DocumentariesOscar Winners Oscar Glossary Top Dozen Dozen A Global 100 Movie IQ Quiz Picture Quiz Top 250

Amy Winehouse had a good deal of talent and a truckload of insecurities. This documentary charts her rise to fame and the shocking crash and burn that followed shortly thereafter. Looking back Winehouse was far too psychologically fragile to cope with where she found herself and help was always one more concert away. Soul crushingly sad.

Malick once again sends his camera floating around a troubled soul mumbling not much more than a stream of consciousness for the whole movie. It's hard to discern exactly what the point of it all is and following along on this aimless journey becomes more and more exasperating as things progress. It's as if Malick had no idea what to make a film about, but went ahead and made one anyway.

A drab and somewhat hackneyed gangster movie that places too much emphasis on a conventional boy meets girl story and not enough on what made the Krays so popular despite their general brutality. However, it's made eminently watchable and is quite a bit of fun due to Tom Hardy's great performances, especially as the unbalanced Ronnie.

Qi Shu is badass here, but there's too little action for that to matter much as this is somewhat abstract and deathly slow, so it's certainly not for everybody. This is a film that you definitely have to be in the right mood for, but if you can hit that zen like meditative state you may find much to admire, as it features painterly compositions and some truly stunning cinematography.

Great premise and well executed, this is truly off the wall, and compelling in its oddness, although it loses its way somewhat towards the end. The dialogue and delivery is deliberately stilted and Farrell does a great job in the lead role, ably supported by Ben Wishaw and John C. Reilly. Certainly the most interesting film of the year.

It's competently shot, Idris Elba commands the screen when he's present and Abraham Atta does a great job as the young protagonist. However, after the first few minutes I could pretty much map out the rest of this film right to the end credits. It starts to drag before the half way mark, really doesn't go anywhere unexpected, then just kind of fizzles out.

Pretty fucking bad. Or pretty bad fucking. Either way this was a chore to sit through. Gaspar Noe seems to think he's 'pushing the envelope' with this film, but that's far from the truth. The sex is mundane, the acting is bad (not wholly surprising as the script is awful) and it's mired in cliche. After the firecrackers that were his first three films this is a hugely disappointing limp wrist of a movie.

Not as measured as the cold Margin Call, or as fun as the darkly satirical Wolf of Wall Street (Scorsese is an obvious influence), but it gets its point across - albeit in a remonstrative and far from subtle kind of way. Those unfamiliar with the causes of the most recent financial crisis may be surprised by the fact that in a broad sense everything in this film is true, and those familiar will undoubtedly have their hackles fully raised by the end.

This is an engine designed with one objective in mind - to hurl you towards the edge of your seat and keep you dangling there for two hours. If that sounds like your bag then climb aboard, put your brain in neutral and fasten your seat belt. Oh, and try to ignore the douchebag with the guitar.

Goodfellas has a lot to answer for. It's made such an indelible impression on so many young filmmakers that you can't help but compare their offerings to Scorsese's definitive gangster movie. Black Mass, suffers by comparison, and feels more like a derivative TV movie. Depp's the best thing in it, but it's not enough.

The premise of The Martian is intriguing, and Matt Damon gives a personable performance, but while a lot of the material here is scientifically accurate, too many key scenes are either over-explained - spoiling the flow of the film and breaking immersion - or sacrifice scientific accuracy for spectacle or drama, which will likely annoy the very people this type of film is supposed to appeal to the most.

Competently directed - Spielberg's an old master at this point - but somewhat cliched. The writing's fine for the most part, and there's a nice sense of time and place. All in all a very watchable affair - due mostly to the great performances by both Hanks and Mark Rylance. There are no risks being taken here at all but as far as safe, well executed fare goes this is top notch entertainment.

Keenly observed film featuring five sisters and their individual responses to the oppressive situation in which they all find themselves. It's thought provoking and becomes quite shocking the more you reflect on what's happening, and why. It does lack some finesse at times, but ultimately is an engaging and worthwhile endeavour, and a stinging indictment of the misogyny inherent in Turkish cultural traditions.

The writing, direction and cast are all impeccable, and Haynes captures the feel and attitudes of 1950s America wonderfully. Both leads are superb - Rooney Mara is especially good here - giving a layered and complex performance. Towards the end I was starting to not care too much about what happened to Carol and Thereze because they didn't seem to. That last ten minutes though...

Chess is a hard sell for movies. As a spectator sport it's uninspiring; two guys sitting across a table from each other in silence. Consequently Zwick has focused much more on Fischer's psychological hangups. This film features good performances, and a decent script but for a movie about such a fascinating game, and one of its most eccentric and brilliant proponents it's really quite uneventful and lacklustre.

Very impressionistic, meandering and occasionally intriguing, but ultimately I found it too abstract to be of much interest. Weerasethakul strikes me as a director who is becoming mesmerised by his own images. It seems like he's focusing on aesthetically pleasing colours and shapes at the expense of almost everything else one can normally appreciate in a film.

From a technical point of view this film ticks a lot of boxes. The camerawork is phenomenal and the performances are noteworthy; DiCaprio immerses himself in the lead role and Hardy is mesmerising at times. There are a few visceral and gripping scenes, but it's a good half hour longer than it needs to be, and it's a one-note film if ever there was one.

The Rocky franchise was nicely wrapped up with the surprisingly good Rocky Balboa, so it's easy to go into this movie thinking that it's just a hastily conceived cash grab. And it is. From a stylistic point of view it's forgettable, as are the characters and performances, with the exception of Stallone, who manages to rise above the bland and cliched script to deliver a performance with a bit of depth. But it's a lost cause with this cynical and soulless affair.

Hong Sang-soo continues his Rohmer-esque exploration of people and their foibles, and with each film he gets more playful and adventurous with form and structure. Here we have the same day played twice with the action branching depending on the lead's behaviour. Some of the dialogue is a bit awkward, but it's a clever idea and the performances are winning.

The first half is slow, with patches of interest, but is too subtle for the subject matter at hand, while the second half has the opposite problem and comes off as a trite TV movie that tries to be hard hitting but ends up just being simultaneously preachy and confusing. All things considered the film feels manipulative and heavy handed.

Refreshingly candid and non-judgmental film that nicely captures the feel of 70s San Francisco spinning out of control in a drug-fueled haze. It features an extraordinary performance by Bel Powley in a part that is unusually complex in comparison to most of what's available for female actors in American films.

Schneider vs Bax is one of those films that starts off really well, but you fear it's going to end up going nowhere, and sadly that's kind of what happens. The journey to the conclusion is interesting enough though; there's some nice black humour in there and it's well shot and put together, so it's still well worth your time.

Denis Villeneuve continues to make films of the highest calibre. From the opening scene to the end credits this is a masterclass in suspenseful, stylish film making. The cinematography is striking, the editing precise but unobtrusive, and the music is highly effective at increasing the sense of impending doom. Performances across the board are excellent. Thrillers don't get much better than this. Film of the year.

Jon Krakauer's 'Into Thin Air' provides an eye opening glimpse into the logistics of Everest expeditions, while also providing a first hand account of events that day, albeit from a singular point of view. It's a great read. 'Everest' on the other hand tries to present all sides of the event from second hand accounts after the fact, and suffers as a consequence, with characters and incidents being rather hastily sketched. It looks pretty good for the most part, but much of the action is confusing and it all feels a bit soulless.

Great filmmaking ruined by an idiotic premise. A man in Auschwitz putting himself and everyone around him in mortal danger to find a rabbi in order to bury some random dead kid is beyond absurd. After a while I was willing Saul to do everyone a favour and just catch a bullet. You'd think he'd have more important things to worry about but no, Saul (or 'that daft twat' as I came to think of him) carries on with his nitwit plan to the bitter end. Such a waste.

On the face of it this is an interesting proposition. A film that raises questions about artificial intelligence, what it means to be alive and capable of conscious thought and self-reflection. But it changes direction midway through and becomes a much more mundane affair. Oscar Isaac puts in another fine performance (got to love that dance routine), and Domhnal Gleeson doesn't.

The behavioral experiments Stanley Milgram conducted in the 60s were fascinating, and this film does a good job of explaining what he was about and how controversial yet important his work was. Sarsgaard gives a very muted performance - presumably matching the real Milgram's personality, and the film itself is presented in a clever and creative way, elevating it above most other biopics.

More than being an exposé of child abuse by priests in the catholic church or a record of the investigative efforts to uncover said abuse, this film is a big juicy steak for actors to sink their teeth into. Keaton and Schreiber are excellent, and the script is solid. In every other way though this film is completely unremarkable.

To criticise this film on the basis of the plot contrivance the events are centred around is to miss the point. This is a precisely crafted character study of an urbane woman driven to inarticulate rage over the accumulation of a thousand tiny injustices. Everything hangs on the script, which feels very natural, and Rampling's performance, which is subtle and nuanced. An overlooked gem.

A charmless updating of the original Star Wars, with Abrams the efficiency expert at the helm, moving everything along at a brisk pace, ticking the requisite boxes. Aside from Daisy Ridley having the acting range of a tree stump the biggest problem here is the villain. Instead of the ruthless and commanding Vader intent on tracking down the Death Star plans we now have a weak and petulant adolescent whose motives are largely unexplained, leaving the audience to wonder what all the fuss is about.

I just watched a guy I don't care about argue with everyone around him about anything and everything for two hours straight. That's the whole movie, and though the script is good, and Fassbender is effortlessly compelling, it seems that Steve Jobs the person just wasn't interesting enough to make a movie about.

Tarantino's grand 70mm western epic turns out to be a parlour piece along the lines of an Agatha Christie whodunnit. The placement of one key scene and the presentation of another are questionable, but aside from that we basically have great actors delivering great dialogue for almost three hours, while Ennio Morricone's atmospheric score adds to the tension. Sign me up for that all day long.

Reminiscent of Kiarostami's vastly superior Ten, this is nevertheless an achievement in its own right, given the fact that Panahi is continuing to make films in Iran while under the threat of imprisonment for doing so. That the end result is utterly compelling and full of levity, while simultaneously exposing his government's brutally oppressive policies towards the arts is a testament to Panahi's tenacity and inventiveness as a filmmaker.

Here's what really happened: Riley's parents were notorious drug dealers back in Minnesota but the Feds were closing in on them, so they sold all their furniture, skipped town and headed off to San Francisco to set up a meth lab. Figuring all the upheaval would make the obnoxiously upbeat Riley jittery they decided to switch her from Lithium to Valium, but the meds got mixed up in the move and they ended up giving her the LSD they had stashed in the glovebox for a special occasion. Poor Riley.

Has the same strengths and weaknesses as Sorrentino's previous film The Great Beauty, but seems less substantial. The script is a bit clunky and things feel a little forced at times. Still, it's a treat for the eyes and Caine is majestic. It also features a higher than average proportion of memorable scenes - the Maradona tennis ball scene for example is sublime.

Woody's take on the Dostoyevsky classic Crime & Punishment is a bit forced at times and reinforces the idea that he's been on autopilot for some time now. There's obviously nothing new here, but Allen seems unconcerned with this - it actually seems like he's purposefully making the set-up contrived so he can concentrate on more technical things this time around, which shows in the final product. Joaquin Phoenix puts in another great turn.