CURE ***

 This Japanese serial-killer chiller is just grisly enough to satisfy the fan-boys and smart enough to please those who like to take their brains with them when they go to the cinema. People are being murdered in Tokyo and their killers are found close to the bodies but claiming either no memory or understanding of their crimes and it's left to laid-back detective Koji Yaskusho to figure out what's going on.

The film is Kiyoshi Kurosawa's "Cure" and since it first appeared in 1997 has built up something of a cult following. It's like a Japanese version of "Seven" and Kurosawa builds up the suspense beautifully, using tiny shock tactics rather than big jump-out-at-you scares and eliciting a genuinely eerie performance from Masato Hagiwara as the man who's probably behind the killings. A superb use of sound effects also adds to the general feeling of unease making this one of the most unsettling horror films of the last 25 years.

THE TROUT no stars

 Even the most avid cineastes are unlikely to be familiar with this very late Joseph Losey opus. It was his penultimate film, made in France in 1982, and starring a young Isabelle Huppert and Jeanne Moreau and frankly, it's pretty terrible. Huppert is the small-town girl with a gay husband, (Jacques Spiesser), and ideas above her station who, after hustling a rich, middle-aged couple, (Moreau and Jean-Pierre Cassel), at, of all things, bowls ends up going to Japan with Cassel's business partner.

The kindest thing I can say about it is that it's a strange movie that is also strangely dated, (there's lots of bad disco music), and it features some of the worst acting that either Huppert or Moreau ever did. There's the flimsiest of plots involving high finance but this, like much else in the picture, is hard to fathom. The best performance comes from the Polish actor Daniel Olbrychski as that business partner of Cassel's who has the hots for Huppert but even he can't redeem this hollow, empty affair that, together with "Streaming", brought Losey's illustrious career to a sorry end.

DEPARTURE *

 "Departure" is another of those precious coming-of-age films that the British or the French, in particular, tend to do rather well, this one being British but set in France where Juliet Stevenson and her teenage son Alex Lawther have come to sell the family's holiday home. Young Lawther, (twenty when the film was made but looking much younger), is also discovering his sexuality and it isn't girls he appears to be interested in, so when he spies a slightly older French boy on a bridge, his hormones start working overtime. Rather awkwardly, when Juliet meets him she, too, is drawn to him.

Beautifully photographed, intelligently written and directed by Andrew Steggall, whose first feature this is, and very nicely acted, "Departure" is one of those films you feel churlish criticizing, rather like throwing stones at a nun and I suppose you could say that in its own way it is absolutely perfect, perfect and lifeless and more than a little contrived. Since young Alex wants to be a writer you wonder how much of it may be autobiographical but if it is, what a dull coming-of-age Steggall must have had; you keep waiting and waiting for something to happen and when it does, it's a case of so-what. This is the kind of art-house film Joanna Hogg makes, which may be a recommendation to some and an anathema to others. As I said, it's 'precious'.

5 AGAINST THE HOUSE no stars

 A heist movie but not a good one. Phil Karlson was the director so you had the right to expect more but saddled with a dreadful script and poor performances all round he couldn't do anything to save "5 Against the House". For starters, the title is misleading as there's really only one against the house, psychotic Korean veteran Brian Keith. The other four are Guy Madison, (looking more like William Holden than ever), Kerwin Mathews, Alvy Moore and Kim Novak, (looking gorgeous but not doing much in the way of acting; even her singing is dubbed), and although it was Mathews who came up with the daft plan to rob a Reno casino they didn't really mean to keep the money. In fact, Madison and Novak were in the dark about the whole thing until the very last minute, (yes, it's as silly as it sounds). There is a trickle of excitement at the end but not enough to keep you awake. By the time the robbery comes around you will probably have drifted into a deep sleep and if you're lucky you might even be dreaming you're watching "Rififi" or "The Killing" instead.

REBECCA **

 Whatever you do, don't approach Ben Wheatley's new film "Rebecca" as a remake of Alfred Hitchcock's much beloved classic, not that it ever would have been; Wheatley is his own man and we always knew he would do things differently, in this case sticking more closely to the book and casting it in such a way as to banish all memories of Fontaine, Olivier and Dame Judith and in this he has been largely successful. Armie Hammer is a lot less melancholy, if a tad modern, than Lord Larry ever was. Lily James is much more down-to-earth and obviously a good deal more sensual than Joan while Kristin Scott Thomas gives Mrs. Danvers a human side that was totally lacking in Judith Anderson's performance. Indeed, regardless of what else you think of the film I doubt if anyone could find fault with Scott Thomas who effortlessly walks away with the picture.

It also benefits from a Manderley that really looks like it might be one of the finest houses in all of England and the whole thing is beautifully shot by Laurie Rose in widescreen and colour. Fans of Mr. Hitchcock's version are unlikely to be won over; however, newcomers and fans of Du Maurier's novel should find plenty here to please them though the device of not giving the new Mrs. De Winter a Christian name seems even more contrived this time round.

CHILD'S PLAY *

 There's evil afoot in one of those boy's schools were the boys are all played by actors in their early twenties. It makes you wonder at what age pupils graduated from American high-schools. "Child's Play" was adapted from a successful Tony-award winning Broadway play and was directed by Sidney Lumet. It's certainly not one of his better films but it's a nice grisly entertainment nevertheless about the feud between two senior masters, (James Mason and Robert Preston, both terrific), and a seemingly inexplicable eruption of violence amongst the boys.

Basically, it's a high-class horror film with possible demonology lurking in the chapel and would be more effective if the 'boys' weren't so clearly young men. Beau Bridges is the new young gym teacher and former pupil torn between loyalty to Preston and sympathy for Mason and David Rounds is good as a fairly liberal young priest. It's nonsense, of course, but the cast give it a real kick and Mason, in particular, might convince you that you're watching something serious. Understandably it isn't much revived.

THE DEVIL ALL THE TIME **

 Religion figures prominently in this slice of American Gothic from Antonio Campos but it's the old time religion of the Old Testament rather than the New and it's the Devil who's in the driving seat in "The Devil All the Time". Covering a period of about twenty years and with a multitude of characters, most of whom come to a sticky end, it's a darkly funny piece of Americana set in the backwoods of West Virginia where murder is more common than a prayer before bedtime.

We've been down these backroads before, of course, all the way back to the seventies. Scorsese cut his teeth on material like this as did Malick and Campos shows us you certainly can't keep a good genre down. It meanders a little and jumps back and forth in time maybe more than it should and it's certainly overlong but it's well-acted, (particularly by Robert Pattinson and Tom Holland), and very nicely narrated by Donald Ray Pollock, author of the original novel.

SALON KITTY no stars

 Of course, it's all done in the worst possible taste. Tinto Brass' "Salon Kitty" is soft, verging on hard, core Eurotrash set in Nazi Germany with something to offend everyone, cineastes probably most of all, particularly if you're not a fan of bad dubbing, (it's said to be in English and is like a porno version of "Cabaret"). Ingrid Thulin is Kitty who runs the salon of the title, Helmut Berger is a typically degenerate German officer and there's a large multi-national cast that includes none other than John Ireland, (did they really think he could sell it to the American market?).

Of course, if this is your bag you won't be disappointed and whatever it lacks in taste it makes up for in design. This is a very good-looking 'dirty' picture, the ultimate dirty-mac movie with copious amounts of male and female nudity with both sexes obviously chosen for their physiques and not their acting chops. For explicitness it puts Visconti's "The Damned" in the shade and if it leaves you feeling very queasy then I guess you can say it's done it's (really rather appalling) job.

THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 ****

 Of course it's brilliant, funny and hugely entertaining; just what you would expect when you see the name Aaron Sorkin, who this time has also directed, as well as written, "The Trial of the Chicago 7" which may not have been 'the trial of the century' but was certainly one of the most important 'political' trials ever held in America. It was, for want of a better word, a show-trial ordered by Attorney General John Mitchell to discredit the organizers of the protests held during the 1968 Democratic Convention. The trial was presided over by one, Judge Julius Hoffman who, from the moment he put his ass on the bench, was clearly on the side of the prosecution, though in view of what he had to put up with from the likes of Abbie Hoffman and others, you might even say he was provoked.

This is a classy production with an all-star cast that includes a couple of Oscar-winners. They are all outstanding with Frank Langella, (the judge), Mark Rylance, (the defence attorney), and, perhaps most surprising of all, Sacha Baron Cohen, (Abbie Hoffman) walking away with the picture and if Oscars are handed out this year surely Langella has to be a front-runner. If Sorkin portrays events in a crazy and seemingly haphazard way then I think it's safe to assume that's exactly what they were. As for the trial itself, you couldn't make this stuff up. This is a brilliantly written, directed and acted tragi-comedy about a terrible time in recent American history, though watching it you might think you are seeing newsreel shot on the streets of America only a few days ago.

BY THE GRACE OF GOD ****

 If you're used to the clever Hitchcockian thrillers Francois Ozon usually gives us, then "By the Grace of God" will almost certainly come as something of a shock and not just because he's dealing with a profoundly serious subject, (paedophilia within the Catholic Church), but also because of the style he's adopted. We are introduced to the subject from the outset but through a series of letters, e-mails and face-to-face meetings divided into three chapters, each linked by a victim of one abusing priest. This is drama done almost like a fly-on-the-wall documentary and is all the more moving for it with performances by all concerned so naturalistic as to go beyond mere 'acting', (Swann Arlaud won a Cesar for his performance).

We are told at the beginning that this is a work of fiction but based on facts and it happens in the recent past, during the papacy of Pope Francis, which is telling; has the Church's attitudes changed that much or is this institution still protecting its own. Ozon, who knows how to make a good thriller, makes a brilliant thriller here without betraying his subject in any way; some scenes I found almost unbearably moving. Perhaps, indeed, this is the kind of film Hitchcock could have or should have made in another time and place but, of course, these things were never talked about then, allowing this culture of abuse to flourish. This very important film may well be the best thing Ozon has done to date.

TWILIGHT OF HONOR no stars

 It's superbly photographed in black and white Panavision by Philip Lathrop which is about the only thing you can say in favour of this turgid courtroom melodrama. "Twilight of Honor", which came out in 1963, was poorly written, poorly directed and poorly acted with Richard Chamberlain as the inexperienced young lawyer roped into defending Nick Adams on a murder charge, knowing the case is strongly rigged against him. He gets a former old pro lawyer, (Claude Rains, in his penultimate movie), to help him, leading to every cliche in the book.

This is one of the least believable of all courtroom movies. Adams was inexplicably nominated for an Oscar for his performance and it's hard to believe the appallingly wooden Chamberlain actually had a career after this. Still, a lot of people think quite highly of the picture which perhaps only goes to show that courtroom movies are exceedingly popular even when they aren't any good. This is one of the worst.

MATTHIAS & MAXIME no stars

 Xavier Dolan, one-time enfant terrible of French-Canadian cinema, hasn't so much mellowed as become conventional. If the plot of his latest film, "Matthias & Maxime" is a little off-the-wall, the treatment is alarmingly predictable. Two male friends agree to take part in a girlfriend's student film in a scene where they have to kiss or indeed 'make out'. Dolan, for some reason, cuts away from the kiss itself and builds his film around the impact their actions has on their lives and their friendship.

It's beautifully filmed and well acted by both Dolan and Gabriel D'Almeida Freitas in the title roles as well as by a handful of people you would hardly want to spend time with normally and therein lies the rub; there's no-one to empathize with and nothing happens to make us care very much about Matthias & Maxime and their hang-ups. I'm not disputing Dolan's very obvious talent and it's still hard to believe he's only thirty-one, (he made his first feature aged only twenty), but these male-orientated and family-orientated psychodramas are starting to get a little dull. This might first look like he's branching out but there's nothing here we haven't seen before.

BAXTER, VERA BAXTER no stars

 Although a major player in the French New Wave, the films of Marguerite Duras are, in general, not that widely known and "Baxter, Vera Baxter" is one that disappeared from view quicker than most. She wrote and directed it in 1977 with her usual collaborator Delphine Seyrig and a little-seen Gerard Depardieu heading a largely unknown cast and it plods along in typical metronomic fashion as we are introduced to our titular heroine, (Claudine Gabay), by Depardieu who, it appears, is her current lover before meeting Vera herself as she languishes in some expensive villa regaling anyone who listens with tales of her sorry love life; Seyrig is one of the listeners.

This is the kind of art-house movie that gives art-house movies a bad name. Ponderous, pretentious and, although only ninety minutes long, feeling like an eternity in hell. It's the kind of rubbish you can see the Monty Python team sending up with dialogue so precious you may feel like switching the subtitles off altogether but even then you would still have to listen to the God-awful music. To be avoided like the worst case of Covid.