What’s it about?
A tornado hurls a small-time huckster magician, Oscar (James Franco), into a Wonderland-esque land overseen by three witchy sisters (Michelle Williams, Mila Kunis, Rachel Weisz). And where there be witches, there be wickedness. Which witch is which? (Spoiler: green face, hooked schnoz, much cackling.) Oscar, mistaken for a powerful wizard and rightful ruler, befriends a few locals and tries to keep the joint safe. Just in case a scarecrow, tin man, lion and Judy Garland turn up, in a far superior film, made 70 years beforehand.

What did we think?
Ben says: Well, we’re off to see the wizardry, the wonderful visual-effects wizardry of Oz. And we get it – in a Skittles explosion of rainbow-hued CG. We also get a gorgeous, crippled china doll who steals the film and cured this reviewer of his lifelong detestation for porcelain dolls. But Oz’s other fantastical curiosities pale next to the 1939 original: winged monkeys are replaced with winged baboons; Munchkins are now the ethnically inclusive Midget Union of North America; and instead of an engaging, rogueish wizard, we get James Franco, as James Franco. In top hat.

What’s it about?
A humble orphan suddenly becomes a gentleman with the help of an unknown benefactor.

What did we think?
Cindy says: I headed into the cinema with great expectations, and thankfully I was rewarded – this is a good one.  Director Mike Newell takes us back to a sumptuous Dickensian time ripe with dirt and excess.  The film unfolds beautifully with each chapter of the story furnished with charming costuming and detailed art direction.  Special mention goes to Miss Havisham’s delightfully decaying wedding banquet.

I was taken in by everything and everyone.  Everyone except the delightfully pretty Jeremy Irvine.  In the pivotal lead role of Pip he is out-acted by everything and everyone in the film.  Expectations almost met. Almost.

What’s it about?
The life of a young woman (Rooney Mara) spirals out of control after her husband (Channing Tatum) returns from prison and she starts taking a new drug prescribed by her psychiatrist (Jude Law).

What did we think?
Hilary says: Hands up if you like a well-woven thriller with a good twist or three… That’s all you really need to consider if you are questioning whether to see this. It’s hard to even talk about the film without major spoilers. What I can say is that Side Effects is a classy production, thanks to director Steven Soderbergh’s (Traffic and We Need To Talk About Kevin) renowned talents. As the lost young wife Emily, Mara (Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) shows her range, proving she really is one to watch. Law puts in a solid, if predictable, performance as her doctor, and Catherine Zeta-Jones takes an impressive turn as Emily’s cool former psychiatrist. With so much to choose from at the cinema right now, you could wait for Side Effects (and it’s lack of visual candy) to come out on DVD but it’s still definitely worth your time.

What’s it about?
Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Hugo Weaving and a stellar ensemble cast navigate their way through multiple characters and six interwoven storylines spanning from the 1800s to some time in the far-off future after humanity has been mostly wiped out. Ostensibly, it’s about how small actions can ripple and cascade through the passage of time and change the world.

I think.
 
What did we think?
Cloud Atlas will polarise people: it’s visually gorgeous, overwhelmingly ambitious, and thematically and emotionally complex, but it’s also long, confusing in parts and a little philosophically heavy-handed. In essence, it was like losing my virginity – I didn’t really know what was happening, and, when I figured it out, it was basically over. But I’m pretty sure I really liked it.

What’s it about?
A misfit searches through seven fantasy worlds for the aerialist she’s fallen for. Who are we kidding? It’s Cirque du Soleil’s Greatest Hits.

What did we think?
Stephen Scott says: when asked to describe a traveling Cirque du Soleil show, I said “it’s something you have to experience for yourself”. The same can be said for this mish-mash of the company’s seven Las Vegas live shows.

How does it compare to a live show?

• Nowhere near as good: when you see it live you are immersed in the breathtaking experience. This is more like a Whitman’s Sampler – with so many amazing bits, and the flimsiest of plots, it gets surprisingly dull.
• Just as good: HOW DO THEY DO THAT? Wow. What an astonishing display of human ability.
• Even better than the real thing: you get to see all the minute details, plus some things you’ll never see live.

What’s it about?
A coming-of-age teenage romance between a witch and a mortal in America’s Bible Belt.

What did we think?
Stephen says: This is not a spellbound angsty Twilight or a Deep South Harry Potter, rather Beautiful Creatures is a forbidden romance tale where the girl happens to be a witch (sorry – a “Caster”).

Imagine if teenagers made a PG version of True Blood, with the witchcraft of Bewitched, and performed it lovingly in the over-the-top accents of SNL’s Colonel Angus sketch (Jeremy Irons is the worst offender – although you can tell that Emma Thompson had a ball). Even when it stumbles or becomes a little too predictable, I’m calling this thoroughly enjoyable flick my guilty pleasure of 2013.