What’s it about?

Each year a Western Australian music festival hosts the same ensemble of die-hard performers and fans. Their stories leap forward every twelve months for three summers.

What we thought

Dan says: Imagine you remade ‘Love Actually’ but instead of being about love and promoting emotionally unhealthy relationships, it was about cultural tolerance and trying to be less of a dick. Ben Elton’s jokes are great. I cackled a lot, but it still feels like he’s directing an episode of Black Adder. Cameras are locked off and dialogue is awkwardly expository as he races for the next gag.

As with all ensemble pieces there’s just not enough time to bring any subtlety to the storytelling. Attempts at pathos feel unearned and he can’t make up his mind whether he wants to respect all cultures or mock them. Good jokes, but it feels like an opportunity to do something wondrous was missed.

What’s it about?
Based on the true story of the 1973 tennis match between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs.

What did we think?
Let’s face it, Billie Jean King is a badass, and if you don’t know all she’s done for inequality, you should find out. Start with this movie. There are parts when I wanted to stand up and yell ‘FUCKYESBILLIEJEANKING!’ There are a couple of parts where it lagged and I was ready for a snooze. Overall, pretty decent stuff. I wish I were more shocked about the blatant sexism and homophobia, but this story remains incredibly relevant in 2017. This film will make you want to fight the patriarchy.

What’s it about?
Batman reluctantly takes on new sidekick: grown-up and disturbed Teen Wolf, a man bent on revenge having seen his fiancé gunned down by terrorists (and obviously having been orphaned as a child). His sado-masochistic training is going well until the old dog (Gambit, Batman’s ex-Robin, who they all thought was dead) goes all arms-dealery and everything gets mixed up in a bucket with terrorists and CIA and guns. Lots of people die.

What did we think?
Stephen Scott says: This is not Shakespeare, people! Imagine 007 without the gratuitous sex scenes (but with extrinsic boobies), more graphic violence and less puns. The clichés are still there – but the action sequences – oh my! And the final special effects rollercoaster … I had to remind myself to breath.

Thus a new mindless-fun Bourne/Bond-clone franchise is born.

What’s it about?
Aspiring rapper Patricia Dombrowski (Danielle Macdonald) dreams of escaping the New Jersey suburbs.

What did we think?
Amy Currie says: Here’s a fun game… Watch the first ten minutes of Patti Cake$, then write a list of all the things that you think will happen. Now you don’t have to see the rest of the movie.

What’s it about?
Middle-aged school friends reunite for a girls weekend in New Orleans which goes a little crazy. Wow. Didn’t see that coming.

What did we think?
Stephen Scott says: If Bridesmaids ‘raised’ the stakes in vulgar comedy, Girls Trip kicks it screaming into the cesspool stratosphere. Shitting in the street is so passé, now we piss on it from a great height. Literally. (And yes, millennials, this is literally being used correctly.) Whilst it veers dangerously close to standard Hollywood schmalz, a surprisingly poignant final speech makes it something you could recommend. But not for your elderly mother. Hell no.

I’ll never be able to look at grapefruits the same way again.

What’s it about?
A man is raising his niece, who is a mathematical prodigy. Once her abilities have been discovered, her grandmother fights for custody.

What did we think?
Imogen says: Watch as one of the Marvel Chrises handsomes his way through this beige movie. It’s got everything you’ve ever seen in a heartwarming film:

1. a man who’s struggling to raise a child by himself,
2. (but does it in a unique and quirky way);
3. an equally unique and quirky child with a special talent;
4. a two-dimensional love interest character (Jenny Slate, you’re better than this);
5. a two-dimensional sassy yet wise black neighbour (Octavia Spencer, you’re WAY better than this).
6. an acoustic soundtrack and predictable outcome.

What’s it about?
50 years after their first adventure launched in comic strip form, spatio-temporal agents Valérian and Laureline finally hit the big screen. In their debut cinematic story, the pair uncover a sinister plot to take genocide to a new level by wiping all knowledge of a peaceful civilisation from galactic history.

What did we think?

Stephen Scott says: Strangely this reminds me of the original Star Wars AND the prequel trilogies at the same time. Like the 1977 classic, you are thrown head-first into a dirty universe, with no back stories to guide you. It’s an assault on your imagination, and a welcome one. Valerian’s universe is spectacular.

Contrariwise, like the flawed prequels, you have to use your imagination to get over the unforgivable plot holes, bordering-on-the-offensive character inconsistencies, and the atrocious miscasting of Dane DeHaan as the (supposedly) womanising tactical genius Valerian.

It’s still good enough to get four stars. Imagine how good it would have been with the appropriate swagger.

What’s it about?
Down-on-their-luck siblings join forces with bomb-addict siblings for a heist that will become legendary: the home of NASCAR.

What did we think?
Stephen Scott says: Logan Lucky (3¾★) wins the heist battle of 2017 over Baby Driver (3½★) thanks to a stronger storyline and beguiling characters – interestingly both films use the transition of musical styles to further tension, in this case from country to bluegrass. Soderbergh cleverly mirrors the same story of a fight-against-the-odds for redemption across three encampments without you realising by using sleight of hand, country music, a couple of clever twists, and some good laughs.

BEWARE: the odds are high you’ll end up singing a John Denver classic. Yep. That one.

What’s it about?
Ten years after An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore is still at it – and with good reason.

What did we think?
Amy Currie says: This is certainly an important film, and its (terrifying) statements about climate change are clearly explained and backed up by solid data. However, the movie itself is blatantly manipulative and spends a lot – like, a lot – of time talking about what a great guy Al Gore is. So great. Wow.

It’s pure propaganda – but when it’s propaganda for good, does it really matter? It’s not a brilliant film, but that’s not the point.