Question: 1. Spacey is a delight to behold in this kind of slyly aggressive role.
2. Despite my reservations about Spacey's performance, the film is generally very well acted.
3. If we've all got something to sell, what parts do character and integrity play in our occupational goals? ** Interviews **
4. Spacey comes across as a live wire charged by alternating currents of cynicism and desperation, turning from sardonic wit to savage fury in the space of an anxious heartbeat.
5. Yet as much as we may resist, The Big Kahuna closes the sale.
6. Seems trapped between theatre and cinema, with nobody around to chew its leg off.
7. What you will find are standout performances from each actor and subject matter that will evoke debate long after the movie has ended.
8. Sometimes good, or even almost-great acting, isn't enough.
9. The destination is well worth the sometimes baffling and tedious journey.
10. Kahuna falters in its attempts at profundity or dynamic social commentary.
Consensus: Wonderful adaptation of the stage play.
Q: 1. Any children's movie so giddily entertaining and inventive can be forgiven for occasional lapses in logic, plotting and acting that may perturb adult viewers.
2. It's ironic that, for a 3-D flick, Spy Kids 3-D is rather flat.
3. A pale shadow of the first Spy Kids, as emotionally barren and irritating as the video game it takes place within.
4. The story is flimsy, simple-minded and often nonsensical, compounded by some obtrusively abysmal supporting cast choices.
5. The film itself is practically a Saturday-matinee tribute to the Atari Hall of Fame -- from Tron to Q*bert -- and almost reproduces the druggy, hyperactive 2-D world of Nintendo.
6. The game may be over, but I'm sure the sequels will live on - as long as they stay fresh and fun, that's not such a bad thing.
7. The story is tedious, and the dialogue can sound hokey to adult ears.
8. While there's a certain rough charm to the handmade virtual reality world [Rodriguez] creates, the movie still has the undeniable drawback that it causes a headache.
9. The clever action and throwaway flights of fancy come close to making it worth the 3-D headache.
10. More fun that the second movie.
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: The movie will be found wanting if one is not taken in by the 3-D visuals.
1. Not so much a narrative as a barrage of violent images designed to beat the brain into abject surrender.
2. What is it good for? Absolutely nothin', unless you're in the market for 90-plus minutes of vacant macho brooding, dog-eared action-flick clichés and so-so fight scenes that squander the talents of its star players.
3. In spite of a late-game adrenaline surge, the hoped-for fireworks between Li and Statham never quite materialize.
4. Rent a John Woo movie instead.
5. Not exactly the Jet Li/Jason Statham battle royale we had been promised.
6. If it weren't for the last act, the film would have ended up being just as functional as any cheesy action film from the 80s.
7. Just as you think to yourself, ''This flick would be way better if it had Van Damme playing twins,'' along comes a plot twist so ingenious that it almost redeems the rest of the flick.
8. This assignment may have provided Statham a decent payday, but it's not his shining hour.
9. Lacking even the galvanizing action sequences that would have compensated for suffering through its formulaic plot, this is a thoroughly forgettable exploitationer.
10. Pure straight-to-video rope-a-dope.
Consensus: Jet Li and Jason Statham find themselves on opposing sides in the immensely boring War, which is full of clichйs but short on action.
Q: 1. The Happening features an effectively stylized physical environment: rarely have clouds drifting overhead and wind blowing through trees and a sunny day been filmed so ominously.
2. The Happening suggests [Shyamalan's] (con) artist's touch is waning a bit.
3. On a brighter note, the Wayans brothers have new material to make Scary Movie 5.
4. A creepy cautionary eco-thriller than neither cautions nor thrills. Instead of being full of dread, it's just dreadful.
5. I'm always amused by the sort of backlashes that Shyamalan is in right now. Well, M. Night Shyamalan makes vague, subtle fantasy thrillers. If you've outgrown it, don't blame him.
6. If you're in the mood for an absurd film that alternates between boring and comedy, this is the movie for you.
7. M. Night Shyamalan's worst film.
8. It's an interesting premise for a doomsday thriller, but Shyamalan botches it from the get-go.
9. Trying to understand the thought process of writer and director M. Night Shyamalan is akin to analyzing Jell-O. What keeps it wiggling and what binds it together? This particular circumstance also had an Alfred Hitchcock vibe.
10. just damned creepy
Based on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?

A: Consensus: The Happening begins with promise, but unfortunately descends into an incoherent and unconvincing trifle.
1. Filmmaker Boorman's stroll down memory lane does not bowl us over with rapid-fire hilarity. It soothes us and then melts away unobtrusively.
2. To watch "Queen and Country" is to get the impression of a man who has gone through life and actually learned something, which not everyone does.
3. I hope Boorman follows through and makes a trilogy.
4. Tonally, the movie can't decide whether it's a comedy, a romance, or a wistful wartime madeleine. What it's missing is the sense of joy and wonder of its predecessor.
5. For a movie shaped by the harsher mercies of martial pursuits, it's incredibly light and frequently hilarious.
6. Queen and Country reveals itself as a prime example of the stale storytelling and ignorant ideologies audiences waved good riddance to years ago.
7. Queen and Country is the film of an old master (Boorman directed his first feature in 1965) who still has one of the most magical eyes in the business.
8. Rambling and unfocused but not without its moments, John Boorman's 19th feature film, Queen and Country, represents a very belated sequel to the director's 1987 feature Hope and Glory.
9. The strength of Boorman's film is that it reminds us of what a service comedy is-the spectacle of cogs rising up against their machine.
10. Far from a searing drama yet seldom takes the glib way out.

Answer: Consensus: Graceful and bittersweet, Queen and Country finds writer-director John Boorman revisiting past glories with warmth and wisdom.