If it's not broke, don't fix it.

Rating: Null/10 (3 August 2002)

It's good to see that Guy Ritchie's next movie is set far from London's criminal underworld, because it's fair to say that he has probably wrung every last drop of entertainment from the (identical) subject matter of his first two features. In fact, he wrung the flannel dry, because one of the twists in SNATCH (an attempt to sell goods back to the person they were stolen from), is a direct lift from LOCK, STOCK & TWO SMOKING BARRELS; Now, I don't mind this sort of thing going on when an old idea is re-processed, but, as a writer, if you find yourself stealing from your previous work so soon, you don't ask how much is left in the well, you wonder how much was in there in the first place.
SNATCH contains the same frenetic pace and kinetic direction as its predecessor, and a gritty, bleached-out colour, while having much more of a sixties feel (despite the surfeit of 70s/80s music), and containing a lot more quirky (or flashy, depending on your opinion) touches. Where this movie does improve on LS&TSB, however, is in injecting a potent dose of pathos into the necessary elements of the plot. It's a shame, then, that a certain sense of self-satisfaction on the part of writer-director Ritchie is evident in the over-elaborate stylisation.
The strands of the story bind together well as the movie approaches its climax (although the conclusion of the black guys' tale is a little lame), and Ritchie coaxes a far better performance from Vinnie Jones than the one he gave in LS&TSB. Brad Pitt is especially good in a role that he should have stunk in.
I liked this movie a lot, although you might not think so from what I've written. Maybe that's a testimony to Ritchie's undoubted ability to deliver a well-made and entertaining story that is strong enough to overcome shortcomings that will, hopefully, be addressed as his career progresses.