1. Of the many film versions, this one from 1951 with Alastair Sim as Scrooge is the most faithful to the spirit of the book.
2. If I dare to say it, a more dramatically successful work than Dickens's novella.
3. A sturdy 1951 British mounting of the Dickens tale, with Alastair Sim contributing a definitive Scrooge.
4. Lashings of festive cheer and a fair dollop of fine performances will leave you in the mood for mince pies and a renewed sense of seasonal goodwill to all men.
5. This is easily the best screen version of the much loved yuletide tale.
6. This faithful adaptation of Dickens' A Christmas Carol is a rare beast indeed, a genuinely affecting melodrama.
7. For many decades, this 1951 production was considered to be the best adaptation of Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol," and it is easy to see why: it features excellent production values and a wonderful performance by Alastair Sim as Scrooge.
8. One of the handful of best Christmas movies ever made.
9. The classic book brought to life.
10. This film, and Alastair Sim's performance as Scrooge in particular, so perfectly captures Dickens's novella that all other versions feel redundant.
Consensus: The 1951 adaptation of Charles Dickens' timeless classic is perhaps the most faithful film version -- and Alastair Sim's performance as Scrooge is not to be missed.
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. Worse things can and will happen this year than The Foot Fist Way being a small success.
2. This movie's weakness is disgusting to me.
3. The film's funniest moment caught me at a loss of breath, and at its best has other moments providing extended laughs, if not of the breathtaking variety.
4. This is irritainment, something you snicker at while covering your eyes, praying that this guy never gets loose in the real world, when, in fact, he's your next-door neighbor. Or you.
5. A film crying out to be discovered by midnight movie mavens.
6. McBride's smalltown satire offers minor martial arts-themed laughs.
7. Everything feels like it sprang from an all-night, cola-fueled brainstorm, so every bit slips easily away, usually after generating a grin or two, if not many laughs.
8. This is a really small film, shot in 19 days, and it's a little rough around the edges, but it's got a huge comic heart that's undeniable.
9. If I had my way, every indie comedy would be done The Foot Fist Way.
10. This comedy clocks in around 90 minutes. Yet somehow it still feels too long and overly padded -- as if it were a sketch-comedy show bit that was stretched out to feature length.
Consensus: The rough edges and biting humor of this martial arts comedy will keep audiences laughing and cringing in turns.
Q: 1. A lively film that doesn't linger too long on any one thought or with any one interviewee.
2. No one emerges very well defined from this historical shuffle, but those who know the artists' works, or names such as Hopps and Blum, but have never heard them speak, will find The Cool School absorbing and informative.
3. Cool School is a must for anyone interested in 20th century American art.
4. The Cool School, a breezy, lively documentary about a thin slice of the Los Angeles fine art scene in the 1950s, is easy on the eyes, and the ears too.
5. Diverting.
6. Thoughtful and thought-provoking.
7. Though designed more for the devotee of the arts than your average moviegoer, the film is still apt to enthrall even the uninitiated who wouldn't know a Jackson Pollock from a Willem de Kooning.
8. Largely avoids sharply delineated portraits, with its focus on the scene at the expense of individuals, ultimately resulting in a documentary that doesn't rise above the functional.
9. All told, and well told, this is essential history.
10. Documentarian Morgan Neville takes an appropriately lively, left-field approach to The Cool School's eye-opening history of the Beat-era Left Coast art scene -- a lesser-known chapter in the story of American modern art.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: A breezy and lively modern art documentary, revealing that LA is not a cultural wasteland when it comes to fine art.
1. An engaging, kid-friendly nature doc with a hint of social commentary rolled in.
2. A populist take on simian society and alpha leadership leads to an entertaining look at caste systems in the animal kingdom.
3. The cheekiest, funniest, and most purely entertaining entry in the Disneynature series.
4. The film should hit the sweet spot for family audiences.
5. With its sumptuous photography, razor-sharp editing, and a delightfully comic narration by Tin Fey, "Monkey Kingdom" shows us like no other film in recent memory how closely animals act like people.
6. The cumulative effect is cheerily life-affirming, a bracing infusion of macaque-style joie de vivre.
7. Monkey Kingdom is delightful, and its swinging and vaulting best any stuntwork you'll see in this year's summer blockbusters ...
8. The imagery of this film will linger in this reviewer's mind long after the monkey names are forgotten.
9. It's hard to imagine what message children will take away from this film other than that monkeys are just like characters in a fictional Disney movie, which they are not.
10. Monkeys.
Consensus: Monkey Kingdom's breathtaking footage of primates in the wild is likely to please animal lovers of all ages.
1. thoroughly entertaining
2. The least fun of the three: overworked and uninspired.
3. A warm and engaging return to the original Raiders spirit.
4. This movie returns the Indy series to its roots of thundering thrills, spiritual inspiration and perfectly timed humor.
5. Jeffrey Boam's script dabbles with themes of neglect and reconciliation, but there's nothing ponderous about the duo's near death scrapes and light-hearted tussels over the same blonde Fräulein.
6. A very disappointing sequel that's just too jokey for its own good. Lacks the intense thrills of the first two.
7. As good as the original!
8. Perfectly exciting third venture into Indiana Jones land by Spielberg.
9. Harrison Ford overacts. Everytime he says "dad," I want to cringe.
10. why I believe in summer blockbusters

Consensus: Lighter and more comedic than its predecessor, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade returns the series to the brisk serial adventure of Raiders, while adding a dynamite double act between Harrison Ford and Sean Connery.