Somebody, please put this baby in a corner.

Before we get into the reasons, let’s recap briefly why the original Dirty Dancing was so irresistibly watchable, because that will remind us of everything that this version is missing. The original had: Jennifer Gray, who lit up the screen. Wonderfully steamy dancing and music that made you long for summer nights in the Catskills. The sparks and even wit that Gray and Patrick Swayze brought to each other. A genuine sense of lessons learned and hearts expanded. All of this made up for an unabashedly cheesy script and everyone went home happy.

Despite the name, this movie is not a sequel. In Hollywood terms, it is a “re-imagining” of the first film, which basically means it has attempted to recreate it but completely missed the point. It does not have the characters, setting, or plot of the original. It does not have the heart or the charm or the chemistry. Worst of all, it does not have the dancing.

There are some slinky moves, but the camera keeps cutting away from the big dance numbers for reaction shots. Since there is barely enough of a plot to sustain a heartbeat, this probably means that the leads were not good enough dancers to do several different steps in a row, and it was intended to be distracting, pretty much defeating the entire purpose of the movie in the first place.

It all takes place before the first movie, in 1958 Cuba, just before Castro’s revolution. Kate (Romola Garai) and her family have just arrived. It does not take her long to figure out that the other American kids are rich snobs and that what she really wants to do is dance with the pool boy, Javier (Diego Luna). Her parents (James Slattery and Sela Ward) were once dancers, but gave it up to provide a conventional and comfortable home for their family. While they think she is with the boy they want her to date, she is off practicing with Javier so they can enter the dance contest and he can win enough money to take his family to America.

I have seen mayonnaise with more personality than the stars of this movie. And I have seen jello with more excitement than the plot of this movie. It isn’t that Garai and Luna have no chemistry with each other. They have anti-chemistry so powerful it seems to slow down the whole time-space continuum.

There’s a subtle reprise of the first movie’s theme song and Patrick Swayze appears briefly as a dance teacher, just to underscore’s this version’s inferiority.

Parents should know that the movie is rated PG-13 “for sensuality,” but that it is very mild compared to most PG-13 releases. As per the title, the dancing is suggestive. There is a discreet sexual situation — a couple spend the night together on the beach and the next morning she is wearing his shirt. Characters drink and smoke and use some mild language, including an ugly racial epithet. There is some violence connected with the revolution, but nothing graphic.

Families who see this movie should learn more about what happened in Cuba in the 1950’s and the results of the revolution led by Fidel Castro. They should talk about why Kate lied to her parents and how they feel about the way Kate blackmailed James into lying for her. Fans of the original movie should talk about what a better sequel would have included.

Families who enjoy this movie should watch the splendid documentary Buena Vista Social Club about Cuban musicians and their music. And of course they should watch the original Dirty Dancing.

Lucy (Drew Barrymore) wakes up every morning with no memory of anything that happened since her brain was injured in a car crash 18 months before. For the rest of us, everything that happens in this movie is just too, too familiar.

Yes, it’s another Adam Sandler movie, which means that a sweet but very immature man will fall for a winsome young lady amidst many, many, many attempts to find humor in sexual orientation, the impact of steroid use on sexual function, the relative merits of different sexual partners, getting walloped on the head, getting walloped on the stomach, getting bit by a shark, various physical disabilities and impairments, and more references to penis size and sexual stamina than an e-mailbox full of spam.

Sandler plays Henry Roth, an affable marine veterinarian at a Hawaiian acquarium whose only long-lasting relationships are with the walruses and penguins and with the goofy guy who cleans the tanks (Rob Schneider). Henry has many, many short-term relationships with female tourists, which keep him safe from commitment. Then he meets Lucy, whose short-term memory impairment makes it impossible for her to make any kind of commitment. He can’t break her heart because no matter what happens, she won’t remember him. But he falls in love with her. The girl who can’t remember is the one he can’t forget.

Barrymore is as delicious as ever, and, as in The Wedding Singer, she and Sandler have an easy chemistry that showcases their offbeat appeal. Even with an exceptionally sweet and tender romantic conclusion, some audience members will find there is too little romance and too much gross-out humor (did I mention the part where the walrus barfs all over the sexually frustrated but mannish woman with an accent?). Then there are some who will think the romance is just a distraction while waiting for the next joke about penis size. Some will be sorry about the waste of talented performers like Dan (“Saturday Night Live”) Ackroyd, as Lucy’s doctor, and Sean (Lord of the Rings) Astin as Lucy’s lisping, steroid-using brother. There may also be some who just wish everyone would get out of the way of the beautiful Hawaiian scenery. This movie has something to disappoint just about everyone.

Parents should know that this movie has exceptionally gross and crude humor, with extremely strong language for a PG-13 and comments that could be considered homophobic. Humor is drawn from drug use, disability, and injury, all portrayed as grotesque, including a clouded eyeball and a lisp. There are sexual references and situations. The movie includes a tragic car crash and comic violence, including a gross sharkbite wound and many, many very hard bonks on the head. Those who have not yet seen The Sixth Sense should know that this movie gives away the surprise. One positive note is that diverse characters demonstrate compassion and loyalty.

Families who see this movie should talk about the memories they would put into a book or tape like the one Henry makes for Lucy. How does your family try to help the members who have injuries or disabilities? They might want to talk about the way that Henry tried to protect his feelings with casual affairs and why that became unsatisfying for him. Families might be interested in more serious treatments of brain dysfunction like Lucy’s. In the book that became Awakenings Oliver Sachs also wrote about a patient with short term memory loss, which inspired the legendary Harold Pinter to write “A Kind of Alaska.” A syrupy but touching book by Nicholas Sparks called The Notebook describes a couple like Henry and Lucy.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy seeing Barrymore and Sandler together in The Wedding Singer. They will have fun with another comedy about someone who lives the same day over and over in Groundhog Day and another comedy about men who have many short-term relationships, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. Families might like to compare Lucy to Dory in Finding Nemo — including the fact that both appear in movies with characters named Marlin!

Sportscaster Al Michaels unforgettably called out “Do you believe in miracles? Yes!” as the 1980 US Olympic hockey team beat the Russians. They then went on to win the gold medal. And so the team, the last group of amateurs sent by the US to play ice hockey, has been known ever after as the “Miracle on Ice.”

But as this movie shows, miracle is the very last word to be used to describe this team. It’s better than a miracle because it is the story of a team that succeeded through heart and hard work and commitment. If it is a miracle, it is in the “God helps those who help themselves” category.

This is not an “up close and personal” saga. You’re not going to get to find out all the quirky personal details or love lives of the members of the team. This is a movie first of all for hard core hockey fans. Its meticulous re-creation of the training, strategy, and the key moments of the team’s games is the movie’s greatest strength. The silver medal goes to Kurt Russell’s fine performance as coach Herb Brooks. Russell is willing to be unattractive in appearance and behavior to convey Brooks’ famously tough and withholding style.

The movie is less successful when it gives us the inevitable toll-on-the-family scenes, even with the ascerbic Patricia Clarkson as Mrs. Brooks. She brings a warmth and even some sexiness to the inevitable complaints that just because Herb is coaching the Olympic team does not mean that he can shirk his responsibilities at home. And the movie’s weakest point is its attempt to make the team’s triumph too much of a symbol. It spends too much time trying to convey the sense of the era, with an opening credit sequence of clips showing lines at the gas station and Jimmy Carter’s speech about how depressed everyone was. Yes, the miracle on ice was immensely satisfying at a moment when America needed some heroes. But trying to re-create that mood takes away from the genuine splendor of the team’s achivement, which is more than enough on its own.

Parents should know that the movie has brief strong language (including calling someone a “pansy”) and some intense sports scenes. There is a discussion of a team member’s loss of a parent. Some younger viewers may be uncomfortable with the pressure Brooks puts on the team and his dismissal of a loyal player.

Families who see this movie should talk about how Brooks picked the team he wanted — “not the best players, but the right players.” He was not much of a team player himself, when it came to the committee members. Families should talk about the coaches and teachers and mentors who have inspired them to do their best — probably not always the ones who were the nicest. Do you think that Brooks intentionally made the players hate him so that they would bond with each other? Families might also want to talk about how the game has changed for the better and worse since the players are now professionals instead of college kids.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy Cool Runnings. The made-for-tv movie Miracle on Ice, with Karl Malden as Brooks, tells the same story from the perspective of the team.

This would be mindless but enjoyably cheesy cinema fluff if it did not cross the line into the category of the unforgivable by using the murder of a child as a plot contrivance. That is a complete violation of the core premise of a movie like this one, which is that if you will offer 90 minutes of your life, it will provide something reasonably entertaining.

Other than that one jarringly misbegotten detour, the movie is exactly what you would expect from a Hollywood fantasy in which street dancers compete for a $50,000 prize and the chance to appear in a Lil Kim video.

Best friends Elgin (Marques Houston of IMX) and David (Omari Grandberry of B2K) are best friends in the neighborhood’s top street-dancing “crew.” They compete with other crews at a local warehouse presided over by the fatherly Mr. Rad (Steve Harvey). And they say things to each other in Hollywood’s idea of hip and happening street talk, like “You crazy but you know I always got yo back, bro” and “may the dopest crew win.” They have elaborate handshaking rituals which appear to take up much of the time they spend together. But trouble arrives in the form of a crew from another part of town that comes to Mr. Rad’s place and out-dances them.

And soon they are feuding because David likes Elgin’s sister Liyah (Jennifer Nicole Freeman). David was with Liyah when he was supposed to be with Elgin make a delivery for bad guy Emerald (former pro football player Michael “Bear” Taliferro). Because Elgin was alone, he was badly beaten by thugs who stole Emerald’s delivery package. Emerald expects Elgin to replace the money that was stolen. And there is this dance contest with a $50,000 prize, where all of these plot threads will come together.

For a movie like this, all we really need to know is first, whether the dance numbers are any good (yes, with lots of pnuematic shaking and fierce attitude). But the numbers are not always photographed well; the cuts and angles do not become a part of the choreography as they did so successfully in Chicago and Drumline. It is not even always clear who is in which crew. The second thing we need to know is whether the story gets in the way of the dancing (not too much). Fans of hip-hop groups B2K and IMX will enjoy seeing those performers as well as a guest appearance by Lil Kim. The one to watch out for, though, is Meagan Good, as Beautifull (“two l’s”), Liyah’s wisecracking best friend, who is as much fun as the best of the dance numbers.

Parents should know that the movie has some strong language. A brother tells his sister she is acting like a “ho” because she is out on a date. Characters deliver packages for a man who is apparently a drug dealer and there is always a strong sense of the pull of thug life. A child is shot and killed (off camera). The main characters are in general responsible, respectful, and devoted to their families. One female character is committed to education and plans to become a doctor.

Families who see this movie should talk about why the dance crews are so important to the characters and how they determine who is the best.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy Saturday Night Fever and Breakin’.

“Big Bounce” wants to be comic caper movie, but the real crime is inflicted on the Elmore Leonard book credited with inspiring it.

You can tell that somewhere in there there is a book with colorful characters and a couple of lines of dialogue that crackle. There is some evidence that there was an actual plot of some kind. At some point. But not now.

What passes for plot looks something like this. Sticky-fingered surf bum Jack Ryan (Owen Wilson) loses his job for bashing the boss with a baseball bat. He gets a new job as a sort of handyman for some bungalows owned by Judge Crewes (Morgan Freeman, adding a little class). He meets a beautiful woman named Nancy (Sara Foster) who has a weakness for men who have a weakness, and the next thing you know everyone is trying to double cross everyone else over $250,000 in cash. It is is supposed to be used to pay some goons to beat up the people who are protesting a development owned by a mean guy who happens also to have Nancy as a girlfriend. But Nancy wants Jack to steal it. “All you have to do,” she purrs, “is walk in poor and walk out rich.”

Wilson, who always looks like a surf bum in whatever part he is playing, finally gets to play a surf bum and is surprisingly uninteresting in the part. Foster has some spirit and Freeman’s bemused spin makes his lines feel fresh. But the movie feels recut by people who weren’t sure what tone they were trying for, and the result is just bland.

Parents should know that the material in this movie is pretty intense for a PG-13, with strong language, sexual references and situations (including making fun of a gay character), drinking, smoking, violence, and general bad behavior by just about everyone.

Families who see this movie should talk about whether anyone in this movie trusted anyone else, and if so, how. What will happen to Jack, Nancy, and Crewes after the movie ends?

Families who enjoy this movie will enjoy better movies based on Elmore Leonard books, Out of Sight and Get Shorty.