Introduction (updated Feb 2019)

King Kong (1933)

Update

(February 2019)

Sadly, this blog has now been discontinued, but all entries will remain online for future reference and research purposes. Enjoy!

This blog started life as a record of reviews in Monthly Film Bulletin and Sight & Sound magazines (see below), but that Index was discontinued with the December 2017 edition of the latter publication.

From 1 May 2018, the blog's name was changed from Monthly Film Bulletin: Index to The UK Film Index, though the URL remains the same.

Tell your friends!

----------oOo----------

The Monthly Film Bulletin (MFB) was a magazine published by the British Film Institute (BFI) from February 1934 to March 1991 which endeavoured to review every new feature film (and quite a few short items) released in the UK on a month-by-month basis. However, research indicates that the MFB wasn't as complete as its reputation suggests, particularly in the early years when the magazine was still finding its feet. Though thousands of films were duly covered by the MFB, hundreds more were discarded, and this continued throughout the magazine's history.

In April 1991, the MFB was discontinued and subsumed into the BFI's other ongoing publication Sight & Sound (S&S). That magazine's schedule was duly altered from quarterly to monthly to accommodate the change, and it continues to review theatrical releases to the present day.

However, in a recent e-mail exchange with the magazine's current editor, Nick James, it was confirmed to me that S&S is unable to review every film listed by the Film Distributors' Association, because "the whole system has been thoroughly subverted by distributors abusing the meaning of a national film release, flooding the market with films they bung onto a screen for a tiny handful of screenings (sometimes just the one) in order to get the download and DVD rights... no one can cope with the sheer volume of releases... what we're seeing is actually the breakdown of the theatrical screening's special status."

Whatever the case, this much is true: Since 1934, these two publications have provided a broad-ranging overview of commercial theatrical exhibition in the UK during the era of sound-on-film. That's a staggering achievement, and a vital record of the cinematic trends which have come and gone - and, in some cases, stubbornly persisted! - in UK cinemas since the early 1930's. It may not constitute a record of every film, but it certainly covers the vast majority of them, and the significance of such a database cannot be overstated.

Which is where we come in.

This blog aims to list every feature film (50 minutes or longer) reviewed within the pages of MFB and S&S, from February 1934 to the present. Each blog entry will represent a single month's worth of reviews and will consist of the following basic information:

• All films are listed under their UK release title, arranged alphabetically on a letter-by-letter basis (ie. It Can't Last Forever before I Thank a Fool). If the UK title differs from the original title in a film's primary country of origin, the original is given in italics directly underneath. Other English-language titles are also provided, including the US release where it differs from all the others. Definite and indefinite articles ('The', 'An', 'A', etc.) are ignored, including those in non-English titles ('Le', 'Gli', 'Ang', etc.). NB. I have endeavoured wherever possible to reproduce titles exactly as they appear on the print itself, right down to the last dot and dash (ie. Sunset Blvd. rather than 'Sunset Boulevard', and The Son of Kong rather than 'Son of Kong', etc.). My only deviation from this rule is the use of colons to accommodate sub-headings - eg. Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter - even when they aren't used on-screen. Given the size and scope of this particular project, mistakes are inevitable, and I hope eagle-eyed readers will offer corrections where necessary, based on a viewing of the on-screen title itself.

• Country of origin.

• Copyright year.

• Running time (RT) in minutes. Some films exist in a variety of different versions, and some were released in the UK after extensive revisions by local distributors. The RT given in this blog refers to the 'definitive' version. Where the original UK release print differed to a significant degree, this is noted at the end of each entry. NB. Given the difficulty in establishing a definitive RT for silent films (due to the fact that many of them were shot and projected at speeds other than 24 frames per second), no RT is given for such films. Instead, they are noted simply as 'silent'. These titles are only included if they are known - or assumed - to run 50 minutes or longer, no matter what the original frame-rate may have been.

• Colour (col) and/or black and white (bw).

• Scope or 3-D notation, or any other special photographic process (Todd-AO, Cinerama, etc.). Tech details for these processes can be found in the Glossary.

• UK distributor.

• Original censor's certificate, including a note of whether the film has ever been cut by the BBFC, either on film or video (you can search the online BBFC database for details of cuts and to find out if uncensored versions of individual titles have since been 'approved' for UK distribution). Where no certificate is provided, that means the film wasn't given a general UK release and played in selected cinemas under licence from local authorities. Indications of censorship activity are crucially important, because each cut (and rejection of entire films) is intended to 'reassure' the public they're being 'shielded' from cinematic excess. This is a self-serving lie, because it assumes that everyone it claims to 'protect' - including every UK resident who reads these words - is either too stupid or incompetent to make those decisions for themselves. Censorship belongs in the hands of individuals, NOT the government, the BBFC or self-proclaimed arbiters of moral standards. It is YOUR RIGHT to decide what is suitable/unsuitable for you and your family, and NOT the province of politicians and centralised organisations. And yet, the history of UK film and video has been blighted by constant interference from those who seek to impose their will on the population at large, using a raft of 'plausible' arguments built on quicksand to make censorship seem not only desirable, but necessary. It is not. It never has been. And when those who wish to impose their idea of censorship tell you otherwise, they are literally insulting your intelligence. Laws which allow the BBFC to ban and censor material on the basis of 'potential harm' are especially monstrous, since the evidence of such harm - potential or otherwise - is not merely flimsy, it is literally non-existent. The Video Recordings Act and the Obscene Publications Act need to be repealed, or at least rewritten to remove all notions of 'harm' caused to the general population by art of any particular stripe, and the BBFC's powers to censor and reject should be limited to the removal of images depicting unsimulated harm - psychological or physical - inflicted on people or animals during the production of a film. Greater emphasis should be placed on classification and consumer advice, since these are key to informing the public about contentious material, and would ultimately allow individuals to make their own choices, rather than having them imposed by others.

• Director (D:).

• Note of sequels or series, along with an indication of when (or if) those films were reviewed in MFB or S&S.

• Multichannel sound formats (Dolby Stereo, WarnerPhonic, 6-channel, Quadraphonic, etc.). Many films are released with a number of different soundtracks, but this blog only lists the primary format(s), the ones which best represents the film as it was meant to be heard. Digital multichannel formats - Dolby Digital, DTS, etc. - are rendered throughout the Index as an audio configuration such as 5.1 (ie. five discrete channels of sound and another channel for low frequency effects). This is because digital audio allows for an increasingly dizzying number of configurations on each print, and it's often difficult to keep track of which specific format has been used on individual films. For example, I • Frankenstein (2013) has credits for (deep breath!) Dolby Digital, Dolby Surround 7.1, Dolby Atmos, Datasat Digital Sound, Auro 11.1 and SDDS, not to mention a 6-track version for IMAX presentations! In that case, I've listed the primary audio formats: 'Dolby Atmos / Auro 11.1 / IMAX 6-track'. Such films will play back in 7.1 or 5.1 in cinemas which are not yet equipped for the very latest sonic technologies. NB. Where no sound format is listed, the film was recorded and released in mono. See the Glossary for tech details of the various sound formats mentioned throughout this Index.

Examples:

The Devil's Backbone
El espinazo del diablo
Spain/Mexico - 2001 - 108m - col
Optimum (15)
D: Guillermo del Toro
Audio: 5.1

Forbidden City
Sorrows of the Forbidden City
清宮秘史
(aka: Secrets of the Qing Court)
Hong Kong - 1948 - 120m - bw
GCT (U)
D: Zhu Shi-lin

Raiders of the Lost Ark
USA - 1981 - 115m - col / scope
CIC (A)
D: Steven Spielberg
35mm and 70mm release prints. Converted to IMAX-D (with 5.1 audio) for a 2012 re-release.
Followed by: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984, Jul/1984), Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989, Jul/1989), Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008, Aug/2008).
4.2-channel Dolby Stereo

Further information (cast lists, plot details, etc.) on each title is available from a multitude of online sources. This blog exists simply to list the films themselves, correcting mistakes and omissions which sometimes crept into the original publications.

An important point: These lists represent the films as presented on a monthly basis within the pages of MFB and S&S, but the blog itself does not seek to retain the tone or ethos of the magazines. The BFI favours 'art house' material over commercial and/or grindhouse productions, whereas I prefer the bombastic and sensational, and this will be reflected via my choice of ad-mats and movie stills. I am not guided by 'critical consensus' (which often seems to run counter to what general audiences actually enjoy), but by my own impulses, which are as eclectic and non-conformist as anyone else's. That said, readers should be in no doubt that every film in this listing has its own importance, and I've striven to treat them all equally in terms of research and attention. The decision to illustrate some titles and not others is entirely personal and reflects my own tastes. Hopefully, those tastes are broad enough to interest a wide variety of visitors to the blog.

Enjoy!