So what’s wrong with Deadpool and Wolverine? Well, if we’re going to quibble, maybe it could’ve done with a little less “play an incongruous song to contrast with the action to humorous effect”. I mean it’s funny, but arguably even funnier if done five times in a movie rather than ten. In narrative terms the movie could also have greatly benefited by showing us the stakes a bit more - the plot hinges on Deadpool trying to save his timeline…

The first thing to note is that, if you build a franchise on a fictional universe and fictional monsters whose workings don’t really make sense on close scrutiny, then the more times you go back to that universe without filling in the gaps or addressing the plot holes, the more they’ll draw attention. The second thing to note is the Toy Story principle: if your plot doesn’t make sense, better make sure your movie is so damn good nobody will…

This is one of the strangest movies I’ve ever seen. I could see a really good movie hiding somewhere. There was much I liked. Creepy atmospheric scenes, and a strong premise - a troubled actor playing a priest in a movie that - though not explicitly stated - is a remake of The Exorcist (whose star, Jason Miller, was the father of this film’s director), falls in thrall to a demon himself. Great ideas. And a great performance by Russell…

James Stewart didn't think much of it, and Alfred Hitchcock admitted his fake-one-take technique was just a gimmick, but I found it rather winning. It's a simple tale and the single set combined with the "one take" method (actually ten takes stitched skilfully together, back in the day when a camera could only hold ten minutes of film) makes it feel very stagey, like a filmed play - which, of course, it is. But it works, because the idea is…