I like Sesame Street a lot, and this is the first time that they have made a real movie, not a television show, and I think they should make another one soon. [02 Aug 1985, p.C5]

Chase and D'Angelo are clever and naturally funny, and they're well-matched. And yet the movie is dumb, so dumb it must have taken some work to make it that way. Perhaps next the Griswalds should make a forced march through a Hollywood executive's brain. [27 July 1985, p.B3]

Richard Mulligan attempts to provide comic relief for the comedy, in the role of a grizzled archangel, but it's a thankless task. The most interesting element of the film is its premise. [26 July 1985, p.D8]

The Black Cauldron is the unthinkable -- a Disney animated feature to which it is inappropriate to take a 4-year-old. Admirers of complex animation will no doubt relish the careful work. But those who believe in fairies may not clap their hands. [24 July 1985, p.D6]

Director Matthew Robbins keeps the pace light, nonviolent, and more entertaining than a made-for-TV movie. The fashion show's the action. His film is really about a face, and a look, and a haircut. [19 July 1985, p.D4]

Fans of the droll style of actor Tom Hanks will chuckle through The Man With One Red Shoe, a story that builds a comic house of cards on a mistaken identity. [20 July 1985, p.4]

The Coca-Cola Kid is for grown-ups, but not all grown-ups. It leaves more than a few bubbles dancing on the tongue. [11 Oct 1985, p.D1]

Explorers is good at probing the wrinkles of the 14-year-old heart and boys are always better than other-world beings.

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome is a rip-off of punk style. It pretends to be about life after we destroy the world -- or about the despair and degeneracy in the world as we know it now. In fact, it's mostly one big fashion show. Science-fiction flicks about contrasting good and bad societies have been done for a long time and done better. If you're 14 and angry, dig it. Otherwise, stay far away. [10 July 1985, p.D6]

For girls and boys who like games, ideas and toys, Back to the Future probably is worth an afternoon's good giggle. But baby boomers be forewarned: You had a better guffaw at Son of Flubber! [3 July 1985, p.D9]

It's beautiful, too. Westerns just don't work without scenery, and Bruce Surtees, the cinematographer, shoots postcards. [28 June 1985, p.1]

The most remarkable failure of the film is that the principals don't seem even to like each other very much, despite their habit of facing the future arm in arm. There's a lot of cute flesh up on the screen, signifying nothing. [28 June 1985, p.D1]

The good-heartedness and skill of Ron Howard, director, have become something to be reckoned with. Cocoon, for all its failures -- and its dependence on hokey effects is a major one -- suggests that Spielberg is not alone out there. [21 June 1985, p.C1]

Although we see many strange things happen (and some of them are seen through wondrous-looking special effects), we never have a clue as to what's really going on, and why. [24 June 1985, p.B6]

Someone involved with Prizzi's Honor, the new film from John Huston and starring Jack Nicholson and Kathleen Turner, doubtless thinks it's a fine satire, a comedy so black it will have us all squirming. There's no other explanation for the long stretches of time the movie spends on "idle," all that potential power, going nowhere. [14 June 1985, p.D1]

To be fair, Secret Admirer is somewhat more clever and a great deal sweeter than the standard for its damp genre. Those who remember with affection Archie's constant flailings at Veronica with the help of lovesick Betty will feel on familiar ground here. The outcome seems fixed almost from the opening moments, and the fact that lonesome Toni, who is made out to be the wallflower, is considerably more attractive than the horsy Debora Anne ("the most beautiful girl in school") is only the first of many tip-offs. [14 June 1985, p.D2]

I guess Perfect is a movie about aerobics, journalism, ethics and love and a couple of hunks. It is even more stupid than it sounds. It is the stupidest thing I have seen this year, in or out of the movies. [7 June 1985, p.C9]

A View to a Kill, also like recent Bonds, is long. And though it is crammed with action -- car chase, boat chase, blimp chase, you lose track -- it begins, by the second hour, to seem quite long indeed. [24 May 1985, p.D5]

Cosmatos' constant device of setting up the audience, releasing the tension and then setting up again gives the movie a pacing that is all manipulation. [22 May 1985, p.D1]

Pryor and director Walter Hill do a competent job collaborating on comic pace in Brewster's Millions. But the screenplay by Herschel Weingrod and Timothy Harris isn't audacious enough to twist the ending and let Pryor's character grow. Brewster's Millions is a pleasant summer laugh, but it's not comedy that bites.

Sounds like Dirty Harry, looks like Dirty Harry, plays like Dirty Harry. The big difference is that Norris is not so mean as Eastwood, nor so interesting. Eastwood's Harry is flawed, even philosophical in his grumpy way; Norris' Sarge is just a nice guy who can kill you a hundred different ways. [06 May 1985, p.B6]

An inane martial arts movie... Thomas is a glorious gymnast and may be a competent karate fighter, but this fight choreography does both disciplines an injustice. Better to spend your $4.50 renting a tape of Thomas scoring a perfect "10" at the American Cup. [10 May 1985, p.D3]

Two predictable disappointments here (among many): As usual, these high school kids appear in fact to be played by folks who have left college well behind them; and, sadder, Just One of the Guys was directed by a woman -- women filmmakers being a worthy cause under almost any circumstances -- yet betrays no higher consciousness regarding kids and sex roles than Porky's 3. [30 Apr 1985, p.B3]

Each of those fine actors has put in a performance or two; each has made a mark. Each has made a mark here, too, if one counts dark blots on the resume. Reynolds is good; they're awful. Perhaps this is because Reynolds was directing them. He may be too nice a guy. There must be a reason. [26 Apr 1985, p.D1]

Laughs are widely spaced, and hardly seem worth the trouble. [22 Apr 1985, p.D4]

As it is, much of this movie is simply incomprehensible, however enthusiastically it was designed and is performed. If it were only a little better, one might even spend some time trying to figure what to make of it. [24 Apr 1985, p.B6]

Stories by Stephen King are traditionally brought to the screen in the worst possible shape, so it's gratifying to report that Cat's Eye, a King trilogy, is not a terrible movie. It's not going to go down in anyone's annals, either, but it's fun and, if you like cats, ultimately quite gratifying. [17 Apr 1985, p.B5]

The film isn't perfect. Seidelman is still pretty much brand-new at this, and there are times when the movie seems about to slip through her fingers, run off into the streets and flow farther, irretrievably, downtown. And the ending has the patness of a studio contrivance; one guesses that had Seidelman been in complete control, something more ambiguous might have resulted. Still, what fun: Good, and good for you, too. Hollywood reaches out and gives someone with talent a chance to make something genuine and offbeat. It's a great system. [01 Apr 1985, p.C4]