Q: 1. Unbelievable filmmaking.
2. You have to see this new film called Catfish. Only problem is, I can't tell you why. Which, admittedly, makes this review useless.
3. Just as you think you're heading towards thriller territory, with street-smart New Yorkers confronting Midwestern loons, the film mutates into a study of benevolence, understanding and forgiveness.
4. Although marketed as some sort of cyber thriller, this is far closer in tone to the sublime doc Capturing The Friedmans by Andrew Jarecki, who just happens to be one of the producers.
5. The real draw of the film is obviously based around the revelations at Abby's farm; but I don't want to spoil the surprise, so just go and watch this film.
6. Catfish will leave you with plenty of nagging questions, but whatever the truth behind the story, this is an extraordinary, provocative film and one that grips like a vice right up to the troubling and moving finale.
7. Starts as a documentary about an offbeat online relationship before warping into something much more interesting.
8. A compulsive, propulsive study of relationships virtual and real.
9. A deftly clever commentary on the nature of identity and how it defines our role in society.
10. Filmmakers Ariel Schulman and Henry Joost, as well as 'star' Nev Schulman, insist the film is a real documentary, I'm only about 50 percent sold on this claim.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: Catfish may tread the line between real-life drama and crass exploitation a little too unsteadily for some viewers' tastes, but its timely premise and tightly wound mystery make for a gripping documentary.


Q: 1. A milestone film for both actor and film-maker, Locke is extraordinary viewing.
2. Locke, commendable as sections may be, just sorta runs out of gas.
3. Every look, facial twitch and sentence Hardy delivers is note-perfect and is the acting display to beat early in 2014.
4. Tom Hardy gives a brilliant performance in this utterly wrenching, low-fi, high-concept indie drama.
5. A marvelous exercise in keep-calm-and-drive-on restraint.
6. "Locke," with one man in a car for 85 minutes, is incredibly accomplished filmmaking.
7. Wearing a beard and a Welsh accent that fits him as comfortably as a well-worn glove, Hardy offers a subtle yet riveting portrait in noble obstinacy.
8. Taut one-man drama explores faulty human relationships.
9. In Locke, we ride shotgun with Tom Hardy as he makes a fateful nighttime drive to London. He is the only person we see on screen for the entire film. There are worse ways to spend 90 minutes.
10. Somehow, miraculously, Knight and Hardy turn that car into the only place you want to be for every one of those minutes.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: A one-man show set in a single confined location, Locke demands a powerful performance -- and gets it from a never-more-compelling Tom Hardy.


Q: 1. The intention is a good one, but the blending of disparate ingredients under Andrew Davis' direction is often jarring.
2. The picture is all over the place -- sometimes a fairly stupid broad comedy, sometimes a rather threatening child-cruelty flick, sometimes tinged with magic realism.
3. The smartest, funniest kids' movie since Spy Kids.
4. ...a collection of would-be goofy moments.
5. You walk out of Holes wondering why more kids' movies aren't like this.
6. A movie that feels like it's constantly interrupting itself.
7. A substantive yarn that deals with racism, children not fitting in, and the importance of friendship.
8. A faithful and richly satisfying adaptation of Louis Sachar's novel.
9. Holes" is "Cool Hand Luke" and "The Shawshank Redemption" for kids.
10. Holes is a hoot from start to finish, one of the most deliciously imaginative children's films to hit the screen in many a moon.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: Faithful to its literary source, this is imaginative, intelligent family entertainment.


Q: 1. Worth watching if only for the wonderful clips from the various "Lampoon" stage shows, and an almost endless parade of covers and comic strips.
2. A generous and briskly entertaining look at the American humor magazine's legacy.
3. The funniest documentary since The Aristocrats.
4. Director Douglas Tirola and his many interview subjects make a strong case for the Lampoon itself as genuinely transformative.
5. Douglas Tirola's upbeat doc on National Lampoon already feels essential for celebrating a hard-fought moment of American comic subversion.
6. It mistakes touch-and-go navel-gazing for comprehension, as if speaking to as many subjects as possible produces an inherently compelling take.
7. The laughs come from the vintage bits, and there's a little missing context. But any documentary that humanizes Chevy Chase is a movie making miracle.
8. Douglas Tirola's source material...is chock-a-block full of the magazine's oft controversial articles, art work and, most famously, the cover art
9. full of magic and promise
10. The doc is a bit more loony than the recent SNL film, but it's still just a bit too tame - i.e. lots of talking heads - to truly represent its subject.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A:
Consensus: Drunk Stoned Brilliant Dead might not be the definitive doc National Lampoon fans are waiting for, but it's still almost as transgressively funny as the magazine in its heyday.