Some viewers may welcome the drama's lack of resolution as an honest response to the mysteries of adolescence, while others may consider it a moral cop-out. [10 March 1986, p.33]

Some slow and vulgar moments aside, it's a minor treat for viewers who don't mind keeping their expectations low. [11 Oct 1985, p.25]

Its metaphors are too obvious (as before, Cimino's analogy for death is more death) and its treatment of social problems is skin-deep. Although the screenplay throws sops to many cultural and ethnic groups, it's riddled with racist and sexist attitudes. [23 Aug 1985, p.25]

Directed by Tom Holland, who serves up the oldest horror-yarn clich'es with a straight face, keeping the action good-natured and even humorous until the gory climax.

Parents will yawn, but younger children may enjoy the fun. [09 Aug 1985, p.24]

It packs an emotional punch despite shortcomings of story and style.

It's best when the carefully chosen cast throws itself into developing characters and building their relationships. When pure storytelling takes over after an hour or so, the picture becomes less original and engaging.

The directors, George Miller and George Ogilvie, borrow from every source they can find; movie buffs can pass the time spotting the Lynch shot, the Leone shot, the Jodorowski shot, and all kinds of others.

Back to the Future doesn't exactly leap out of the starting gate, and some scenes are strung out by gimmicky editing. But the story picks up steam as it goes along, and the last third is especially full of speedy surprises. [3 July 1985, p.23]

A View to a Kill plods along dutifully, observing the rules of the series with dull consistency.

The story is harmless enough, with its bloodless violence and happy resolutions. The images are a bland mixture of cliches lifted from Tolkien and "Star Wars," among other sources, served up in wretched TV-style animation. Little children may like it, but they won't be richer for it. [06 Jun 1985, p.31]

Along with some creaky plot mechanics in the last third of the story, this reduces the film to ordinary dimensions - a sharp but no longer resonant show.

Gripping, intelligent, provocative drama...Incisively directed by newcomer Roland Joffe, although the story sags in spots and the beginning is draggy.

A lavishly produced and often involving drama that never reaches its full potential. [09 Jan 1985, p.25]

Get cracking, filmmakers. It'll take a lot of doing to beat this creep-show for worst picture of the year. It's about a computer programmer who beats the devil in a series of spooky challenges. No fewer than seven directors worked on it, and it doesn't make any sense at all. [23 May 1985, p.25]

If you can handle its horror-comic grotesquerie, you'll find an enormous amount of cinematic imagination at work.

The River doesn't live up to its ambitions. [03 Jan 1985, p.27]

The gentlest of his movies, it shows a new maturity in Mr. Carpenter's outlook, emphasizing close human relations rather than shocks and outlandish effects. Although it never quite comes together, it shows a shift of focus and interest that bodes well for his work to come. [31 Dec 1984, p.18]

It's about time Eastwood and Reynolds faced off - and I, for one, am glad they do it with barely hidden smiles. [06 Dec 1984, p.49]

Beverly Hills Cop is an action movie and an Eddie Murphy vehicle first, but Brest's dramatic intelligence surfaces often enough to make a welcome difference in what could have been an ordinary crowd-pleaser. [13 Dec. 1984, p.35]

There's little fire to the story, as directed by Ulu Grosbard, but the performances are strong and it's refreshing to see a romance that limits the lovers to one unconsummated bedroom tryst. [06 Dec 1984, p.50]

Joseph Zito directed this cheap exercise in hate, suspicion, and mayhem. [06 Dec 1984, p.50]

If these talented people had worthwhile things to do, No Small Affair would be no small movie. But the action has many weak moments, and the subplots are trite, especially when the trendy bachelor-party scene arrives. Too bad the screenplay, by Charles Bolt and Terence Mulcahy, doesn't live up to the cast or to Vilmos Zsigmond's careful cinematography. [13 Nov 1984, p.47]

Directed rather broadly by Norman Jewison, but well acted and intelligent. [04 Oct 1984, p.27]

Director John Byrum's idea of evoking the past is to usher a parade of overblown cliches across the screen. [15 Nov 1984, p.47]

Sentimental from the moment the title hits the screen. But it's a nice kind of sentimentality, based on real affection for the characters and real involvement with a place and time.

Socially committed realism and screwball comedy don't mix easily. That's the main reason that Teachers is a mess. [02 Nov 1984, p.25]

Eureka is vintage Roeg in its sweep, its bravado, and its explosive visual style. It's also a murky stew of half-baked story ideas, overcooked sex, and nasty violence, inhabited by characters who'd be tedious even if they didn't talk, talk, talk through one self-indulgent scene after another. [11 Sep 1985, p.23]