This disappointing would-be romantic comedy is neither comic nor particularly romantic. Its biggest problem is a sitcom-style script with too much emphasis on the situation and not enough on the comedy. It fails to create a single believable or sympathetic character. What it gives us instead is a string of barely related skits about people whose behavior ranges from inconsistent to random. The result ranges from dull to annoying, with the few comic bits already overly familiar to us from the commercials.

Jennifer Lopez is a talented and attractive performer, but she does not have the acting or comedy skills to transcend the limits of the script. She looks beautiful, but a little remote and unsympathetic.

Lopez plays Mary, a wedding planner who is so organized that she has all the essentials strapped to her belt, including smelling salts and superglue. She is also so cynical that she can predict the length of the marriage based on the song selected by the couple (“I Honestly Love You” is a bad sign). Mary is supremely competent and confident at work, negotiating for a partnership in the firm if she can land an assignment for a dot-com zillionaire bride Fran (Bridgette Wilson-Sampras). But at home, Mary eats alone in front of the TV, watching “Antiques Roadshow.”

Prince Charming arrives in the person of Matthew McConaughey as Steve, a pediatrician who saves Mary from an onrushing dumpster. They go out with Mary’s friend for a movie and a dance under the stars, and Mary is smitten.

Then she discovers that Steve is Fran’s groom-to-be. How cute is that! Not very. Meanwhile, Mary’s father (Alex Rocco, who struggles valiently with the unforgiveably hackneyed role of choleric ethnic dad who just wants his daughter to get married) is trying to fix her up with a horrendous loser from the homeland.

There is no real narrative, only different locations for the characters to get into faux-adorable fixes. Here’s one example: Mary and Steve knock over a nude male statue and his genitals break off. Much hoped-for hilarity but no actual laughs ensue as they try to glue it back on. Here’s another example: Mary and Steve run into Mary’s former beau and Mary hides under a table to avoid him. But they run into him (with his pregnant wife) anyway, and Mary responds by getting drunk. Two weddings have to be disrupted before it can all get straightened out and even that never-fail standard of the romantic comedy drags on until we can go home to find something better to watch on UPN.

Parents should know that the movie includes some strong and graphic language (typical of PG-13’s, that means one F-word and scattered lesser words). The movie includes comic drunkenness and a character’s alcohol abuse is also played for laughs. The scene with the statue includes a fairly graphic depiction of male genitals, which at one point get superglued to a character’s hand.

Families who see this movie should talk about how we know when we have met the person we truly love. Was the behavior of the main characters responsible? What hardships did their behavior impose on others? How is what Mary does to Massemo different from what her old boyfriend did to her? Families should also discuss Mary’s reaction to seeing her old boyfriend with his pregnant wife. First she hides, then she embarasses him, and then she gets drunk. Why does she behave this way? How could she have behaved in a way that preserved her dignity and self-respect?

Mary describes herself as a “control freak.” Families should talk about the way that people who have been hurt sometimes try to protect themselves by exercising a lot of control. Families may also want to ask why Lopez, an Hispanic actress, played an Italian character. Was it because audiences might feel more comfortable with a WASP-Italian romance than with WASP-Hispanic?

Families who enjoy this movie will enjoy the superior, “The Runaway Bride.”

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.”

This choice little fairy tale even begins with “once upon a time.”

It takes place in rural France, in a “quaint little village whose villagers believed in tranquility.” They have “learned not to ask for more.” The village is all but untouched by the outside world, and they seem to like it that way. A young priest sings an Elvis Presley song and it as though he is a visitor from a time machine.

The town is overseen by the Comte de Reynaud (Alfred Molina), the mayor. He acts as a sort of moral policeman, making sure that everyone is keeping to the straight and (very) narrow. Into this paragon of rectitude and abstemiousness the wind blow a mysterious red-cloaked mother and daughter.

Vianne (Juliette Binoche, Oscar-winner for “The English Patient”) and Anouk (Victoire Thivisol) open up a chocolate shop. The Comte takes it as an affront to his authority. How dare they! In the middle of Lent! He does his best to keep customers away. But the chocolate is luscious and Vianne always seems to know just what people need. She knows how to add a touch of chili pepper to hot chocolate for spice and she has an uncanny way of giving everyone the kind of chocolate they cannot resist. She gives her chocolate to her grumpy landlord Amande (Judi Dench, Oscar-winner for “Shakespeare in Love”). She gives some to Josephine (Lena Olin), a woman who is considered a little crazy by the town, but who behaves that way to protect herself from her abusive husband. The chocolate — and Vianne’s warm heart — help both women to bloom. Vianne takes Josephine in and helps Amande get together with her estranged family.

Then the Compte is affronted further when a group of itinerants dock their houseboats in the town. Vianne becomes friendly with Roux (Johnny Depp) and this is too much for the Compte and his sidekick, Josephine’s husband Serge. Both the Compte and Vianne have to confront near disaster and their own fears. The young priest has to find a way to speak from his own heart and his own faith, to become a true spiritual leader for the community.

This whimsical little story is as delicious as its chocolates, with a terrific score and lots of great issues for family discussion.

Parents should know that Vianne never married her daughter’s father, and that in a flashback we see that she and her own mother left her father to wander. Vianne gives some chocolates to one woman to use as an aphrodisiac, and we see the gleam in her husband’s eye as he watches her, after he eats them. Later, a dog who eats some of the chocolates is similarly inspired (brief shot of dogs having sex). There are mild sexual situations with brief and inexplicit nudity. There is some social drinking and a scary fire (no one hurt). A character dies peacefully.

Families should talk about why the Compte is so threatened by Vianne and her chocolates. He seems to feel that his efforts to keep himself and others from feeling joy and passion will help him avoid sadness (and dishonor) from the desertion of his wife. Why do Vianne and Roux wander? Why is there one person whose favorite she can not guess? What is the significance of Anouk’s imaginary friend? Why is Armande’s daughter so angry with her? What do you think about the priest’s conclusion that we are judged by what we do and those we embrace rather than by what we stay away from and those we exclude? Families might also want to talk about what some of the names mean in English. For example, reynaud means fox and roux is the base that holds a soufflé together.

Families who enjoy this movie should enjoy some of their own favorite chocolates together. Some family members will also enjoy Like Water for Chocolate, another movie about a woman whose food has some magical properties (mature material).

Instead of the annual G-rated musical cartoon released just as school lets out, this year Disney’s big summer release is “Dinosaur,” a stunning integration of computer graphics over live backgrounds.

Aladar is an orphan Iguanodon raised by monkey-like lemurs. When flaming meteors destroy their home they join a group of dinosaurs trying to find food and water. The leader of the group, Kron, insists that stopping to help the older or slower dinosaurs is too dangerous. But Aladar shows the others that cooperation, teamwork, and kindness make more sense because then everyone gets a chance to contribute. That resolution brings to mind another dinosaur — a big, purple one on PBS. Aladar just is not that interesting a character. Disney worked very hard to make sure that the faces of the dinosaurs were expressive, but should have worked a little harder on giving them some more complex and subtle emotions to express. Even in a movie for kids, it is not enough for the characters to overcome some external challenge. What makes a story get into your heart is seeing the characters learn and grow and overcome internal challenges. It is a marvel of skill, but does not have half of the heart or wit of either of the “Toy Storys” or “A Bug’s Life.”

The technological mastery is dazzling to watch, though, especially the textures. Fur, scales, eggshell, water, and goo are all so vivid you can almost feel them. It is a shame that the story and characters are not as strong as the visuals, though that will be more of a problem for the adults in the audience than the children.

Parents should know that the movie is dark and scary at times. Characters are frequently in peril and some are killed. A three year old sitting near me cried for more than half of the movie. But most kids find enormous appeal in the idea of creatures that are amazingly huge and powerful and reassuringly long departed. While they may not connect to these characters the way they do with the animated films, most kids will like watching the dinosaurs and will find the conclusion satisfying.

Families who see the movie may want to talk about the narrator’s comment that “sometimes the smallest thing can make the biggest changes of all.” What is the “smallest thing” and what are the changes? How did being treated with kindness change the way some of the characters behaved? How did making Baylene feel needed change the way she behaved? Why was Aladar’s point of view so different? Could it have been due to the loving way he was raised? How did Aladar help Neera see things differently?

Families — especially blended, foster, and adoptive families — may also want to talk about how the lemurs decide to “adopt” the huge dinosaur, and about how some species were intolerant of others. Older children may want to talk about Kron’s view that the only way to keep some members of the herd alive was to sacrifice those who could not keep up, and the way his behavior showed that he believed the only way to maintain power was to refuse to listen to anyone else.

Kids who like this movie will enjoy “The Land Before Time” and its sequels and “Baby: Secret of the Lost Legend.”