Monsters University

What's it about? Set many years before the events of Monsters Inc, Monsters University sees Mike and Sulley enrol at Monsters University, where they intend to study the art of scaring. Mike is studious but not scary, Sulley is lazy, living off his family reputation and his instinctive scaring skills. Both of them find themselves thrown off the course and the only way back on will be to team up with a fraternity of misfits and try to win the Scare Games.

What's it like? Monsters Inc is firmly established as a classic Pixar feature - funny, inventive, intelligent and beautifully crafted. Monsters University may struggle to endure to the same extent, but it is still a very accomplished, successful film. Most live action college-set comedies are pretty bawdy and so it is something of a challenge to swim in those waters while still keeping everything child-friendly and appropriate. That Pixar manage it so deftly is a sign of their enduring talent. We meet a younger, nerdy and eager Mike, who befriends Randall Boggs (before he went "bad") but finds himself at odds with Sulley. Billy Crystal's voice work continues to be one of the high points of animation in general and this series of films in particular and a combination of carefully crafted conversations, great visual gags and dynamic set pieces keep our attention easily through a long-ish running time (IMDb says 1h40 and it feels like it).

Whether chasing a mascot, breaking into the scare factory or navigating a tunnel full of toxic spiky plants, the exciting and funny action sequences are inventive, even if they don't hit the heights of the finale of Monsters Inc. The third act is not just thrilling, it also fits in with the character arcs of Mike and Sulley perfectly, eschewing the obvious in favour of something more considered, subtle and imaginative. Brief appearances by Roz, Waternoose, the Abominable Snowman and Celia all help the film blend seamlessly into where Monsters Inc kicks off and the overall message of "maybe who you're meant to be isn't who you thought you wanted to be" is far more welcome than the alternative of "be who you want to be, just wish hard enough". Not as instantly memorable or quotable as Monsters Inc, Monsters University nonetheless has much to commend it, including a slug racing to class, a great gag revolving around teenage cliches, a thoroughly funny mum and a University principal who is genuinely creepy (clickety-clack go a hundred spiky feet).

Should I see it? It's not essential big screen viewing, but it is another really strong effort from Pixar. They have been off their game a little from Cars 2 onwards, but this is still really good stuff. There just isn't anything offensive, mean or inappropriate about this film and although very tiny children will be scared by it, everyone else will have a blast. Afterwards, try to have a conversation with your kids about their dreams and ambitions, what they feel called to, or interested in and what they might feel God has for them. Monsters University has a lot to say about those times when we might become uncertain as to whether we are cut out for what we had pinned all of our hopes on. For slightly older children, this might be a way to start to explore these sorts of issues with them. Enjoy!

Star Trek Into Darkness

What's it about? After earning the captaincy of the Enterprise in the first film, Kirk has been leading the crew and the ship on a series of adventures. After a run in with a far less developed planet involving saving them but violating the Prime Directive, Kirk is chastised by Admiral Pike for his attitude. Before much can be done (other than taking away Kirk's captaincy), a terrorist by the name of John Harrison unleashes a campaign on Star Fleet, to which Kirk volunteers to respond.

What's it like? I really like Star Trek. Really. A lot. The 2009 reboot was an absolute master-class in rebooting, prequelising, whatever you want to call it - respectful but free, exciting but character-driven, JJ Abrams showed himself to have the Midas touch. All of this puts a lot of pressure on his return to the much-loved franchise and he doesn't buckle. Yes, some of the characterisation is sacrificed in the rush to keep it all moving, but there is still time and space for each character to develop, still a compelling story and of course, so much lens flare.

Kirk is still cocky, but needs to learn to toe the line. Spock is in control of his emotions, but at times, like all of us, needs to be able to cut loose. Harrison is an excellent villain, played with lip-curling relish by Benedict Cumberbatch who handles the Lector/Starling-like sequences in the Enterprise brig with as much aplomb as the physical fights and chases. His background is well fleshed-out and the resonance with the original Star Trek series is threaded through convincingly and cleverly. The space battles are thrilling, as are the scenes of hand to hand combat, with a real heft and crunch to one particular "altercation" where the eventual futility of all of Kirk's rage is shown to him. He can exhaust himself in anger, but he cannot undo what has been done.

As with the previous film, this stays close enough to the tone, spirit and style of classic Trek to keep die-hard fans happy, but still manages to be its own beast. Many of the third act developments will bring a knowing smile to the lips, but there are still surprises in store, even for those who might think that they know what is coming. Excellent entertainment.

Should I see it? I guess it's not for everyone and it doesn't quite hit the heights of the previous film. It has a better villain, but less compelling character work, more action, but fewer affecting emotional scenes. There is an infuriatingly gratuitous underwear scene, but mercifully little bad language. There is some violence but little blood and there are clear consequences for both the victims and the perpetrators of that violence. The spectacle of course lends itself to big screen enjoyment, but this might just as well be enjoyed for a family DVD night with a wheelbarrow of popcorn.

Iron Man 3

What's it about? After the dramatic events of The Avengers, Tony Stark is suffering. He can't sleep and he experiences regular panic attacks. He has been tinkering as well, producing dozens of new suits. Meanwhile, a scientist by the name of Killian has been developing new technology to enhance the strength and healing powers of human test subjects and a new terrorist by the name of The Mandarin is unleashing attacks on America.

What's it like? Shane Black, the writer and director, is new to the superhero genre but has worked with Robert Downey Jr on Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and the same flippant tone finds its way into IM3 too. As with all of Marvel's output these days, there is plenty of spectacle, plenty of witty lines, lots of fun, a reasonable amount of peril and a 12A certificate as standard. The presentation of Stark as a fragile man, suffering and insecure is an excellent and realistically handled direction to take the character in and returning him to some of the simplicity that characterised the first act of the first film in this franchise is a sensible move.

The grand finale (as shown in the trailer) is a little bit too crash bang wallop and although it is exciting, there is the usual loss of character for the sake of spectacle and as with the worst excesses of the Transformers franchise, it can become a little difficult to see exactly what is going on. Having said that, the earlier sequences, especially the character-oriented segments involving Stark striking up a friendship with a kid in the small town he crash lands in and the unveiling of The Mandarin are really engaging, with excellent script work from Black and Drew Pearce. The cast deliver the goods across the board, especially RDJ, who has made the character his own and newcomers Guy Pearce and Ben Kingsley give good villain.

The pacing and the story development are great and random jokes about Croydon and Downton Abbey will please UK audiences in particular. There is a creeping tendency for films to get longer and longer these days and although 130 minutes is a bit much here, it could be worse. There isn't too much loose flab and we are kept well entertained throughout.

Should I see it? I saw it twice, returning the second time with my three children. It was a bit much for my daughter, who didn't enjoy some of the scarier scenes and eventually went off with my wife to do something else. My 12 and 7 year olds loved it and although 12A's these days can carry a certain amount of bad language, there was relatively little of that here (no f-words, just one fairly light-hearted use of p***y). There are some interesting themes being explored here in relation to fear, anxiety and the fragility of our emotions and if you are able to take the time, it can be good to discuss those with your kids.