Q: 1. unfurls at the same pace as a doomed lotus blossom. And just as beautifully with the year's most sensuous cinematography
2. Ang Lee's latest, Lust, Caution is a sluggish disappointment with a catchy title.
3. Lust, Caution is strangely engrossing but the fairly straightforward plot does not justify the running time.
4. Isolated moments of high drama and some startlingly intimate sex scenes sadly fail to galvanise a turgid and overlong whole.
5. In a film where casting is a vital component in the edgy equation, Leung and Tang make a picturesque and dramatically compelling couple.
6. While some will feel his previous works better illustrate his gift of film, Lust, Caution creates an unmatched statement of cinematic wisdom all its own.
7. Lust, Caution asks some patience of us, but our patience pays off.
8. This Juliet if not Romeo steamy Shanghai erotic spy thriller touching on a torturer's tainted libido, crosses party lines to contemplate sexual betrayal laced with toxic unrequited desire.
9. A downer with no redeeming entertainment value outside of its hot sex scenes.
10. What is graphic and raw and adult and disturbing are the roiling, dangerous emotions underlying the hot, sweaty, etc sex...
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: Ang Lee's Lust, Caution is a tense, sensual and beautifully-shot espionage film.
1. Are you, more or less, setting yourself up for disappointment if you go to see a film adaptation of one of the most powerfully written novels you can recall reading?
2. much like the 80's era that it personifies
3. I wish I hadn't seen it.
4. Una de las más comentadas, ingeniosas e inteligentes películas del ańo
5. a potentially sensationalistic film that has become--for lack of a better word--boring.
6. The best monster movie in years.
7. Harron, thankfully, chooses to leave most of the carnage to our imaginations, but without any psychological backing for Patrick's bloody acts, they ring pretty hollow.
8. Sex, drugs and sadistic homicide mark disappointing Sundance buzz-maker.
9. A visually chilly but often very funny satire of American greed and conspicuous consumption.
10. If you are offended by purposeless terrible deeds and unrepentant evil, skip it. Otherwise, it's a great movie to chat about over a nice, fluffy dessert.
Consensus: If it falls short of the deadly satire of Bret Easton Ellis's novel, American Psycho still finds its own blend of horror and humor, thanks in part to a fittingly creepy performance by Christian Bale.
Q: 1. As the eponymous terrorist, Cheadle makes a big impact without too much noise.
2. Traitor is undeniably an intelligent, watchable thriller that wisely steers clear of racial stereotyping, yet manages to fall short of delivering a wholly satisfying cerebral or visceral experience.
3. Other than Samir, most of the characters are oversimplified placeholders with little depth, but Cheadle gives you someone to latch onto and care for. You also sort of despise him, because he may well be doing more harm than good.
4. Simmers down into a reasonably smart little thriller with a moral conscience, yet.
5. If it doesn't succeed in challenging you perception of the war on terror, it might challenge your view on Steve Martin.
6. Surprisingly, Steve Martin created this story. In a decade of wild and crazy fictional terrorism, his was the most horrifyingly plausible - one that spun terrorism as drama into uncomfortable community theater, striking the country's friendliest corners.
7. We watch for the sake of the chase, and while it's a chase that certainly proves better than most, it's also one that is good enough to have been even better than that.
8. As a thriller, Traitor excels and feels especially relevant, considering the subject matter.
9. The action scenes will grab you, but there's an actual story here, too.
10. Much harder to see coming is the film's denouement, but that's only because of its extreme silliness.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: Despite another reliable performance from Don Cheadle, Traitor suffers from too many cliches and an unfocused narrative.
1. [A] penetrating portrait of life on the outskirts of New York.
2. An intriguingly original look at one boy's version of the American Dream, Ramin Bahrani's third feature is filled with vibrant life, finding drama and beauty in a world that's hidden from the eyes of most Americans.
3. Three shots into Rahmin Bahrani's Chop Shop, and you're already pulled into its world with an effortless economy and precision that leave you no doubt you're in the best of cinematic hands.
4. Tells the kind of New York story too often overlooked.
5. Bahrani deftly walks a tightrope toward insight, never falling into safety nets of judgment or unearned sentiment.
6. The director has created a not-to-miss gem for the discriminating viewer.
7. Iranian-American filmmaker Ramin Bahrani showed great compassion for New York's underclass with his first feature, Man Push Cart, and his storytelling skill has only sharpened with this riveting followup.
8. Bahrani's willingness to expose the shameful reality of third-world conditions in the Land of Plenty while telling a crackling good story marks him as a filmmaker as important as he is accessible.
9. Shot in the unvarnished sets of New York's Iron Triangle, the unpaved mud holes of the streets and the rough plywood of bedroom walls tell an unforgettable story of growing up in a world with little pity
10. Director/co-writer Ramin Bahrani ("Man Push Cart") gives a candid window into America's impoverished underbelly via a Queens junkyard neighborhood called the "Iron Triangle," where 12-year-old Latino orphan Ale (Alejandro Polanco) plans for his future
Consensus: Filled with excellent performances, Ramin Bahrani's deft sophomore effort is a heartfelt, hopeful neorealist look at the people who live in the gritty underbelly of New York City.
Q: 1. Sean Connery may have been eying retirement, but he and Bond were by now moulded together, his sleek machismo indelibly imprinted on 007 forever.
2. It isn't "Thunderball" and it sure isn't "Goldfinger," but it IS old-school Connery Bond, so obviously it's a darn good time.
3. This noisy and wildly violent picture... is evidently pegged to the notion that nothing succeeds like excess. And because it is shamelessly excessive, it is about a half-hour too long.
4. Tired, poorly paced Bond from 1967, with Sean Connery displaying his discontent.
5. A well-crafted installment in the Bond series.
6. Sean Connery's disenchantment with his starring role is unmistakable in this, the fifth Bond spectacular.
7. Sean Connery plays 007 with his usual finesse.
8. A primetime Bond adventure plus the best Bond movie theme of all time.
9. Roald Dahl's implausible script is padded out with the usual exotic locations, stunts, and trickery.
10. Tons of fun, really, and Donald Pleasence as Blofeld is inimitable.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A:
Consensus: With exotic locales, impressive special effects, and a worthy central villain, You Only Live Twice overcomes a messy and implausible story to deliver another memorable early Bond flick.