A joy to behold, a complex film that never loses either its sense of purpose or sense of humor. [7 February 1986, Friday, p.33]

What's so funny about Down and Out In Beverly Hills is not its moral imperative to appreciate life's simple, enduring pleasures. True, we get that message, and we appreciate it, but we already know that motto even if we don't live by it. No, what's funny is director Mazursky's extraordinarily fine eye and ear for capturing the way the wealthy residents of Beverly Hills walk, talk, dress and think.

A packed convention of contemporary cliches. [31 Jan 1986, p.J]

So, as we watch this movie go through its predictable paces, we also watch two actors, one in character and one not. And that is an awful lot to ask an audience to suffer through just to see Russell deliver another dependable piece of work. [3 Feb 1986, p.C2]

Power is cast exceedingly well, with director Lumet being one of the best-connected directors in New York. Power gives us the likes of Gene Hackman, Julie Christie, E.G. Marshall, Fritz Weaver and Beatrice Straight in supporting roles! [31 Jan 1986, p.30N]

It is played out in such a special, gentle way that you will want to anticipate and savor it for yourself. [31 Jan 1986, p.30N]

The film starts out gently enough, capturing the after-hours banter of the chauffeurs as they play cards and try to ward off Casey`s intrusion. Unfortunately, this charming opening quickly degenerates into a film so needlessly obscene and offensive that it is hard to imagine what its creators were hoping to achieve.

Despite a few interesting moments, Iron Eagle looks and sounds like an extended televison commercial that encourages young people to be all they can be . . . in a supersonic fighting machine. [20 Jan 1986, p.3C]

Although the film isn't an empty picture, it is too much of a good thing. Voight delivers a wonderful speech to Roberts about survival, but it's only one of many such monologues. Similarly, Roberts is tiring in his frantic reactions.

Black Moon Rising utilizes every cheap thriller trick in the book. If a lackluster script is going to rely on gadgetry and chase scenes to satisfy its audience, it had better pulse with more suspense and originality than a TV rerun. This one doesn't. [10 Jan 1986, p.34]

It`s a lamebrained movie, without much sense in its construction.

Al Pacino has become a self-involved film star, and he`s one of the stars I hate.

The physical scale of Ran is overwhelming. It's almost as if Kurosawa is saying to all the cassette buyers of America, in a play on Clint Eastwood`s phrase, "Go ahead, ruin your night"--wait to see my film on a small screen and cheat yourself out of what a movie can be.

Although you probably haven't heard much about Enemy Mine this season, you might want to check it out. You'll be pleasantly surprised. [23 Dec 1985, p.C2]

It`s a shame to have to knock the otherwise beautiful and haunting picture, but when you`re watching a love story and you can`t stand the character who is being loved, that makes for a very frustrating movie-going experience.

To miss this film is to cheat yourself and your family of a memorable moviegoing experience.

There's a movie here, and there's a gimmick. The gimmick undermines the movie and the gimmick is attached to the wrong part of the movie. Other than that, Clue offers a few big laughs early on followed by a lot of characters running around on a treadmill to nowhere. [13 Dec 1985, p.38]

The major problem with the sequel therefore is really the script, which was not written by Diane Thomas and which, coincidentally, did not meet with immediate approval by Turner. And so instead of surprising us in the rapid-fire manner of the original, ''The Jewel of the Nile'' takes people we know and runs them ragged through a new but unappealing location--the Arab desert--as they get caught in the middle of a holy war that doesn`t have much entertainment value given the recent number of incidents involving real-life terrorism in the area.

A classic play has been reduced a decent movie. It's a shame it couldn't be as good as the play; it's a small pleasure that it's as entertaining as it is. [20 Dec 1985]

One imagines that fans of Chase and Aykroyd will be mildly pleased with the results. As political humor, though, Spies is an uneasy blend of seriousness and farce--a picture whose antiwar theme seems designed to let its makers cash their paychecks and, at the same time, feel good about themselves. [06 Dec 1985, p.A]

It's a good ol' boy version of "Who's Afraid of Virgina Woolf?," but whereas that classic had four characters in direct conflict, "Fool for Love" essentially is a two-character duel to the quick.

The production is first-rate in all technical ways imaginable, but the villain that Holmes and Watson chase is not worth their intellect or time or ours.

Whereas Stallone with "Rambo" is messing around with real places and real events, in Rocky IV we all know that this is pure Hollywood, pure fantasy. And very well made Hollywood fantasy, indeed.

The movie does command our attention because Hines and Baryshnikov, through their dancing, manage to create very real and living and hurting characters. [22 Nov 1985]

Not a remake of the Stewart Granger-Deborah Kerr epic, this film has been made, so obviously and calculatedly, to capitalize on the success of ''Raiders of the Lost Ark'' and ''Romancing the Stone,'' seeking their crafty harmony of action, romance and humor. The result is action so ludicrous that it falls consistently between thrilling and amusing and never comes in sufficient amounts of either.

That`s right, Fever Pitch receives ''zero stars,'' a rating given infrequently and most often to a film that is morally offensive. There`s no other way to describe Fever Pitch, which, aside from its multitude of filmmaking sins, has the gall to do a complete turnabout with its ending, twisting a supposedly antigambling, message movie into nothing less than a promotional film for casino betting, feeding off the chronic gambler`s pathetic hope to ''get even'' through one more toss of the dice.

Nearly everything that is right about Smooth Talk would have been impossible to obtain by conventional Hollywood film- manufacture. The film's appeal, including that of the performances, is in nuance and intermediate shades. That appeal is considerable, another reminder of the possibilities of the American independent film. [9 May 1986, p.43]

Sheffer`s calm serves as an effective counterpoint to Estevez`s coiled energy, and Morgan Freeman is outstanding as Charlie, an older bar owner who mediates between the two boys as they clash over the importance of women and the rapidly changing nature of their lives.