. In the film, she softens, he blossoms, and cookies solve most of their problems. However, does the relationship earn its screen time? Ryan questions whether Ana exists as a person or merely as a reward for Harold's growth. Rafiq points to the "flours" joke as evidence that the movie knows exactly how corny it is being. Additionally, the group debates Maggie Gyllenhaal's performance, which some critics praised and others found underwritten. Is this a romance, a comedy with a romance attached, or a fable that uses love as a plot device? The Taste Buds do not fully agree. As a result, the segment becomes one of the livelier arguments of the 2006 season. The Metanarrative: Who Is Writing Harold? The third topic digs into the film's biggest idea. Karen Eiffel is writing Harold, but who is writing Karen? The movie never explains how a fictional character came to walk the streets of Chicago. Instead, it treats the premise as a given and moves on to questions of responsibility. Professor Hilbert insists that the book must end as written, because the ending is a masterpiece. Harold, understandably, disagrees. Specifically, the panel examines whether the film is a story about authorship, mortality, or the ethics of art. Ceci draws connections to Charlie Kaufman, whose Adaptation covered similar ground four years earlier. Greg pushes back, arguing that Forster's film is warmer and less cynical. The panel also discusses the on-screen graphics that visualize Harold's counting, and how they reinforce the idea of a life reduced to data. Therefore, this Stranger than Fiction podcast segment doubles as a mini seminar on narrative theory, minus the tuition. Rushmore: The Music of 2006 The Rushmore segment returns, and this week the mountain honors the music of 2006. Each panelist nominates the faces that defined the year's sound. Fittingly, Stranger than Fiction itself leans on music, with Spoon's Britt Daniel co-composing the score alongside Brian Reitzell. The year also gave us landmark albums across hip-hop, indie rock, and pop, and the panel argues over which artists earned a permanent place on the monument. Nevertheless, the final four faces stay a secret until you listen. Expect disagreement, at least one deep cut, and a debate about whether soundtrack contributions count. 2006 Prostars Finally, the panel plays 2006 Prostars. In this segment, the Taste Buds and their guests assemble a team of the year's standout performers, the people who showed up in 2006 and simply dominated. Some picks come from the Stranger than Fiction cast, since Emma Thompson, Dustin Hoffman, and Maggie Gyllenhaal all had busy years. Others reach across the full 2006 bracket. In addition, the group debates what makes someone a Prostar rather than merely a good actor having a good year. The roster stays under wraps here, so press play to hear who made the cut. Why Stranger than Fiction Still Matters Twenty years on, Stranger than Fiction still feels like a small miracle of tone. It could have been a gimmick. Instead, it became a gentle argument for paying attention to ordinary life. The film also marked a turning point for Will Ferrell, proving that he could carry a story without a single shouted punchline. Furthermore, its questions about authorship and control have only grown more relevant. We now live surrounded by algorithms narrating our choices back to us. Harold's panic at hearing his own life described feels less like fantasy every year. Consequently, this Stranger than Fiction podcast episode arrives at a good moment. Whether the film survives the bracket is another matter, and the Taste Buds have plenty to say about it. Listen to the episode, then let us know whether Harold Crick deserves to advance. Related Episodes from Movie of the Year: 2006 Movie of the Year 2006 Intro, Part 1 The 2006 Bracket Reveal 2006 Mixtape, Part I Little Miss Sunshine All Movie of the Year episodes FAQ: Stranger than Fiction Podcast and Film What is this Stranger than Fiction podcast episode about? The Taste Buds and guests Cecilia Dillon and Rafiq Taylor debate Will Ferrell's dramatic turn, the Harold and Ana romance, and the film's metanarrative. The episode also features the Rushmore and 2006 Prostars segments. What is Stranger than Fiction about? IRS auditor Harold Crick begins hearing a novelist narrate his life. When the narrator announces his imminent death, he sets out to change the ending. Who directed Stranger than Fiction? Marc Forster directed the film from a screenplay by Zach Helm. Forster's other credits include Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland, and Quantum of Solace. Who stars in Stranger than Fiction? Will Ferrell, Emma Thompson, Dustin Hoffman, Maggie Gyllenhaal, and Queen Latifah lead the cast. Tony Hale, Tom Hulce, and Linda Hunt appear in supporting roles. More Questions About Stranger than Fiction Is Stranger than Fiction based on a book? No. Zach Helm wrote it as an original screenplay. The title comes from a line by Lord Byron about truth being stranger than fiction. Where was Stranger than Fiction filmed? The production was shot on location in Chicago, and the city's architecture plays a visible role throughout the film. Why does Harold Crick hear a narrator? The film never explains the mechanism. Harold is somehow the real-life version of the protagonist in Karen Eiffel's unfinished novel, and the story treats that as a given. Why does Stranger than Fiction still matter? It proved Will Ferrell could anchor a drama, and its questions about authorship, routine, and mortality feel more urgent in an age of algorithmic narration. Who are the guests on this episode? Ceci Dillon and Rafiq Taylor, hosts of the Tubi or Not Tubi podcast, which reviews films from Tubi's free streaming library.