Movie Review: Hancock
As you may recall, I could not bring myself to attend the screening. That, and Mrs. SG had other plans for me. So, I sent Friends of Supergenius instead. Below is their report.
FoSG sez:
I didn’t know quite what to expect going into Hancock, and, in many ways, don’t know what to think coming out of it. Was it a comedy? A superhero movie? A vehicle to show off Will Smith and Charlize Theron’s physiques? A Greek tragedy? I suppose I can take comfort in the fact that I am not alone in my confusion–Peter Berg seems to have faced the same problem.
Hancock starts our irreverently funny with Will Smith playing-up (and overplaying) a drunk super-man stuck in LA who, despite a history of mass property destruction, still tries to help save the day; a shtick that would have been perfect next time Smith hosts SNL. The problem is, that, as many a feature film director has found out about SNL skits, a movie can be too long to carry the joke. Consequently, the plot takes a somewhat surprising 180-degree turn towards Greek tragedy (a genre we should probably begin calling American Superhero) that falls miles short of that which we have come to expect from Superhero movies.
While not an awful summer movie, in this summer-of-the-Superhero-blockbuster, Hancock will not be the one we remember. If you do shell out your own money to see it, there is one upside–you’ll probably get a Dark Knight trailer.
There you have it folks, looks like a b/b+ movie.
The advantage of Hudson Hawk or The Last Action Hero over this one is at least they weren’t taking themselves seriously. They were trying to be part Marx Bro and part Mel Brookes. They still failed miserably but at least one could see what was going on.
Hancock looks like that worst kind of train wreck. The film that in way too sincere at being a message film.
It’ll be interesting how Hancock affects future Iron Man films since Hancock is obviously borrowing a lot from the alcoholic Tony Stark of the 1980’s. I’d expect future writers and producers would want to avoid anyone thinking of Hancock when the next Iron Man appears.
Comment by Clark — July 2, 2008 @ 4:11 pm
It’s not doing well at Rotten Tomatoes, and the reviews all seem to be worse than this one. I’m guessing it will only make 200 million instead of 300 million.
Comment by jjohnsen — July 2, 2008 @ 5:05 pm
We need a WALL-E review.
Comment by tracy m — July 2, 2008 @ 8:14 pm
Go for it, Tracy!
Comment by Susan M — July 2, 2008 @ 8:51 pm
Oh, no! Three blogs is more than I can handle, thank you very much! I just want to see what people besides me thinks of it…
Comment by tracy m — July 3, 2008 @ 12:26 am
Hancock looks like interesting spin on the latest superhero movie craze… if nothing else at least Will Smith tends to be pretty funny
Comment by patrick — July 3, 2008 @ 4:44 am
If I get to Wall-E before too long I’ll write it up, unless someone else beats me to it, which would be fine.
Comment by Tom — July 3, 2008 @ 9:01 am
We’re taking our toddler to Wall-E as a matinee sometime next week as his first “big boy movie.” (i.e. in the theatre)
Comment by clark — July 3, 2008 @ 9:39 am
Clark- it’s a harder movie for really little ones to pay attention too- my almost 5 and almost 7 year olds did fine, but my 2 year old would have been climbing the seats.
Comment by tracy m — July 3, 2008 @ 9:58 am
He’s almost 4 but thanks for that info. I’ll relate it to my wife. I was hoping this one would be more like Cars than Ratatouille in that sense.
Comment by Clark — July 3, 2008 @ 10:14 am
My 4 and 5 year olds hate “big boy movies.” They get bored or scared and I end up leaving with them once they start acting up. Maybe it’s just us. They’ll sit still at home though (and honestly, our home theater is probably just as good or better anyway, just smaller and without sticky floors).
So the great Will Smith finally, after all these years, failed to impress. I must say that if Hancock is the worst he’s done lately, then he’s doing alright. By my count, I haven’t disliked him since Wild Wild West. He’s usually top notch and among my favorite actors. Oh well. He’ll do great next time (what’s he got on his plate, BTW?).
Comment by David J — July 3, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
We saw it today. It really was two movies, mashed together into one. As far as I’m concerned, they could have added the ending right after his release from jail, then the rest of the movie could have been the sequel, Hancock 2.
It wasn’t the disaster that Wild Wild West was, but it wasn’t anywhere near the best Will Smith movie. I’m just glad we only paid matinee prices for it.
Comment by CS Eric — July 3, 2008 @ 9:38 pm
Gruber says it’s great for kids as opposed to Marginal Revolution who says it isn’t. We’ll see I guess.
Comment by Clark — July 3, 2008 @ 9:47 pm
I was going to comment on the MR site- but I’m more comfy here. It depends on the kid. MR doesn’t have kids- my boys loved it. Some kids won’t. I wouldn’t have taken my two-year old- no way- she can’t sit through Teletubbies. The people who took 18 and 20-month olds were nutso.
Comment by tracy m — July 4, 2008 @ 1:13 am
I really liked Hancock. I admit that there was an awkward shift in the middle (hopelessly awkward), but the conclusion ties it up nicely.
It was funny in its funny parts, but the best part of the movie was the exploration of Hancock’s role/purpose. It was touching to see him humble himself. Why? Because one man finally decided to show appreciation to him. He had been alone, a frankenstein’s monster. That was very touching. In a summer-movie sort of way it was balanced just right. The scene where Hancock leaves prison, then goes back in, was also touching. The care and concern of one man cause Hancock to begin appreciating himself, and trust others. The ‘good job’ to the officers was equally poignant.
Then the middle came and was just poorly introduced and awkward. The end went well, though, wrapping up the whole idea with Hancock embracing the aloneness of his role.
Not a new story, and it needed more time, betting handling, and better balance between funny and serious; thus the bad reviews, but it was still entertaining and touching. I think bad parts can be overlooked as long as the movie still does something for you. You’ll just have to go see it.
Comment by ZSorenson — July 4, 2008 @ 12:08 pm
I haven’t seen it, but I read an advance screening review a month or two ago, and in that cut of the film, there was a scene straight out of “Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex.”
That didn’t sound very kid friendly to me. I’m guessing it got cut, then.
Comment by Ivan Wolfe — July 4, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
The second half is like a totally different movie. My wife and I were really into it until then. I’ve also read that they trimmed about 30 minutes out in the past few months, partly to get a PG-13 rating. Usually I don’t say this, but the movie seemed jumbled enough at places that I think they should stick those 30 minutes back in to see if it flows better.
Comment by jjohnsen — July 7, 2008 @ 9:24 am
as for “wall-e,” i didn’t see it, but the grands took the kids. my almost 4yo asked to leave almost immediately. she fell asleep partway through. my 5yo liked it, but asked questions throughout the entire movie, something she never does. my parents loved it (dad, who is growing senile and thinks bill o’reilly and ronald reagan are too far left, said he could’ve done without the politics), but they both said it wasn’t really a movie for young kids (meaning the ages of my almost 4yo and newly-turned 5yo).
Comment by makakona — July 7, 2008 @ 10:09 am