Whacking on Vince

Betsy Sharkey at the Los Angeles Times unloads on Vince Vaugh, recently in Couples Retreat (which Rico says he liked):

Remember when Vince Vaughn was so money? A long, lean panther in a shiny suit padding through L.A.'s late-night lounge scene stalking beautiful babies? You could sense the uncertainty behind the swagger; the waver behind the cocky wink. The sarcasm that slipped sideways through a half smile was sly, knowing and a shade fearful.
It was 1996 when Swingers came along. The film would be the first to define Vaughn for most of us and he would come to embody its vision of retro hip. Other careers would be helped by the film, but for Vaughn it would turn out to be star-making material. Like a lot of people, I fell hard for the promise of Vaughn. Could he develop depth and finesse to match the roguish charm in the way of Paul Newman? Would he stretch beyond the comedy in stunning fashion as Bill Murray has? Or figure out how to mine a darker, damaged side as Michael Keaton does? Or would he settle for Chevy Chasing his way through life, collecting cash while he can? Reading the tea leaves of the thirty movies he's been in over the thirteen years since Swingers, frankly, it doesn't look good for artistic promise beating out money in the bank.
Vaughn has gone from intriguing to repetitive. The $63 million-plus that the mediocre Couples Retreat has made in its first two weeks will only make matters worse. Hollywood has a bad habit of confusing money with quality.
I hate that about Hollywood.