Richard Walker

After the first episode I thought it was probably going to be rubbish. A glitzy setting, filthy rich , irresponsible, young prople swearing their heads off, having sex as casually as they might have a swim, taking drugs and generally being obnoxious. Probably, but not definitely. It was good enough to persuade me to try the second installment and am I glad I did! I was hooked and don't mind saying I loved every trashy, improbable, wantonly commercial minute of my binge watch. Nicole Kidman oozes class, as does Liev Schreiber as her husband. Everyone else performs well, especially Donna Lynne Champlin as the police detective, a rightly not at all glamorous portrayal. One star off though for the vulgar and unfunny characters of the maid and the wedding planner. Neither worked for me. But, the ultimate test of a whodunit is whether it can hide the secret of who did it, how, and why until the final reveal. I didn't guess it, despite all the clues being fairly laid out. That's a good whodunit, and this one happens to be compelling and look sumptuous too.

One of the show's central characters advocates being different. Well, the show certainly is. Although there is arguably a bit too much going on, it is gripping stuff, helped by compelling performances. Especially well shot, it looks fantastic and there are many arresting images of New York. My favourite was of the city viewed across a massive landfill site. Benedict Cumberbatch and McKinley Belcher III are incredibly good, the whole thing moves towards a satisfactory ending, but some will find the very broad ambition of the script, with multiple serious themes tackled, reduces somewhat the impact it should have made.

Don't be put off by the first (gut-wrenchingly horrific) episode, which is nonetheless brilliant, by the way. The whole show is outstanding. Thought -provoking, intelligent, superbly written. Some episodes are stronger than others, but not by much, and many are excellent. One or two are so good they transcend the series, even the genre (take a bow everyone involved with "San Junipero" and "Be Right Back").

It looks great but, then, you expect that these days. More to the point, it has a surprising, engrossing, epic story, which pays due respect to some of the classic sci-fi of the past like Solaris and 2001, not to mention Moon - and in some ways it is highly reminiscent of The Planet of the Apes. Obviously a 'must watch' for any Tom Cruise fan, but rewarding viewing for Morgan Freeman acolytes too, or, if you just like gaping at special effects for a couple of hours, you can do that. And, personally, any film with A Whiter Shade of Pale on the soundtrack is surely worth a view.

Such a clever film. So many thrillers go into very dark or pessimistic areas - and David Fincher's own 'Seven' is a prime example - but 'The Game' is only superficially of that genre. Really, it is knowing, ironic, and devious in the nicest way. Keeps the viewer involved from beginning to end. Very entertaining.

There are a few laughs, to be sure. But the problem with a fantasy premise like this is that the audience will spend the whole movie thinking, but wait a second, what about...? Liar Liar, which was based in very similar territory, realised this and used a lot of Jim Carey histrionics to cover up the fact that the premise is not sustainable. In the case of the Invention of Lying, I found myself asking, does not being able to lie mean you have to utter whatever is in your head? What about someone who genuinely believes something to be true, and says it, but it's actually wrong? What about metaphor? And idiom? I might say 'he's a whale' or 'I could eat a horse' but not mean them literally. My feeling was that the movie didn't do enough to address, or exploit, these kinds of issues. As a result it came over as rather light, half-baked and inconsequential.

It is superb. Gripping, entertaining, amusing at times, and basically just really satisfying. Despite everything - and that is a lot - the fugitive of the title, Dr Kimble, can't forget that he is a doctor and it's his job to help people. This nearly gets him captured a few times and it's one of the major elements that sets this film apart from the rest. I would say, however, that it runs about half an hour too long, thanks mostly to a plot strand about corruption in the pharmaceutical industry which feels very contrived. Actually, there are several moments where it would be worth having large pinches of salt to hand. But, hey, it's the movies. Harrison Ford and Tommy Lee Jones are both at the top of their game, aided by a terrific script and direction. The ending is very neat indeed. Overall, one of the best of its type, and well worth a viewing or three.

Genius for the first hour and ten minutes or so. Really. Some of the sharpest, most thoughtful and wittiest writing I can remember in a film. But then. Oh dear. Talk about "from the sublime to the ridiculous". Characters openly waving guns around as they chase each other through the streets of Bruges with not a police officer in sight; human beings shot at point blank range - multiple times - and surviving. And all dragged out to getting on for thirty minutes of the most obtuse carnage. My advice, watch until Ralph Fiennes and Brendan Gleeson head for the bell tower. After that it's, well... downhill all the way.

OK, I've just watched Xanadu for the first time, forty-two years after its release. And the reasons for avoiding it are all too obvious: mainly a woeful, under-worked script and some of the worst acting I can remember. What's more, the choreography and direction of the big set piece sequences is over-busy and can get in the way of enjoying the music. And yet, the movie's got a beautiful, naive charm; all the music and singing is top quality; Gene Kelly lights up the screen as he always does (and, boy, could he still move at, what, 68?) It left me feeling happy. In the end it's rather a strange, misfiring little treasure.

It is hugely enjoyable. Riveting, edge of your seat stuff. Top class performances from Hugh Laurie, Olivia Colman and a particularly menacing Tom Hollander. I wasn't personally as blown away by Tom Hiddleston's turn as some seem to have been, but this could just be a matter of taste. If you're a real nerd about illogicality and plot inconsistencies, there are a few, but these are very minor quibbles. Overall verdict, if you haven't seen it already, do so.