Antwone Fisher, a young Navy seaman, overcomes his violent tendencies and abusive childhood to find a side of himself he has kept hidden for years. It has a touch of the Good Will Hunting about it, with Denzel Washington playing a psychiatrist who is somewhat repressed himself, helping the promising kid recognize his own greatness, and learning a valuable lesson in the process himself. But the story isn’t so much about embracing your opportunities as about taking control of your self, and realizing that although your past can shape you, it doesn’t define you.

This is Denzel Washington’s directorial debut, and the only point where he sets a foot wrong is right at the very end, where he gives his own character an awkward “you helped me more than I helped you” speech. Yuck. It’s Derek Luke who steals the show, though. His performance as Antwone Fisher, from repressed anger to awkwardly romantic, is extraordinary.

Alex Hitchens (Will Smith) is the “Date Doctor”. He helps men find–and create–the right opportunities to meet and hit it off with women they would otherwise be too shy or awkward to ask out. He does this quietly, though, without any publicity. All his business comes from referrals. So when the woman he himself falls in love with is a newspaper gossip columnist…it’s easy to see where this will eventually lead.

The first hour of the film is very sweet. Hitch helps a timid, clumsy accountant break the ice with a rich heiress he is madly in love with, and the two of them stumble towards romance. At the same time, Hitch and Sara (the columnist) go out on a couple of dates that, despite all of Hitch’s experience as a professional smoothie, turn out disastrously.

But the fatal misunderstanding that causes the reversal of fortune, despite being obvious, felt contrived in much the same way that How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days did. The resolution then drags on for almost another hour, which is far too long for a romantic comedy of this nature. It loses a lot of its initial charm by being wordy without saying much, and by trying to juggle too many balls at once. The parallel doctor and patient plots are fun, but the balance between them isn’t right.

Nevertheless, this is Will Smith at the top of his game again: smooth, funny, and with bags of easygoing charm. Eva Mendes and Kevin James provide quality support as Sara and the bumbling accountant. The chemistry between Smith and Mendes is good, but not electrifying. Overall, Hitch is entertaining enough, but it doesn’t rise to be anything better.

It’s an undeniably beautiful film, lovingly shot with some extraordinary fight and battle scenes. But…

I’m getting tired of Tom Cruise’s earnest, indefatigable, one-man-who-pulls-through-in-the-end schtick. This was one performance too many for me. Also, I found the film’s constant heavy hammering on the themes of honour and loyalty really tiresome. By the end of the film I was longing to see more of the everyday lives of the rebel villagers, and less of their warriors’ desire to die a glorious death in battle. There are more subtle ways to tell a story about honour.

Finally, the race thing bothered me: the fact that it’s a white man who eventually redeems the honour of the Samurai. I understand why the characters were chosen to work that way, in order to make it fly as a big-budget Hollywood epic, but I found it ugly and patronising nevertheless. I would much rather thave watched this film if it had been a Japanese production, with the focus on Ken Watanabe’s character Katsumoto instead. In fact, you could remove the Tom Cruise character altogether, and you’d end up with a stronger story. The tragedy would be greater, and the emotional impact would be more honest.

Even for a kids’ film, this is unforgiveably bad. Imagine, if you will, a pale shadow of the already excrable Spy Kids 3D, with none of the humour or strength of plot, and you’re probably giving it the benefit of the doubt. The 3D effects are poorly done, pointless, and repetitive. The acting is….no, the acting isn’t. The only thing it has going for it is that Alex seemed to like it–at the time.

It makes Robert Rodriguez’s achievement in making Sin City seem even more extraordinary, and even more like a one-off.

There are two main reasons I didn’t like Ocean’s Twelve. First of all, it’s entirely pointless. It has no heart, drifting instead between several plot lines that do tie together, but not in anything you’d call a climax. There is a “big” heist they have to execute, but is far from central to the film. Most sequels at least try to be bigger and better than their originals; this one lacks even that ambition.

Secondly, the use of cinematic shorthand to tell the story really bugged me. There are lots of knowing glances, and histories alluded to with a nod and a wink. It lends the illusion of depth to the characters, but when the credits roll, do you actually know anything about them? No. This shorthand extends to many key sequences in the film itself, which are not shown as part of the action, but instead revealed after the fact in flashbacks or conversations.

As an ensemble star vehicle, it is appropriately self-indulgent and deliberately harmless to each participant’s position on the Hollywood status ladder. But as a heist or a con movie, or even as a crime comedy caper, it is utterly flaccid.

Sometimes you fancy a film that will challenge your assumptions, and sometimes you just want some raw comic book carnage. In the latter case, you could do worse than to flip on AvP. But you could do a whole lot better, too.

Everything about this film is slow. From the way the characters talk, the speed at which the plot develops, right down to the slow fade-to-black cuts at the end of each scene. Even the climactic gunfight plays out over the course of twenty minutes or so. This isn’t a bad thing, though: it echoes the pace of the period it is portraying, and with it provides a very immersive experience.

(This quick review is part of my September 2005 “clearing the decks” exercise.)

Despite the crass silliness of the trailer, this is a remarkably mature and–in places–quite subtle comedy. That’s not to say that it isn’t also roaringly funny, with plenty of absurd situations and over-the-top characters: it’s both.

Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn play two lawyers whose favourite summer activity is blagging their way into weddings and wedding receptions, and pulling women. The thing is, they are much more than just unwelcome freeloaders. While they are making the most of the free food and drink, they are also charming the guests, making conversation, and acting like entertainers (who just happen not to have been formally invited). They are fundamentally nice guys who just happen to indulge in a shallow hobby. The film is about what happens when love hits them in the face, and forces them to grow up.

Wilson and Vaughn have tremendous chemistry on screen, with Wilson’s laid back charm the perfect foil for Vaughn’s hyperactive patter. They make it all look so easy and natural, that you can’t help but love the journey they’re on, and take delight in every twist and turn along the way.