Q: 1. It's not as dark or as edgy as Tim Burton's Batman films, but it's still cleaner and more digestible. It's not a deep story, but it's full of fun nostalgia and action.
2. A beautifully directed, high-flyin' production, teeming with all sorts of classic Hollywood encounters and bizarre comic book touches...Connelly is mesmerizing -- a stupendous act of casting that elevates the room temperature of the picture.
3. Almost never takes thrilling flight.
4. More Deco-era style than substance -- but fun.
5. A charming adventure tale, in the spirit of 1930's serials, The Rocketeer is a fun ride.
6. One of Disney's most underrated films, and I can't for the life of me figure out why, unless it's the absence of a big-name star.
7. A charmer in its gee-whiz, irony-light resuscitation of the movie serials of the '30s. [Blu-ray]
8. While The Rocketeer never crashes, it's a bumpy ride of cartoonish characters, a flimsy plot and an overall sense of letdown.
9. Energetic, but the script is routine.
10. A piece of blandly enthusiastic, B-movie pulp.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: An action-packed, if anachronistic, look back at pulp matinee serials, The Rocketeer may ring hollow with viewers expecting more than simple fun and gee-whiz special effects.
1. Much of the fun of Baghead is that it's unclassifiable, by turns a movie-movie lark, an Eric Rohmer-like relationship comedy, and a surprisingly effective Friday The 13th kids-in-the-woods slasher film.
2. Once the threat arrives, I was praying to return to the childish mating rituals of these monotonous characters. Watching lousy actors try to express heartache through limited gifts is far more frightening than any masked, crazed killer.
3. A very short and cheerfully scruffy comedy-thriller by the Duplass brothers.
4. I want to persuade you to see Baghead, but I don't want to overhype it, because in many ways it's a delicate construction best served as a surprise.
5. Satire, you see, requires the sort of artistic discipline that is anathema to mumblecore filmmakers.
6. While the acting is uneven and the focus wavers, the Duplasses take several well-aimed potshots at their bloated industry.
7. Delightfully unpredictable.
8. One of the year's standout indie efforts.
9. The semi-improvised performances, which seem so natural that it is tempting to confuse the actors with their characters, bring Baghead into the realm of group therapy observed through one-way glass.
10. What could have been an amusing short subject, the Duplass Brothers' not-quite-horror/not-quite-comedy drags its one note premise out to an almost mind-numbing 84 minutes.
Consensus: Pitting actors against murderers in a self-aware struggle for stardom, Baghead successfully skates the borders of horror and comedy.
Q: 1. When Hollywood attacks a volatile issue, it inevitably spoon-feeds you the main components of the issue several times over.
2. The tone is so muddled that there's a whiff of exploitation to this movie that's unsettling at best.
3. Undeniably one of the more powerful films you'll see this year!
4. Riveting!
5. I just wish the film didn't give us an entire year's history curriculum about racism in two hours.
6. Having reduced racism to a kind of adolescent coping mechanism, X takes a mildly curious path to its foregone conclusion, writer-director Tony Kaye putting his leads through the somehow comforting 'hood-film paces.
7. American History X may be flawed, but it's not easily forgotten.
8. Kaye wants to say something about what produces a skinhead today, and though he doesn't succeed fully in this endeavor, he does take us a significant part of the way.
9. Norton is by turns frightening and heartbreaking, angry and serene. I don't think I've ever seen a character in film with a more believably wide range.
10. A powerful and disturbing social document.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: A compelling and provocative story led by an excellent performance by Edward Norton.
1. Both epic and intimate, taking on a large cast of characters while focusing quietly on the details of their lives.
2. Writer-director Barry Levinson brings it all back home to Baltimore and delivers his funniest and most heartfelt film since Diner.
3. Nostalgia is a tricky thing, but Levinson manages to strike just the right balance of humor, affection, and candor.
4. Lovingly crafted.
5. A grand slam!
6. A pretty brave and ambitious feat.
7. Excellent re-creation of the clothing and landmarks of Baltimore in the 1950s.
8. Liberty Heights is worth a look, with its rich characters and dialogue, and its gorgeous cinematography by Chris Doyle.
9. Offers a deeper immersion in that old '50s feeling than any other Hollywood film in recent memory.
10. Coming to terms with "the other" (whether stranger, enemy, or alien) is as critical to the development of soul now as it was in the 1950s.
Consensus: A moving film with moments of humor, Liberty Heights succeeds in capturing the feel of the '50s with great performances and sensitive direction.
Q: 1. An intelligent and expertly-judged microcosm of the inanity of war.
2. Despite some missteps, No Man's Land is a shrewd film that provides a persuasive picture of how small conflicts can escalate into all-out war.
3. Skimps on character development for such a politically-charged movie
4. It's less about battlefields and weaponry than it is about personality conflicts and the agonizing frustration that boils inside people who want to put positive changes into effect, but are too entangled in red tape to do much of anything.
5. absurd situation creates lasting images that don't diminish with time
6. A brilliant and brilliantly disturbing film.
7. Tanovic adroitly indicts the entrenched hostilities between people and nations.
8. savage whimsy
9. No Man's Land is the superior version of Russell's slightly overrated Three Kings.
10. Makes us laugh and frustrates us at the same time.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: Bleak and darkly humorous, No Man's Land vividly illustrates the absurdity of war.
Q: 1. One of the most ludicrous movies in years.
2. Dark City is a truly scary flick.
3. This is one of those movies that's more concerned with set design motivation than anything that's going on inside the characters' heads.
4. It does not take long to realize that there is a lot less here than meets the eye.
5. Proyas floods the screen with cinematic and literary references ranging from Murnau and Lang to Kafka and Orwell, creating a unique yet utterly convincing world.
6. If you don't fall in love with it, you've probably never fallen in love with a movie, and never will.
7. City ultimately plays like one of those art-deco dystopian CD-ROM adventures of recent years.
8. [A] stylish hybrid of futuristic thriller and film noir.
9. Has all the visual punch of ... Terry Gilliam and David Fincher, but lacks the narrative and thematic strength of either of those two.
10. Such thin plotting is okay, because it's the city itself that makes this film work.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A:
Consensus: Stylishly gloomy, Dark City offers a polarizing whirl of arresting visuals and noirish action.