There’s a line in “Splash” that I thought of when I watched this movie. Tom Hanks plays a sweet guy who falls in love with a girl who turns out to be a mermaid. Utterly deflated when he finds out the truth, he says, “I don’t understand. All my life I’ve been waiting for someone, and when I find her — she’s a fish!”

The charm of that comment is that it is a metaphor for the way many people feel when they fall in love and have to grapple with the high-wire balancing act between intimacy and independence. That is certainly true of Ruby (Marisa Tomei) in “Happy Accidents.” She and her friends keep a box of pictures of former boyfriends (called “The Ex Files”), as they try to sort through the weirdos and creeps. They tell themselves that they aren’t even looking for Prince Charming anymore, just someone who is not too crazy and will be nice to them.

Ruby meets Sam Deed (Vincent D’Onofrio) and at first he seems too good to be true. He may have some quirks, like being scared of dogs, taking sea-sickness medicine on land, and being oddly unfamiliar with some of the basic facts of daily life. He is sweet and tender and crazy about Ruby, and that seems enough for a while, until she has that Tom Hanks moment. Sam’s not a fish, but he’s something almost as outlandish. He is a time traveller, born 400 years from now, when Iowa is on the ocean, and he has come back in time to be with Ruby because he saw her picture in an antique store.

Is he crazy? Is he sick? Is he really from the future? And, most important, does that mean he can’t be her boyfriend?

This is a tangy romantic comedy that plays sly games of its own with time as the story unfolds. While it is not quite up to the writer/director’s previous “Next Stop Wonderland,” it is a charming love story and a lot of fun. Tomei and D’Onofrio are terrific, as are Holland Taylor as Ruby’s therapist, Tovah Feldshuh as her mother, and Anthony Michael Hall as himself.

Parents should know that the movie has very strong language, sexual references and situations (not explicit), drinking (including references to alcoholism), smoking, and drug use. A character is in peril and there is a scary accident.

Families who see this movie should talk about how we look at the risks of falling in love and how to get close to someone without losing ourselves.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy Next Stop Wonderland and When Harry Met Sally.

At the heart of a sex farce is someone who wants to have sex (preferably illicit) but is amusingly thwarted. This gives us the best of both worlds, as we get to vicariously enjoy the illicit possibilities and feel righteously smug about the agonies the characters go through in pursuit of their quest.

The problem these days is in finding believable excuses for keeping the characters apart. Not quite in the category of believable, even within the low credibility threshold of a comedy is this movie’s premise: Josh Hartnett plays Matt, a web designer who gives up sex for Lent.

To make him a more sympathetic character, we find out that his real problem is that he can’t get over Nicole, the girl who dumped him. Though he tries and tries to have consequenceless sex with a series of girls who could have the Sports Illustrated swimsuit models feeling insecure, it just doesn’t make him happy. So he decides to go completely without for 40 days and nights. At first, he feels liberated and in control. But every first-act set-up requires a second-act complication, and it arrives in the form of the lithe and lissome Erica (Shannyn Sossamon of “A Knight’s Tale”). He enjoys getting to know her without jumping into bed, but after a while it becomes awkward. And when she finds out what he is doing and that there is actually a website devoted to whether he will last for 40 days, she feels hurt and betrayed. And then Nicole re-enters the picture.

This is a very raunchy and explicit comedy but it is all done with sweetness and even a certain humility that keeps it from being too disgusting. Hartnett and Sossnanan are stronger on the romance than the comedy but they have a nice chemistry and we can’t help rooting for them. Erica’s friend is played by Maggie Gyllenhaal, who seems to have real potential, with an adorable smile and wickedly perfect delivery.

Parents should know that this movie has extremely explicit (often humiliating) sexual situations and references, including casual sex, masturbation, nudity, Viagra, pornography (one tape is titled: “In Diana Jones and the Temple of Poon”), a same-sex kiss, overall skanky behavior, and a used condom. A woman has sex with a man without his consent (he is tied to the bed and thinks she is someone else). There is very strong language. Characters drink and smoke. Some viewers will be offended by the portrayal of a Catholic seminarian (Matt’s brother), who is having his own problems with the vow of chastity.

Families who see this movie should talk about how Matt sees the world differently (literally and metaphorically) as a result of his vow. How would his relationship with Erica have been different if he had not taken the vow? Why was he unable to enjoy casual sex – was it really his lingering feelings for Nicole or was it a sense that he had not connected with her any more than he did with his one night stands?

Viewers who enjoy this movie will also enjoy “American Pie.”

“Hardball” is a softball, and this umpire calls it out at first base.

Keanu Reeves plays a compulsive gambler named Conor O’Neill who owes a lot of money to various thugs. A childhood friend offers to pay him $500 a week if he will take over the friend’s responsibility to coach a baseball team in Chicago’s Cabrini Green, one of the nation’s most dangerous housing projects. You know where it goes from there because you’ve seen it in “The Bad News Bears” and “The Mighty Ducks” and dozens of clones. That is not always a bad thing – there’s always room for another story of underdogs and redemption. But this one never delivers on any of the opportunities that formula creates. There’s a nine-member team and we barely get to know any of them except for two inevitable cliches — the fat kid and the cute little kid who talks a lot. Reeves can be terrific in a part that suits his range, but the blankness that works well for him in dumb parts (“Bill and Ted”) and silent parts (“Speed,” “The Matrix”) does not give him enough to work with when he is supposed to be struggling with his compulsion to gamble or angry with himself for getting into trouble. Reeves gets no help from the script, which makes him behave in an arbitrary and inconsistent manner and does not have a single memorable line of dialogue. We don’t want to be told that he and the kids come to care for each other in a movie like this – we want to be shown. And there is not one moment of practice, teaching skills (baseball or otherwise), or conversation to make us believe it.

The movie makes the most of the audience’s inherent commitment to the storyline. We want those kids to make it, and we want Conor to make it, too. The other reason to watch is yet another quietly arresting performance by Diane Lane, who brings a delicacy and complexity to every moment she is on screen.

The script is strictly by-the-numbers, but there is a timely plot twist concerning a player with a forged birth certificate. One of the movie’s most wrenching scenes shows him after he is kicked off the team, wearing gang colors and warning his former teammates with a meaningful glance to get away quickly.

Parents should know that the movie includes very strong language, including many four-letter words used by children. The boys are surrounded by drug use and gang violence. They can identify the weapon by the sound of the shooting and take it for granted that they must sit on the floor to be out of the way of gunfire that might come in the window. One child is badly beaten and another is killed.

I have to say something here about the MPAA’s rating system. This film was originally intended to be released as an R, due to the language used by the children. The producers argued that it was an authentic portrayal of the way that people in that environment speak. Protests during the filming, and, more significantly, marketing concerns about whether the audience really wanted an R-rated movie about a little league team, led them to cut some of the worst language to obtain a PG-13 rating. This shows again the absurdity of the MPAA’s standards because the movie still has some material, including the gang shooting of a child, that is far more likely to be upsetting to younger audiences than a few four-letter words.

Families who see this movie should talk about how the children helped Conor realize that he needed to make some changes. Why was it important that Conor made a rule that the players could not insult each other? What did Conor learn from G-Baby? What do you think will happen to the members of the team when they get too old to play in the league?

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy The Sandlot and Angels in the Outfield. They might also like To Sir, with Love.