What’s it about?
A whimsical look at how Dr Mortimer Granville devised the invention of the first vibrator in the name of medical science.

What did we think?
It’s true doctors used to diagnose Hysteria as a catch-all for women in the 19th century and true that sometimes manual manipulation of the vulva was prescribed as a treatment, so why not make a romantic comedy about it? 0_o Hysteria takes liberties with history but never pretends to be anything but playful so it’s easy to forgive especially in the light of the performances of Maggie Gyllenhaal and Rupert Everett.

Despite my dislike of  anachronistic events on film, I quite enjoyed this titillating comedy that managed both laughter and solid characterisations.

 What’s it about? 
A male stripper teaches a younger performer how to party, pick up women, and make easy money.

What did we think?
I was ready to have the pants entertained off me, and the first half hour did just that.  There was so much eye candy early on – special mentions go to Matthew McConaughey’s on-screen bravado and bongo playing and Channing Tatum’s body moves.  Oh.  My.  Goodness.  Yes.

But, the sugar high simply wore off.  Like being sober at a hen’s night, at first it was exciting and fun and a little bit naughty, but the longer it dragged on, the more you wished you were drunk off your ass.

Needed less romance, more bromance.  Left the crowd wanting less talking, more stripping dancing.  P.S. I need a teacup piglet.

What’s it about?
Peter Parker finds a clue that might help him understand why his parents disappeared when he was young. His path puts him on a collision course with Dr. Curt Connors, his father’s former partner.

What did we think?
Anthony Sherratt says: My dad summed it up with: “the only thing I got out of that movie was sore eyes from the glasses”.

The plot has more holes than a spiderweb, Peter isn’t as likeable as previous incarnations and it feels as if the director was chosen merely because his surname is Webb. Not even strong performances from Emma Stone, Martin Sheen and Sally Field can save a film that only teens unfamiliar with the character will like.

What’s it about?
It’s officially described as a documentary that chronicles Katy Perry’s life on and off-stage.

What did we think?
While I’m not sure it counts as a movie, this PR-based-image-piece-masquerading-as-a-documentary actually wasn’t too bad a watch.

It might be easy to bag but it’s really only meant for current fans and , most importantly, they will actually get a lot out of not only the behind-the-scenes stuff but the music and concert.

What’s it about?
As the result of a childhood wish, John Bennett’s teddy bear, Ted, came to life and has been by John’s side ever since – a friendship that’s tested when Lori, John’s girlfriend of four years, wants more from their relationship.

What did we think?
Today we present a multiple choice review to reflect individual demographics.

If you like (tick all that apply):
[  ] The 80s
[  ] Family Guy
[  ] Political Incorrectness
[  ] Puerile humour
[  ] A little crudity
[  ] Flash Gordon
[  ] pop-culture references
[  ] a cute but foul-mouthed main character

0-1 ticks: Ted is not the movie you seek. Move along.
2-3 ticks: You’ll get a chuckle or two out of Ted but it might not be for you.
4-5 ticks: Ted is an enjoyable movie that provides both laughs and fuzzies (warm fuzzies that is).
6+ ticks: Ted is frickin’ hilarious.

Personally, as a geek-child of the 80s with a dislike for Political Correctness I roared with laughter throughout. There’s probably a bit too much 80s love for younger people but there’ll still be enough for most people to appreciate and enjoy.

What’s it about?
While trying to save their childhood orphanage, Moe, Larry, and Curly inadvertently stumble into a murder plot and wind up starring in a reality TV show.

What did we think?
I have never understood the appeal of slapstick and this puerile offering has only strengthened my distaste. With incredibly weak writing, infantile humour and extended Jersey Shore character appearances, what’s not to dislike?

Not even seeing Snooky being poked in the eye made it pleasurable. Indeed by the end of the film I felt as if I’d been poked myself.

What’s it about?
Determined to make her own path in life, Princess Merida defies a custom that brings chaos to her kingdom. Can she undo a beastly curse?

What did we think?
For a movie featuring archery, it’s ironic that Brave doesn’t quite hit the mark. It’s a little predictable and oddly two-dimensional – very strange for a PIXAR offering. The characters are rich, the scenery is stunning but the story just lacks depth and any lasting connection.

I’m not sure whether it’s because the movie has had so many problems with re-writes and re-workings or Disney interfered to make it a ‘safe’ movie, but Brave is a solid movie without the usual PIXAR magic.

What’s it about?
In a twist to the fairy tale, the Huntsman ordered to take Snow White into the woods to be killed winds up becoming her protector and mentor in a quest to vanquish the Evil Queen.

What did we think?
Far better than you expect it to be, though not as good as it could have been. Obviously curtailed from stepping into the darkness and mayhem it so longs for in order to maximise audiences, Snow White nonetheless manages to engage on a more adult level than most popcorn flicks.

What’s it about?

After being married to the slightly off-kilter King of Denmark, the Queen finds solace in her relationship (and subsequent romance) with the royal physician. Their enlightened ideals create swift policy change and bring about a revolution in Danish political history, until their affair is discovered and severe consequences result.

What did we think?

Not quite the bodice-ripping, passionate tale that its title might suggest, the film does manage to effectively convey the historical implications of the events in the film. It adheres a bit too strictly to period-piece conventions and doesn’t do much to invest reason to care about the relationship between the lovers. Historical accuracy is given priority over the romantic swoon factor, which makes everything feel somewhat dry. Only Mikkel Folsgaard as the mad King injects a bit of humour and liveliness into the proceedings.

What’s it about?
While in his teens, Donny fathered a son, Todd, and raised him as a single parent up until Todd’s 18th birthday. Now, after not seeing each other for years, Todd’s world comes crashing down when Donny resurfaces just before Todd’s wedding.

What did we think?
The world is a dumber place for having this movie in it. Even diehard Adam Sandler fans will struggle to find anything redeeming in a movie that starts with the statutory rape of a 13-year-old and works up to puerile adolescent humour.

Tasteless at best, I don’t think there’s actually a redeeming quality in the entire 114 extremely painful minutes.