What’s it about?
After he becomes a quadriplegic from a paragliding accident, an aristocrat hires a young man from the the wrong side of town (who only turned up to the interview to get a signature to get his benefits) to be his caretaker.

What did we think?
Lisa Campbell says:  A touching yet simple story of friendship and differences. The movie was full of laughs and surprisingly mostly at the expense of Philippe’s disability. Terrific casting for a warm and engaging film of how the relationship between two completely different people develops. I truly loved it and recommend it to everyone. One not to miss.

What’s it about?
Proof that truth is stranger than fiction, Argo is a dramatisation of the rescue of the “Canadian Six” from Iran during the revolutionary uprising of 1979. With radical alternatives to save the group dismissed, the best worst idea is employed: pretend the fugitives are shooting a science fiction movie.

What did we think?
Stephen says: This fast-paced thriller puts you, then keeps you, on the edge of your seat – a high accomplishment as we know how it ends. Affleck cleverly doesn’t identify a specific villain, instead focussing on the retributive predisposition of a people finally freed from their tyrannical ruler, only to inflict their own brand of terror. When faced with a nation of hatred, it makes the planning and execution of this escape even more nail biting. Some are upset the film wavers from the true story, but don’t worry about that. A highly enjoyable film that dramatises an already astonishing story.

What’s it about?
A heartwarming tale about a boy and his dog. His dead dog.

What did we think?
Liz says: A return to the terrifically twisted kookiness of vintage Tim Burton. Based on a live-action short from 1984, this delightfully dark flick pays homage to classic schlock horror movies using Burton’s iconic stop-motion animation and eerily cute designs. Not sure the 3D added much and the ending didn’t quite ring true but it’s an enjoyable ride fans will welcome. Restricting the film to black and white lends a macabre, attractively moldy atmosphere that almost erases some of Burton’s overly colourful missteps into the mainstream during the past few years. The Halloween partner to Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas, it’s sure to gently thrill the youngster in those old enough to remember comic-book ads for Sea Monkeys.

What’s it about?
A couple of Californian drug dealers and their shared girlfriend face a hostile takeover of their Laguna Beach drug business by a brutal Mexican cartel.

What did we think?
Lisa says: With an interesting-in-theory plotline and strong performances from supporting players, Savages could have been much better.
Instead, the film suffered from shallow performances from the three leads, an over-reliance on cringe-worthy narration, and a serious lack of decisive direction to the point where two alternate endings were included (and neither of them was much good).

Only bother if you’re in the mood to watch pretty people doing violent things.

What’s it about?
It has been five years since the disappearance of Katie and Hunter, and a suburban family witness strange events in their neighborhood when a woman and a mysterious child move in.

What did we think?
Having played every one of their suspense tricks in the first three instalments, the Paranormal Activity franchise takes a different tack in the fourth by turning it into a game. With viewers now expecting subtle movement in the peripheries, the makers taunt us with long shots to get the audience guessing what (if anything) will happen. Surprisingly it works well especially with a few added laughs.

Nowhere near as scary as any of the first three, it’s an okay addition but doesn’t auger well for a fifth.

What’s it about?
A professional enforcer reacts to a heist that went down during a mob-protected poker game.

What did Anthony think?
An anti-American film masquerading as pseudo-intellectual bullsh**. Painfully slow and mostly pointless, this arthouse-wannabe all seems to be one drawn-out set-up for the last few lines of the movie. Five-star cast, one-star movie.

What’s it about?
Based on the true story of three “indestructible” brothers beating the depression by brewing the best moonshine in Virginia … and waging a war with a hypocritical corrupt cop.

What did we think?
Stephen says: There’s a lot to like about Lawless. But there’d be a lot more to like with some better editing in the first half – it drags like a tarred and feathered redneck being pulled behind a pick-up truck. Once it picks up, you’re in for an engaging tale of a boy becoming a man in a brutal world.

Shia LaBeouf and Guy Pearce must have wet their pants when they read Nick Cave’s script – their roles are actors’ dreams come true.  There’s cussin’ and graphic violence and smokin’ and gun-totin’ gangsters and graphic violence and creepy corrupt cops and friendships broken and love found and graphic violence and graphic violence. Exactly what you want from underdog heroes battling the seedy underbelly of corruption.

What’s it about?
In a future where time travel has been invented, mob bosses send their enemies back to the past to be killed by “loopers”. Joe lives the high life eliminating whomever the mob bosses send back, no questions asked. Which works fine, until they send future-Joe back to be disposed of… and he escapes.

What did we think?
Elizabeth says: A taut, well-paced thrill ride, this feels like one of the freshest takes on the whole time travel schtick in a long time. The script sets up the sci-fi premise of the tale, before cleverly a shifting the focus onto the characters, giving Looper an emotional weight I wasn’t expecting.  Joseph Gordon-Levitt does a great young Bruce Willis, and Bruce Willis plays a great old Bruce Willis. And who doesn’t love Bruce Willis? Serious acting props also have to go to the creepy kid (Pierce Gagnon).

It doesn’t pay to look too closely at the logic behind this flick; there are holes in the time travel theory and thinking about them may make your brain explode. But really, when a movie is this entertaining, who gives a damn about logic?

What’s it about?
A Yorkshire hill farmer “does the Christian thing” and takes in a homeless boy. The boy falls in love with the daughter and becomes obsessed with her.

What Angela Bowen thought:
This adaptation of Wuthering Heights is dark and disturbing. There are moments that are beautiful, ominous and some that are just weird and uncomfortable. I’d pop a few no-doz before this one and prepare to feel depressed for exactly 129 minutes.

The scenery shots are so plentiful it starts to feel like David Attenborough should be commentating but the real problem is that the relationship between Cathy and Heathcliff misses the mark. Stitched together by a lot of flashbacks that aren’t particularly moving to start with, the film features limited dialogue and is certainly not for animal lovers.

The redeeming feature is Solomon Glave’s performance of a young Heathcliff. His violent and animalistic up-bringing is heart- wrenching and you just want to reach out and give him a big hug. This movie is one that can be appreciated after it’s over. If you stay awake.

What’s it about?
Former CIA operative Bryan Mills returns to our screens with the father (and crime boss) of those he killed in the first movie, seeking revenge and targeting both Mills and his family.

What did Anthony Sherratt think?
Quite simply this should haven been called Taken Lite. A suprisingly logical premise justified the sequel but the general action from then on mirrors the original to a point where you’re left wondering where the ‘meat’ was.

It’s not bad – in fact it’s quite fun and worth seeing – but there’s a lack of originality that leaves it feeling like quite a short romp that really had little point to it other cashing in on the popularity of the awesome first flick.

Quote simply it’s the Diet Coke version of Taken. Less calories, less filling.