Hancock

[Bourne101]

http://l.yimg.com/img.movies.yahoo.com/ymv/us/img/flickr/62/05/002380186205.jpg?x=660&y=660&sig=osZIoiiGYas9rwoXJDJ9CQ--

Directed by Peter Berg

Written by Vincent Ngo and Vince Gilligan

Genre: Action/Comedy

Tagline: There are heroes. There are superheroes. And then there's... Hancock

http://l.yimg.com/img.movies.yahoo.com/ymv/us/img/flickr/67/53/002608266753.jpg?x=660&y=660&sig=MgNwDy9uO8HJB4BfVvLvqQ--
Hancock teaches little Mikey Myers a lesson

Plot Outline: What happens when a wisecracking, homeless, alcoholic superhero meets a determined PR exec? Hancock, who just saved the life of idealistic Ray Embrey, is about to find out. Embrey is determined to rehabilitate the down-and-out Hancock, clean up his image, and make him into a true hero the world can adore. Embrey's wife Mary, on the other hand, isn't so sure it's a worthy endeavor, particularly when Hancock starts hitting on her in the midst of his big comeback. The "Big Blue Boy Scout" he ain't.

http://l.yimg.com/img.movies.yahoo.com/ymv/us/img/flickr/66/09/002608266609.jpg?x=660&y=660&sig=oTtYdYlredy3Nr.LW589pg--

Starring: Will Smith, Charlize Theron, Jason Bateman, and Jae Head

Rated PG-13 for some intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence, and language.

Runtime: 95 Minutes

Looks like an absolute blast.

[Moviefan1234]

HANCOCK looks entertaining as all hell. I can't wait to see it.

[AndrewDB]

I have little to no interest in this.

[MadsenOMC]

I can't wait to see this. Though the advanced word indicates that it's a little bit of a mess, I think it looks like a great summer movie. I love the cast (huge Bateman fan) and hope to see it in theaters.

[Mr.HyDe807]

Wow, 95 mintues? Thought it was gonna be longer.....

Doesn't matter, ill check it out!

[MisterChristian]

Seeing this tomorrow as there's a screening.

[Ender]

Looks intriguing. Smith was good on Colbert last night. I can't help but think that the advertising isn't doing enough to separate it from the glut of superhro movies this summer, but I guess with Smith's giant face all over the poster it proably doesn't matter.

[Tweek]

Looks intriguing. Smith was good on Colbert last night. I can't help but think that the advertising isn't doing enough to separate it from the glut of superhro movies this summer, but I guess with Smith's giant face all over the poster it proably doesn't matter.

Indeed. The dude's a helluva draw.


That kid creeps me out.
:(

[bigred760]

I'm looking forward to this, have been for a while.

But DAMN!! Only 95 minutes? WTF?

[Strider]

The running length surprises me. 95 minutes? That's it? Since Hancock is a superhero flick, I thought this was easily 2-hours. Guess not.

Oh well.

This still looks like a lot of fun, though. I will check it out.

Strider

[xseanymacx]

I'm waiting on some reviews. I've heard the first part is great and funny and then they try to get serious/philosophy and it becomes a disaster.

[dellamorte dellamore]

I think it looks great , should be the 3rd excellent " superhero " movie to come out this summer .

The second trailer sold me specifically because of what looks to be a change in narrative tone from breezy , goofy , and cynical to a more somber and serious tone . I don't mind when a film has such a change , it's welcome , or else the film would be one big one liner filled with dime store wisecracks .

[CyclicNightmare]

Why did they have to give him an origin? It's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. I'll try to keep an open mind, but come on now.

[JoeChar4321]

I'm waiting on some reviews. I've heard the first part is great and funny and then they try to get serious/philosophy and it becomes a disaster.

Very few real reviews out but so far, not so good. Usually, I don't pay much attention to critics but this comment hit home in a bad way...

"I’m not so sure Berg is losing faith that his audience can follow along...but in the face of so many comic book films entering theatres, it seems a poor choice to differentiate yours by way of tacky TV-level antics."

Ouch.

[FrancisBuxton]

I really do like the idea behind the movie, but the early reviews from some people who went to the test screenings worried me a LOT - it sounds like an absolute train wreck of a film; reviews kept talking about how it didn't know what kind of film it wanted to be - a superhero movie, or a "wacky relationship movie". Rumor is that they ended up recutting a lot of it, and they even had to go back and do last-minute reshoots - that's almost NEVER a good sign.

I hope all of that is wrong, and it ends up being good, because it IS a cool concept - but my expectations are very, very low right now.

[dellamorte dellamore]

Why did they have to give him an origin? It's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. I'll try to keep an open mind, but come on now.

Ever since the success of Spiderman , it's obligatory to give your heroes an origin story ( in the post modern era , because it was done in Superman in the 70s ) . I don't really mind it anymore , and it's not something that will turn me off to Hancock , but i would like to see a cool comic book hero movie without any sort of backstory whatsoever , i only want hints about how they came to be according to their actions in the present .

That won't happen any time soon , so i'll just enjoy Hancock . Reviews don't bother me , there's two movies i loved that i wouldn't have seen if listened to misleading reviews . There's just way too many critics blabbing about nonsense these days .

[CyclicNightmare]

I don't have a problem with origins. Just this particular one is fucking lame and unnecessary.

[muttly69]

skipping this one. waiting to rent.

[athf1980]

I'm seeing it and it looks like fun

[TeeRay]

I'm looking forward to this, but the reviews make me nervous.

[Raimo69]

I will probaly wait for the unrated dvd if they have one. Since this was oringally supposed to be rated R i heard

[MisterChristian]

Saw the Hancock screening in Toronto and hmmm wow, what a mess.

I'll leave it as that, and we can discuss further when the film officially opens.

[Spidey]

Damn too bad. The trailer is kickass though. I'm going to see it anyhow.

[Preston_79]

The review I read said Hancock was pretty bad, but he didn't have me convinced.

One complaint was the language was pretty foul. To that I say who fucking cares? Seriously, what's wrong with a character calling people assholes, bitches, and homos?:D It's obviously not a kids movie, but since I'm an adult I think I can handle it.

I'm pretty sure Hancock is a alcoholic bum of sorts so the language is probably appropriate.

[dellamorte dellamore]

That guy should stick with Pixar films then if he doesn't want to be exposed to harsh language . What a silly reason for not liking a film , damn i want to see the film even more now after reading that .

I like the idea of a truly reprehensible " superhero " who could care less about himself or others , well at first at least .

[KingofKings2525]

Mess or no mess this film will make a shitload and I predict it takes the lead in biggest opening weekend and when it's all said and done the biggest moneymaker of the year.

[MisterChristian]

As in beating Spider-Man 3's opening weekend record? Doubt it.

It may open well, but won't have the legs of other Will Smith films.

[Moviefan1234]

It may open well, but won't have the legs of other Will Smith films.

Will Smith is unstoppable at this point.

[Bourne101]

And the thing is, the majority of his movies are pretty solid and find an audience both critically and in mainstream. Regardless of if they're medicore or great, there is a massive audience that love them. If his movies had been complete shit always, they might still be opening at $20 million and finishing with $50 or $60 million, but not massive hits like I Am Legend and The Pursuit of Happyness.

Just look at the RT stats:

I Am Legend- 70% fresh critically, 80% RT community
The Pursuit of Happyness- 66% fresh critically, 88% RT community
Hitch- 70% fresh critically, 73% RT community
I, Robot- 60% fresh critically, 78% RT community
Bad Boys II- It goes without saying, deep down inside, everyone found at least a little bit of enjoyment in this one.
Men in Black II- 40% fresh critically, 50% RT community
Ali- 67% fresh critically, 76% RT community
Enemy of the State- 71% fresh critically, 83% RT community
Men in Black- 90% fresh critically, 90% RT community
Independence Day- 62% fresh critically, 76% RT community
Bad Boys- 43% fresh critically, 72% RT community

We'll leave out Beggar Vance and Wild Wild West. One of which tanked badly, and the other is his least liked moved.

But considering those stats, it's no wonder his movies make so much money. Hancock will be HUGE.

[jasonicus]

God, this movie looks absolutely horrible. Every time I see the trailer I puke in my mouth a little. Early reviews say it is bad, too, so I am hoping it will be a flop and go away fast. Plus, I already know the spoiler to it so why even bother. This kind of movie was not needed and I don't understand why they bothered in the first place.

[Lazy Boy]

I like the concept (washed up, surly drunk of an asshole superhero), but something isn't sitting right with me -- the trailers seem to be cut so that it's either hiding (a) a fantastic ass-kicker of a story reveal or (b) not much there and a crappy, hour and a half (!) waste of time. Will Smith might rule the summer (and made the otherwise disappointing I Am Legend and Pursuit of Happyness watchable), but I smell at least a film that will be received as well as Wild Wild West, at least critically. I'm sure it'll clean up at the box office. I just haven't been wowed by anything Berg has directed, at all.

[dellamorte dellamore]

God, this movie looks absolutely horrible. Every time I see the trailer I puke in my mouth a little. Early reviews say it is bad, too, so I am hoping it will be a flop and go away fast. Plus, I already know the spoiler to it so why even bother. This kind of movie was not needed and I don't understand why they bothered in the first place.


Are you working for a rival studio man . You have one post and it's about how much you think Hancock will experience a quick death at the box office .

I don't get the idea that the movie was not needed , according to who and why , it's entertainment , you can say that about any film .

Too bad you won't get your wish , it's not bombing .

[Preston_79]

This kind of movie was not needed and I don't understand why they bothered in the first place.


What kind of movies are needed then?

Hell, fuck movies altogether. I'm not sure any of them are needed;)

If the main thing this movie has going against it is an unlikable foul mouthed character who's a drunk, that's just not enough to keep me away.

Seems like some of the critics just want a family movie over the 4th. Well I want to see Will Smith drinking heavily, cussing at little kids while fucking shit up.

[dellamorte dellamore]

What kind of movies are needed then?

Hell, fuck movies altogether. I'm not sure any of them are needed;)

If the main thing this movie has going against it is an unlikable foul mouthed character who's a drunk, that's just not enough to keep me away.

Seems like some of the critics just want a family movie over the 4th. Well I want to see Will Smith drinking heavily, cussing at little kids while fucking shit up.

I'm with you on that one , the only " superhero " movie that showed the hero as a drunken lout was Superman 3 , or was it four . They showed him drinking up a storm and disheveled ( it was supposed to be his evil twin i think ). That's the extent of substance abuse we have seen in these types of films .


Didn't Batman go through a period of heavy drinking when he became disillusioned , it was dealt with in the novels , but we never saw that in any of the films to date .


I agree , it's going to be hilarious to see this type of flawed , selfish superhero , and i think the studio has taken a bit of a risk with the material . It's more than welcome though , sometimes i think comic heroes are too perfect . They experience the occasional doubt , discouragement and some issues with motivation , but we never really see them hit rock bottom , save for the aforementioned Supes movie .

[bigred760]

I'm with you on that one , the only " superhero " movie that showed the hero as a drunken lout was Superman 3 , or was it four . They showed him drinking up a storm and disheveled ( it was supposed to be his evil twin i think ).

Superman 3 - it was the "evil" Superman, after coming in contact with kryptonite . . . it didn't kill him, it turned him evil. His doppelganger, as it were.

[dellamorte dellamore]

Thanks , i remember being shocked that he was in that state , but all was allright again once he had that fight in the junkyard .

[bigred760]

It's not my favorite of the Reeve's Supes flicks, but I still enjoyed it. I thought the doppelganger aspect of the movie was well done.

But I think Hancock is an actual drunk . . . along with other issues (obviously).

[The Poonchy]

Saw this tonight, and I was really worried about the intense amount of negative hype behind it. Came out pleasantly surprised. One review in particular had me freaking about several things, and I found during the film all those things were done right, helping it become even more pleasant. The film was funny when it needed to be, and dramatic when it needed to be. In my opinion, it worked. Should have been a little bit longer though, probably. 7/10

[spacemonkey]

Extremely curious for this one...looks like it could surprise. Hope it does.

[snoopmish]

I will probaly wait for the unrated dvd if they have one. Since this was oringally supposed to be rated R i heard


It was originally rated R. They cut it because the studio wants it PG-13 to make the most money.....of course, Let's not care if it's good. Anyway, I read they cut it around 3 times to get the rating. Hopefully there will be an unrated director's cut so we can see how it was supposed to be....without all the hands stirring the pot with $$$s in their heads.

BUT....I am seeing it tonight. I am looking forward to it.:D

[snoopmish]

I'm with you on that one , the only " superhero " movie that showed the hero as a drunken lout was Superman 3 , or was it four . They showed him drinking up a storm and disheveled ( it was supposed to be his evil twin i think ). That's the extent of substance abuse we have seen in these types of films .


Didn't Batman go through a period of heavy drinking when he became disillusioned , it was dealt with in the novels , but we never saw that in any of the films to date .


I agree , it's going to be hilarious to see this type of flawed , selfish superhero , and i think the studio has taken a bit of a risk with the material . It's more than welcome though , sometimes i think comic heroes are too perfect . They experience the occasional doubt , discouragement and some issues with motivation , but we never really see them hit rock bottom , save for the aforementioned Supes movie .


Ya got a point there....Tony Stark is an alcoholic in the comics..I thought Robert Downey Jr was perfect casting!:p

[Shockwave]

I honestly think this looks prety terrible.

[Cato]

Will Smith let me down after Legend (http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/movie/11087025/review/17652636/i_am_legend) and Peter Berg cheers me up after The Kingdom (http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/movie/10498754/review/16495819/1036the_kingdom). Now the mixture works of this two amazed me with the image of a grab-ass and booze-swilling superhero, Hancock. (http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/movie/17077651/review/21543535/hancock) It's a very entertaining movie until the last tragic dimension, but Smith saves the day. Trailer (http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/movie/17077651/review/21543535/hancock) Here:)

[darkface]

No thanks. This movie just doesn't look good to me. It's as if they're trying to milk the superhero movie idea with a big A-list star.

I could just see the Producers when they came up with the idea. Big dollar signs appeared in their eyes.

I'LL PASS

http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/7230/smithzt9.jpg

[BanksIsDaFuture]

Great, great movie. It was hilarious in the beginning showing how a homeless drunk with superpowers spends his days.

It progressively got darker and darker, but also better. It touched on a lot of issues that Hancock had to deal with, with a nice twist and a satisfying ending.

9/10

[MisterChristian]

From The Hollywood Reporter:


'Hancock' will open big
Will Smith starrer bows over the holiday weekend

By Carl DiOrio

July 1, 2008, 06:43 PM ET


"Hancock" should do handily at the boxoffice.

Which is fortunate, considering the Will Smith starrer cost Sony upward of $150 million to produce and perhaps another $70 million to market.

Reviews have been mixed, but the topliner's boxoffice appeal is unmatched and his hold on Independence Day week has proved marquee magic more than once. So "Hancock" -- which officially opens today but bowed in most of its booked theaters Tuesday night -- seems likely to fetch something north of $100 million through Sunday.

"Every man, woman and child in the world loves Will Smith," Sony distribution president Rory Bruer said. "He's the biggest movie star in the world, and everybody just wants to hang out with him and chill."

MovieTickets.com recently asked moviegoers to rate their favorite Smith performances, and two nonholiday openers, April 1995's "Bad Boys" and July 2003's "Bad Boys II," topped the responses with 29% of poll participants picking his role as Detective Mike Lowrey in those films. About 25% of respondents chose Smith's star turn as Capt. Steven Hiller in "Independence Day" -- which opened during that holiday in 1996 -- and another 22% selected his role as the embattled Robert Neville in "I Am Legend," which bowed in December.

Playing in about 3,600 theaters since bowing Tuesday night, "Hancock" will have its Friday-Sunday grosses measured against 2007's holiday opener "Transformers."

Nielsen EDI data shows that the DreamWorks/Paramount action film grossed $155.4 million during its first 6 1/2 days after bowing with some Monday night "previews," with $70.5 million of that haul coming during the subsequent weekend.

[snoopmish]

Great, great movie. It was hilarious in the beginning showing how a homeless drunk with superpowers spends his days.

It progressively got darker and darker, but also better. It touched on a lot of issues that Hancock had to deal with, with a nice twist and a satisfying ending.

9/10


Just got back and I agree 100%. I haven't laughed that hard in a movie in a long time. Part of it was heart breaking too........and yes..a very satisfying ending. When it got darker, it worked very well with in the frame of the film. I also don't feel that things were left unexplained, to me they wrapped it nicely. And his character progression did not feel forced.......more like he was wanting it.

Glad I went tonight.....definitely a keeper when the DVD comes out.

"I'll break my foot off in your ass you old bitch."

[SpikeDurden]

Hancock is definitely a mixed bag, and very much a mess of a film. It starts out fairly lighthearted, with a malicious and dark edge, as we watch our drunken superhero fight crime and cause destruction. And much of it is funny, with Will Smith as charming and likable as ever, and the action scenes shot well in Peter Berg's traditional shaky-cam style. Then we meet Jason Bateman, the real life force of the film, who is always hilarious and pretty much steals the film away from Willie. This is when things start to take a turn for the worse. I'll give the film credit for exploring ideas we've never really seen in a superhero film before, such as the collateral destruction that is caused, and it definitely takes an interesting psychological approach with the drunkenness and the sorrow that we eventually learn Hancock feels. There is also a lot of great super power action on display, the likes of which we never got to see (but should have) in the admittedly better Superman Returns, despite the lack of this type of action. And yet, when Hancock and Ray (Bateman) team up to try and better his image, and the film turns from action comedy to mild drama, and the cards of the film start to reveal themselves, it loses everything it spent the last 45 minutes building. Things get sillier and sillier as the mythology builds and none of it really makes sense. And, as the film tries to get us to truly care for these characters we can't because things have gotten so ridiculous. I won't reveal the film's main twist (though I suspect many of you know what it is already, or at least will about 20 minutes into the film - it's telegraphed very poorly), but it is absolutely unnecessary and reeks of desperation and I think that without it, and with a more solidly written and composed second half, the film could've been a great summer ride. Instead we're stuck with a mixed bag, that has lots of laughs and some solid action, but is also filled with inane absurdities and a wavering tone.

6/10

[ilovemovies]

Loved the first 2/3rds of the movie. But once the big twist is revealed it drops the central premise of the movie and goes into a different, less interesting direction. Some of it got outright silly. But the hospital scene was alright. And it's not bad enough to ruin the movie as a whole. Still pretty disappointing though. It ends as a completely different movie from what it starts off as and not for the better. Although Will Smith is great, I thought it was Jason Bateman who stole the movie. He's just great here and he and Smith work so well together. As for Theron, well I love her. She is so damn gorgeous and a great actress and to her credit she gives a perfectly fine performance. It's not her fault her character's stuff doesn't work. But her character is a big part of the reason why I didn't care much for the last third.

All in all, though I was disappointed in the ultimate direction the movie takes late into it, it was still a pretty darn entertaining summer flick. And I do like it more than the other two superhero flicks, Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk. Unlike Jon Favreau, Peter Berg really knows how to craft a great action sequence.

7/10

[Ender]

Am I correct in my speculative interpretation of the flick as a metaphor for US foriegn policy? Ya know, lots of power but not particularly responsible and doesn't understand the resulting hostility, hence the title and the Indendence Day opening weekend? Or am I just overanalyzing?

[BanksIsDaFuture]

I can't wait for the unrated DVD, you can tell where they cut stuff to get the PG-13.

"Call me a asshole....ONE more time."

[dellamorte dellamore]

If someone already discussed this , i apologize , but i read an article in my local paper concerning the history of the script and all the revisions and directors that were attached .

It appears this character was a response to Superman and his sterling personal character . The man who wrote the script wanted to create a superhero who was the total opposite of the virtuous and impeccably polite character of Superman / Clark Kent .

The original script really went overboard with the neuroses , he had Hancock doing things to himself ( if you know what i mean ), pretending to commit suicide by shooting bullets into his mouth , and all manner of despicable actions . The original script was considered way to depressing and dark for mainstream audiences , from what i read this guy was so reprehensible that he had no redeeming qualities whatsoever . It would have had to be an unrated art house film in it's original form . I'm sure some of that just may find it's way into the dvd , or at least they may discuss scenes they felt they just couldn't possibly include .


Honestly , i hope we do get an r rated version for dvd , but i'm more than satisfied with what iv'e seen so far and the direction they took the character in . I mean come on , how many would take their kids to a film where they show the hero touching himself and shooting something threw a door or building , can't remember exactly . They had to tone it down for the mainstream . I'm genuinely surprised what did make it into the final product , if the trailers are any indication . This is no doubt a risk for the studio , even if Smith's presence alone minimizes the chance they are taking .


I hope it starts a trend , delving into the dark side of superheros , not merely hinting at it , or showing them as angst ridden post adolescents , but really showing them at their worst .

[ilovemovies]

You hope it starts a trend? There have already been superhero movies in this trend. From Darkman to Daredevil to Batman Begins to V for Vendetta. Those movies do more than just delve into them. Hulk too is another one.

[dellamorte dellamore]

None of those films have gone into these darker areas that Hancock seems to do . This is an unrepentant alcoholic , womanizing , kid hating drunkard , this is something new .


Personally i don't think these types of films are dark enough because they are straddling the line between appealing to the younger people in the audience and the adults . I want to see some real neuroses on display , i don't want it just hinted at .

[ilovemovies]

Have you seen V for Vendetta? V is a self admitted monster. I mean look at what he does to Natalie Portman's character in that one major scene in the movie! Not to mention that he's a guy who is so determined to put an end to the governement that he's not above letting innocent people die in the process. Not dark enough? Sheesh! I don't see how it could be any darker.

I also disagree that Batman Begins and especially Daredevil and Darkman aren't dark enough.

[xseanymacx]

Maybe V needed to rape her...

[dellamorte dellamore]

I have yet to be disappointed this summer ( save for Indy 4 ) , and Hancock continues this streak that is easily the best summer season in memory .


I was taken aback at the introduction to the character of Hancock . He is one miserable , despicable , selfish , and hateful person you can imagine . Worse than the previews lead you to believe . I think he may shock some of the younger folks in the audience , this isn't someone you can even remotely root for . If it was anyone else besides Smith playing this character , i doubt it would have worked , he made a drunken lout charismatic .

Spoilers


This is one of those reluctant superheros who is only helping out because he has nothing better to do , but he would rather drink copious amounts of alcohol and be left alone than fight crime .

This all changes when he saves a public relations consultant played by Bateman , from certain death at a train crossing . Bateman sees Hancock as a reclamation project and a way for him to advance his career , but he also believes Hancock is a good man who is simply misunderstood and under appreciated by the public that he continually saves and keeps safe from crime .


This is where some people i think felt the film changes it's narrative tone , but i disagree , it naturally progresses according to Hancock's discovery of himself .



Bateman's character decides that , as a publicity stunt , and a way for Hancock to change his image in the public's eyes , he should turn himself in to the authorities as a result of a warrant that is out for his arrest for massive amounts of property damage . he also feels that with hancock incarcerated , the public will appreciate what he does for them more . You see , he tends to overdo the crimefighting thing and he destroys buildings , vehicles , trains , and pavement anytime he apprehends criminals , saves people , or simply takes off in flight and touches ground after flying . This is hilarious to see , he's like the proverbial bull in a china shop but with superhuman strength . he doesn't have a clue about the extent of his powers and he doesn't care how much damage he causes .


So Hancock agrees to surrender himself to the police , and to do time in a federal prison . The moment the tone effectively changes is when he makes a speech in front of reporters announcing he will serve time in prison . It is somewhat subtle , but effective , how Smith hints at a life wasted , at least the one he remembers . He's still adamant about living his own life and not concerning himself with how he is perceived , but he reluctantly decides to follow his friend's advice .

Now , he goes to prison and , as you already know from the trailers , he has a bit of a run in with some guys he helped lock up in the past . He takes care of them and is never bothered again . While in prison , he begins to realize that maybe he has a greater purpose , and that it's his responsibility to protect the citizens of LA . He also becomes disillusioned because he feels nobody misses him , and that maybe he is expendable . he gets the call from the chief of police because of a bank robbery in progress and he now has a renewed purpose , and an outfit to go with his new image ( one that Bateman gave him ) .


This is one of the most effective sequences in the film , the bank robbery , i seriously got a bit giddy seeing hancock zooming across the sky in the distance , on his way to the crime scene . It was akin to the feeling i got watching Supes for the first time , it's highly effective . Where once Han was bitter , antisocial , and hateful of the police and public , he is now congenial , polite , and cooperative . The action in this sequence is terrific , and i loved how he rescued the fallen female officer from certain doom . Then it gets even better when he apprehends the robbers one by one , leading to the leader of the group , who happens to have a remote control device that is about to set off some explosives attached to the hostages . I didn't think he would disable the criminal in the manner in which he did , it's funny , but a bit disturbing and violent , although they only show the aftermath



When he saves all the hostages and all the robbers are in custody , he has his coming out moment with the public . They applaud him and congratulate him . It's the appreciation and recognition he always craved but never received , it was a touching moment , highly effective .


Now were will the story go now , we know he's invincible , he's immortal , so that takes away the drama and tension . It turns out , Bateman's wife has some issues of her own . At first it appears that she has some feelings for Hancock , there is some mild sexual tension there . A scene in which they are both in her kitchen with her husband past out drunk upstairs reveals she also is an immortal , a sort of twin of Hancock's . More than a twin though , his wife / sister . Eternally bound by the one who created them . There is a slight problem though , the longer these twins remain in each other's presence , or in close proximity , the more their powers fade until they become a genuine mortal . Sort of like a spin on the whole kryptonite angle in Supes , except in this situation it's related not to a piece of someone's home planet but to their kin / twin or other immortals . They were together since they were created , but because of an accident about 80 years ago , he doesn't recall anything . He was injured when he was in a mortal state , and can't remember anything that had happened before that , even his life with Theron .


She eventually tells him that there were more of them , but they all died out because they remained together and became mortal . Now , this is the only minor flaw i had with the film , i seriously thought , somehow there would be more immortals in existence even though Theron says there isn't . I thought that was the direction it was going in . Maybe in the sequel we'll have a sort of Zod immortal that Han has to confront . There is a scene in the prison when the guy who Han apprehended at the bank and prevented from detonating a bomb , speaks to the two guys who Han roughed up when he first entered prison . I thought this guy was going to turn out to be a latent immortal , it would have made sense .


It doesn't matter though , because in another revelation , Han is wounded by gunfire when he intervenes in a grocery store holdup . he has spent too much time in Theron's presence , now he is vulnerable like a mortal and can be harmed just like them .


This leads to the finale when the aforementioned mastermind of the bank robbery escapes from prison with two of his cohorts and proceeds to go to the hospital where he intends to murder Hancock . I thought this was aplot hole originally , considering this guy knows Han is impervious to bullets , but since he knew he wasn't anymore , it made sense he would attempt this .



The sequence in the hospital is another great sequence and it's very tense . It seems as if Theron is becoming mortal also , and she is wounded with gunfire . She is also physiologically linked to Han , and feels the pain he feels . He realizes , after being wounded and on the brink of death , with the aid of some fire ax help from Bateman , that he must get as far away as possible from Theron , his kin .


He does , and both him and Theron begin to heal .


This is a great film , it has an effective mix of drama , action , comedy , and pathos . I loved the interaction between Smith , Bateman and Theron , it's a wonderful dynamic , and i also appreciate how Theron is portrayed as a loving , protective , loyal wife concerned about her family . It never once seemed false or tacky , and it never once devolved into sentimentality . The three of them played great off of each other , good job there . And their little son wasn't annoying , that's an accomplishment . It's easy to make a kid in films too cute , it doesn't happen here , and he plays an important role , the kid is the first person to express a genuine appreciation and affection for Hancock , it's the beginning of his awakening .


I highly recommend this film , it delivers on all fronts . Smith is great once again , Theron is terrific , and Bateman is highly effective . The visual effects are excellent and the story is intriguing .


Stay through the beginning of the credits , there is a bit of a bonus scene in there . No doubt this is getting a sequel and it's definitely welcome , a new superhero is born .



Trailers


TDK , again !!! :)


Eagle Eye - this thing is attached to everything along with TDK , i think it looks excellent .

Step Brothers - oh man , it wasn't on the radar before , but now it is . This looks like some goofy fun , the trailer is funny .

The Day the Earth stood still - this looks very interesting and the effects look great . I'm sold , i want to see this one . Reeves is perfect for this role .


Quantum Solace - i have to admit , this looks light years better than the CR . I'm no doubt liking what i see with this film . Maybe Bond isn't dead after all . :) . It looks like a throwback to some of Connery's films , and a bit of OHMSS . Should be great .

[dellamorte dellamore]

Have you seen V for Vendetta? V is a self admitted monster. I mean look at what he does to Natalie Portman's character in that one major scene in the movie! Not to mention that he's a guy who is so determined to put an end to the governement that he's not above letting innocent people die in the process. Not dark enough? Sheesh! I don't see how it could be any darker.

I also disagree that Batman Begins and especially Daredevil and Darkman aren't dark enough.


V i'll give you , but i'm referring to the more mainstream comic book style heroes .

[snoopmish]

Am I correct in my speculative interpretation of the flick as a metaphor for US foriegn policy? Ya know, lots of power but not particularly responsible and doesn't understand the resulting hostility, hence the title and the Indendence Day opening weekend? Or am I just overanalyzing?



You are WAY over analyzing. This is "Bad Santa" meets "Superman".

[snoopmish]

V i'll give you , but i'm referring to the more mainstream comic book style heroes .

From what I am reading....wait till Dark Knight comes out.

[plissken2013]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477337/ The sword bearer, aka Mechenosets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx7zN1_Egyc
Now that's a "superhero" movie like I've never seen. Awesome. But most people didn't like it: more a drama than the average superhero movie. Do yourself a favour and check it out!

Talking about dark superhero movies: Batman returns, Hulk (Ang Lee version, I love that movie),...

[Shockwave]

6/10

I honestly think well get a much better movie on DVD if they ever do a directors cut. WTF is up with a 90 minute running time?

I liked the first half of the movie alot better then the second half.

..and just like I AM LEGEND, Will Smith continues to carry a movie that really isnt worthy his talent.

[Squid Lips]

Okay, POSSIBLE SPOILER Even though I have not seen the film....

I watched the trailer of this and was kind of interested, but the one thing that struck me was that Charlize seemed to be playing some second banana house wife. That was until I saw the one shot of her towards the end, giving that "look" and wearing what appeared to be some cool clothes. My immediate response was "she is a super villian" otherwise she probably would not have done the role.

Now reading Jo's review, I can pretty much guarantee it. But it seemed so given away in the trailer if that is the case. Maybe a red herring... but me guess tis not!

I still intend to see it though.....

[echo_bravo]

Eh, just not really a big Will Smith fan. Absolutely hated I Am Legend but if my friends drag me to see this I might not refuse and give in.

Bring on The Dark Knight already.

[dellamorte dellamore]

From what I am reading....wait till Dark Knight comes out.


Now that is a Mr Obvious statement , TDK has already taken on a life of it's own , and i'm not about to make any comparisons to Hancock concerning that film with regards to entertainment value . What i am saying is that we haven't seen such a despicable superhero / comic book hero like this before , and for me it worked to perfection .

I always wanted to see both films and i will , one is out of the way , now it's Tdk next , i don't see why you can't enjoy both . If people are deciding between Tdk and Hancock for their hero fix , because of ticket prices , then of course , go with Tdk , but if not , i would highly recommend Hancock . Overall , i would say it was great time at the movies , but we all know Tdk is the must see of the summer . That doesn't in any way detract from the value of Hancock .

[rob the many]

Loved the first 2/3rds of the movie. But once the big twist is revealed it drops the central premise of the movie and goes into a different, less interesting direction. Some of it got outright silly. But the hospital scene was alright. And it's not bad enough to ruin the movie as a whole. Still pretty disappointing though. It ends as a completely different movie from what it starts off as and not for the better. Although Will Smith is great, I thought it was Jason Bateman who stole the movie. He's just great here and he and Smith work so well together. As for Theron, well I love her. She is so damn gorgeous and a great actress and to her credit she gives a perfectly fine performance. It's not her fault her character's stuff doesn't work. But her character is a big part of the reason why I didn't care much for the last third.

All in all, though I was disappointed in the ultimate direction the movie takes late into it, it was still a pretty darn entertaining summer flick. And I do like it more than the other two superhero flicks, Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk. Unlike Jon Favreau, Peter Berg really knows how to craft a great action sequence.

7/10


This is exactually how I felt. They should how spent more time on the script. Because the first half was damn good then all the story stuff came in and either lost everyone or made people not care(i didn't care). It was like they forgot what movie they were making and just threw another film in with hancock. The audience I saw it with loved the first half too. but then they started talking about his past and how he got to be how he was. then preceded to take forever explaining it and once they did and you heard why you were just left wondering what the fuck. The movie really fell apart. A shame really i was looking good and then god knows what happened. Do you think this will affect will in anyway?

Spoiler:
Why did the villian when he first ran into hancock ask out loud What is going on. Then at the end talk like he knew what hancock was? Did anybody else catch this major flaw. This was plot hole that ruined it for me but there were many others.

[ilovemovies]

Kind of off topic (though kind of not) I saw trailers in the movie for Knowing and The Day the Earth Stood Still and I got to say, they both look VERY cool.

[KCJ506]

I have no idea why some are casting such hate on this movie. I saw it today and while i can certainly see why some would have issues with certain aspects, there is enough fun here for even the most jaded film goer I would have thought.

The film's biggest drawback is it's short run time which makes it feel like it's in a rush to get to the end, the mythos it attempts to create isn't given enough time, whether you accept it or not as a one that works for Hancock is a personal choice.


7/10

[jdparker]

This is a B- for me.

What blew me away in terms of Hancock was superb acting. I guess that's what you get when you put talent like Jason Bateman and Charlize Theron up on screen with Will Smith, who has the Action star persona down pat. What sets Hancock apart from his super-hero contemporaries is the exploration into the dark psyche of its protagonist. Smith did a good job of encapsulating the role, in other-hands Hancocks antics could easily have come off as childish, or goofy.

However there is some serious hinderances on the film. I understand the desire to get the movie going, but I felt the reform of Hancock was too rushed to be believable. The whole movie should of been more along those lines, instead of veering off into a new direction. The Hospital scene was pretty great, however for the most part the 3rd act just didn't work. It's a catch-22 for Hancock, for the story to work it would need to be another 20 mins longer. But I think if it were that long I would of lost interest.

One nit-picky thing: The shaky-cam bothered me in the otherwise enjoyable action sequences.

If there is a sequel I'd love to see someone like Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson take on Hancock. He could play a villian, probably make a good foil for Hancock.

[hubbard_28]

I'll watch just about any superhero movie that comes out. Mystery Men (LOVED IT) to Spiderman (classic), if it has the word superhero anywhere near it, I'm there.
Hancock was pretty good. I wanted it to be better, and would still give it a 7/10, but what surprised me most was the character development. I really liked the character.

[Homyrrh]

Considering going tonight (i.e. - now), but get this. 'Iron Man' showed 19 times on debut night (May 1) at my local AMC 16 (yes...16 theaters). Meanwhile, 'Hancock' is showing 24 times in 11.5 hours...gah.

[Homyrrh]

I should also add, as this theater is the most prominent i nthe area, that 'The Happening' has but two show times all day.

[Rapture27]

Damn........really cool premise. Liked most of the film..ummmm. Some real funny scenes and lines. Laughed out loud more than a few times.......damn.

.....movie does what its supposed to in the broad sense of things but it falls way short of what it could've really been. The "twist" or turning point in the film breaks apart an odd, entertaining movie.....I wasn't pissed at the end of the movie, not satisfied, just kinda like....well, that was ok. I can see why its getting good reviews but I can also see why it got bad reviews.

Sometimes u wonder what studios, directors and writers are thinking when they partly destroy a really good flick....

*sighs*

[snoopmish]

Now that is a Mr Obvious statement , TDK has already taken on a life of it's own , and i'm not about to make any comparisons to Hancock concerning that film with regards to entertainment value . What i am saying is that we haven't seen such a despicable superhero / comic book hero like this before , and for me it worked to perfection .

I always wanted to see both films and i will , one is out of the way , now it's Tdk next , i don't see why you can't enjoy both . If people are deciding between Tdk and Hancock for their hero fix , because of ticket prices , then of course , go with Tdk , but if not , i would highly recommend Hancock . Overall , i would say it was great time at the movies , but we all know Tdk is the must see of the summer . That doesn't in any way detract from the value of Hancock .



I'm not saying that you have to choose between the two....I was saying how TDK will probably be darker in tone. If you didn't see...I LOVED Hancock. I had such a great time at this film I gave it a 9/10. Sure the second part seemed more drama...but who cares. His character went through a change and I enjoyed watching the change. In the first 1/2...I haven't laughed that hard at a movie in a really long time. Most comedies have sucked now and being a huge comics fan it was great to see What if Superman didn't give a shit?

[Homyrrh]

Talk about a plot-driven waste of money. Something happened with this because it tanked about halfway through the film. Who didn't figure Charlize Theron would at least end up playing a pivotal role in the end via plot twist.

The plot and sequencing in this film's third act were so unnecessary and melodramatic, and it compeltely defacated on the incredibly entertaing first half.

Simply, a 6.0/10.

[dellamorte dellamore]

Glad you cleared that up Snoop , it did seem as though you were saying to forget about hancock and wait for Tdk instead .

[spacemonkey]

This movie had some good things and some bad things going for it.

Good things:

1- The character, Hancock, is interesting (at least in the first half) cause that whole idea about him being a drunk, and a depressed superhero was the most interesting aspect of it. Its different. How often do you see a drunk as Superhero? Much less one who kind of hates to have to save people all the time? Never. So that was new, and to my understanding, they should have played with it a little more. They should have stretched that aspect of the story a little more.

2- The special effects were pretty cool. Some very fun and incredible effects were on display here. Those scenes with Hancock stopping those crooks in the highway and throwing their car around like it was made of paper was awesome. I enjoyed that and whenever any of the super people powered up and starting fighting and destroying things, and blowing up trucks and controling weather and all that...that was awesome.

3- The comedy. I enjoyed the way Hancock treated people like shit, I liked that they hated him cause it just offered up some cool moments. LIke the one where the people actually tell Hancock what could have done better. Also, how Hancock was so powerful that he would destroy everything all the time, he lands he breaks everything, he lifts off he destroys everything, anything he does, he destroys everything, that aspect of the movie offered up some funny moments as well.

The Bad:

1- The story reaked. I mena, the premise of the film, a drunk lame ass lazy superhero was great. They just didnt take it as far as they could have taken it. As far as Im concerned, they should have stuck with Hancock being a drunk bastard for MOST of the film, until somehow his actions screw things beyond repair and then he decides to change. But the change from drunk bastard to squeeky clean superhero happened to fucking quickly, the most interesting aspect of the film was taken away. Then we are left with a lame ass story.

2- They left a lot of info out. I hated the fact that this movie took the same route as Jumper for example as far as telling its story went. You know, brush over certain things, without giving too much away, so they can expand on the story in future sequels. Im really starting to fucking hate this. Its like a new trend, where they automatically take it for granted that there will be more films, without even knowing if their movie will make money. As a result we are left with a bunch of movies with incomplete storylines. Movies that could have been better, but werent cause the filmmakers wanted to hold back on the story and information for future films, which they dont know if theyll ever get made.

3- The absence of a worthy villain. Ok, I get it, in this film, Hancock is his own enemy and he has to battle his inner demons in order to prevail. But I have to admit, the fact that the worst villains in this film were a group of bankrobbers really dissapointed me. I wanted somebody equally powerful for Hancock to fight. NOt some bank robbers. That royally sucked. And for the amount of budget this film had....we should have gotten a decent fight with a worthy villain, a worthy situation, something global, something major, something cajunga. Not fighting with some bank robbers in a hospital room.

4- The ending, should have been more exciting. You are left with this feeling, like you wanted to see something major, but didint. The small fight that Hancock has with the other super being, was great, it had some decent effects in it. But it kind of like felt like that fight in the first Fantastic Four movie, where it was a bunch of quick effects and then its over? Kind of like that. You are left wanting more. But the movie does not satasfy in that sense.

Finallly, I respect what they were tring to do here. Something different. But they should have added a bit more excitement in the mix. As it is, this film feels like My super ex-Boyfriend.

[Mr.HyDe807]

(Possible Spoilers)

Just got back, and although there were mixed reviews, i pretty much enjoyed it. The whole first half was funny and entertaining, while the rest felt a little bit sloppy (the origin thing felt a little tacked on for my taste). I wonder if extra minutes were added on that it would make it feel more fleshed out. However, while it was a little jaded near the end, i was still having a good time.

Overall, another good summer flick.

Oh, and "its you! handjob!" was the funniest line in the whole movie! I'm surprised Epps actually made me laugh after his shit in the Resident Evil movies.

8/10

[Homyrrh]

Best part, other than the abovementioned laugh-out-loud Mike Epps outtake, was the 'Quantam of Solace' trailer.

[spacemonkey]

Best part, other than the abovementioned laugh-out-loud Mike Epps outtake, was the 'Quantam of Solace' trailer.

Oh yeah, I devoured that one. I like the level of "reality" they are giving the bond films, obviously taking a cue from The Bourne movies..

[Shockwave]

Oh yeah, I devoured that one. I like the level of "reality" they are giving the bond films, obviously taking a cue from The Bourne movies..

Yeah, i was thinking that as well.

..and thats a very good thing.:cool:

This is a complete side note, but a new Bond game is being done by the COD4 people (using the same kick-ass engine)about Casino Royale and Quantam of Solace. It looks like we might finally get a Bond game that kicks Golden Eyes ass.

[JoeChar4321]

Hancock is definitely a mixed bag...

the action scenes shot well in Peter Berg's traditional shaky-cam style.

...with a more solidly written and composed second half, the film could've been a great summer ride. Instead we're stuck with a mixed bag, that has lots of laughs and some solid action, but is also filled with inane absurdities and a wavering tone.

6/10

Very true but I really hated Peter Berg's work here and think the action sequences suffered greatly because of his jarring style. Worse, regular scenes were cause to look away from the screen. The one notable aspect that really detracts from the movie's running time is his horrifically heavy handed techniques. Needless jarring, zooms, spins and intentional blurred to focused lens shots are so evident that they pull you right out of the film at times. This director almost single-handedly manages to ruin what turns out to be a fun and somewhat intriguing story.

Still, Hancock is a typical, inconsequential superhero action movie that does manage to keep you interested all the way through the movie. It’s more of a superpowered character study because there really is no villain or remarkable action sequences on display at any time. I agree with most that are saying that the lead up and first half of the film is much more interesting then what occurs after secrets are revealed.

7/10

[Shale]

Hancock
Review by Shale
July 3, 2008

I got off work early today and caught a 4 p.m. showing of Hancock. Right off, I will give this a Shale 4-DVD rating and may even go see it again in theater. That seems at odds with the majority of critics who didn't care for this movie. OK, guess I'll dust off my "I Enjoy Bad Movies" adage, but really this was not a bad movie.

It started out as the routine summer CGI action/adventure with a little slant in that the "hero" was really messed up in the head. An alcoholic misanthrope who goes to battle the bad guys drunk, doing so much collateral damage that all of LA was out to get him. He didn't really care since no one could touch him - how do you bring the man of steel to justice?

So, all anyone could do was just call him an asshole. That, BTW is a running gag throughout the flick and the first one to call him that is a cute little kid who tries to get him out of his drunken stupor to stop the shooting car chase in progress on the LA Freeway.

Hancock (Asshole)
http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/gallery/1191264/photo_04_hires.jpg

You've likely already seen all the action scenes in the trailers of Hancock's screw ups, including his stopping the train with his body and the consequent derailment for miles. This was the scene where he saves the life of PR man Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman) who was stuck on the tracks. As the angry crowd heckles Hancock, Ray comes to his defense because it was his life that was just saved.

PR man Ray defends Hancock after train wreck
http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/gallery/1191264/photo_06_hires.jpg

Ray then takes an interest in Hancock and tries to work his public image while getting him to clean up his act. When the authorities berate him for his criminal indifference and call for justice, Ray convinces Hancock to turn himself in; detox and try to become a real superhero. Reluctantly, the bitter Hancock does.

Hancock turns himself in
http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/gallery/1191264/photo_07_hires.jpg

Ray is a social do-gooder but his usually supportive wife Mary (Charlize Theron) is visibly put off by the crude, obnoxious Hancock. She has to endure him because her young son adores him and her husband is really trying to help him.

Hancock serves time in prison (predictable scenes of bad guys in the slammer getting more grief from Hancock who put them there) and gets his act together by the time crime gets so out of control in LA that the police chief calls him for help. Hancock literally cleans up and puts on his superhero uniform and does good.

He even seems to be on the good side of Mary as the three of them go out to dinner together and we learn a little of Hancock's history and how he came to have super powers.

Hancock Turnin' Around
http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/gallery/1191264/photo_02_hires.jpg

Here there is a plot twist that I thoroughly enjoyed but which seems to be one reason so many critics faulted this movie. This was so refreshing a turn in the movie that it was the selling moment for me.

Again, go see this movie. If you don't enjoy it, call me an asshole. I'll handle that better than Hancock.

Shale's movie rating scale:
0 DVD No I would not waste my money or time seeing this movie again.
1 DVD I would get this DVD for $5 or $7
2 DVD I would get this DVD for $10
3 DVD I would get this DVD for $15
4 DVD I would get this DVD for $25 as soon as it was released.

[Shale]

...- it sounds like an absolute train wreck of a film; ...

HeHeHe!

[dellamorte dellamore]

First off , i think you really are an a-hole for defending this movie , you know it's your duty to follow what all the high brow critics say ;) .

I agree , it is an excellent film , and for me , the film gradually became even more interesting the more they revealed who Hancock really was . In a scene that could have been the height of sentimentality , Hancock questions what type of person he could have been for no one to claim him at the hospital , that scene really got to me , it was heartfelt and genuine , and it underscored the anguish he was experiencing .

I didn't think the dynamics between all the principle characters would be as effective or moving as they were , and that's one of the strong points in the film . The film looked like typical silly fun , a somewhat soulless b buster cgi fest , and i was prepared to enjoy for that alone , but don't let the fantastical premise and visual fx fool you , there is a heart beneath it's surface .

I like how they don't try to get you to like the characters , you come to appreciate them through their natural actions .


It is somewhat disappointing that there wasn't a villain who could possibly be a threat to Hancock , but i still felt they handled the vulnerability angle just fine , and i'm sure in the sequel we will get a true baddie for him to contend with . They set up the history of his kind , so i fully expect a sort of Supe 2 narrative arc in the second film .

Just some random thoughts , did anyone see the short scene in the beginning of the credits , it was pretty funny . And also , Ogre from ROTN and Bloodsport , among other films , has a cameo as one of the prisoners . He's one of the people in the group therapy sessions . Funny seeing him after all this time , and man , this guy is massive , bigger than he ever was .


Spoilers




Ps - i was giggling like a schoolgirl during the scene in the kitchen when Han was testing to see if a certain someone was also superhuman .

[snoopmish]

SPOLIER
Don't read below:p














i was giggling like a schoolgirl during the scene in the kitchen when Han was testing to see if a certain someone was also superhuman .


Yea....I died laughing at the rolling pin...:D

[ScaryFreak1827]

I had no expectations going into this movie and came out loving it; Will Smith was hilarious as the "occasionally drunken" and crude superhero who actually ends up making something of himself and Bateman/Theron were great here as well. I also loved the scene with the French kid Michelle (the same kid from Halloween) and his descent into the air:D

8.5/10

[InvaderZim]

7.5/10 - So much promise... if given to a competent crew this could have been a great film.. but it suffers from too much shit.. fun but dumb as nails.. its a shame when the best scene of the movie is in the credits

[athf1980]

3.5/5

spoilers
It's was solid. The first part was the best when Hancock was drunken a-hole.

[dellamorte dellamore]

Uh , that's not a spoiler , that's been heavily marketed in the trailers :) .

[Walter Sobchak]

Spoilers.









Good movie. I can't wait to get an unrated version on DVD.

My main problem with it is that it was like two or three movies in one. It would have been nice if the progression had been slower. I hated the musical in the beginning, it sounded like the soundtrack from Hot to Trot, very corny.

The Good:
The touching moments with Hancock were the best. Will Smith portrays anguish very well. I laughed hard quite a few times. Nice action sequences.

Good beginning, so-so in the middle, but it wrapped up nicely.

8/10

[CyclicNightmare]

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Hancock-2-Planned-9373.html

Even Will Smith knows it kinda sucks.

[Shockwave]

He probably isnt happy with the way the studio fucked with the film.:)

[unspoken]

Minor spoilers ahead...










This movie was a good start that ended up striking out in a big way. There were several good laughs until Hancock started cleaning up his image. Then the twist came, and somewhat caught me off guard, but the ensuing story was a major letdown, and some of the action sequences afterwards were just ridiculous.

So the movie disappointed me. I was also pissed that I gave my cousin my money to get my ticket while I was out having a smoke. He said we were going to see Wall-E. Then he bought tickets for this, and Wall-E wasn't sold out.

And the trailer for the new Bond was a let down as well. All in all, I'm not a happy moviegoer tonight.

4/10

[echo_bravo]

God damn this film sucked!

Of course my friends dragged me to see this even though I warned them of all the negative reviews.:mad:

Probably the second worst film of the summer (the worst belongs to The Happening).

Peter Berg was not the right director for this at all.

Also it had some horrendous CGI. Will Smith hanging on wires infront of a green screen basically.:rolleyes:

The only saving grace of this film was Bateman. That guy is a GOD.

4.5/10



With that being said, I gotta say I really dont like Will Smith films. I think he is talented but he isnt using that talent to his full potential. I would like to see him do some more "edgy" stuff or some indie stuff.

Take Tom Cruise for example, he broaded his horizons by doing an AWESOME role in Magnolia. Along with Vanilla Sky, he showed he could take some risks.

[PR0J3KT M]

saw it yesternight.

first off, i enjoy will smith in movies. and he seemed completely different in this movie...he played the part well. i dk, maybe it's me, but i didnt get that whole part where the prisoners were talking about getting their power back..that was weird...just that whole twist was kind of random...but yeah.. it was a good film, but couldve been better.

7/10

[dellamorte dellamore]

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Hancock-2-Planned-9373.html

Even Will Smith knows it kinda sucks.


It sounds more like he was disappointed that he didn't have as much control over the finished product as he would have liked . I was more than satisfied with the final product , i really don't see how they could have made it any better . I'm sure the dvd will have some deleted scenes that flesh out the characters a bit more , but it's fine the way it is . A planned sequel is not news to me , it was obvious this film was set up to be a franchise , now it's just a matter of who directs , and / or writes , and how much control the studio is willing to give Smith this time around . Honestly , i like what they did , and where the story is going , i wouldn't want him mucking around too much , there is serious potential there for two more movies with the same crew , writer , and director . Give them a break already , they are familiar with the material now , let them grow with it . This isn't on a Batman and Robin level where they had to go in a totally different direction , this is a great start to the series .


Spoilers



I agree about the prisoners , they set it up as if they were going to be superhuman also , that's what i got out of that scene . It seemed as though maybe they were immortals also and that there was a way for them to regain their strength so they could confront Hancock . They made it seem as though there was some sort of connection between the lead bank robber , and the two prisoners Smith confronted in the prison . Not simply the fact that he aided in all of their captures , but something deeper . It's a minor issue for me , but it would have been a terrific little twist if those guys turned out to be immortal also .

[Shale]

Spoilers

...

I agree about the prisoners , they set it up as if they were going to be superhuman also , that's what i got out of that scene . It seemed as though maybe they were immortals also and that there was a way for them to regain their strength so they could confront Hancock . They made it seem as though there was some sort of connection between the lead bank robber , and the two prisoners Smith confronted in the prison . Not simply the fact that he aided in all of their captures , but something deeper . It's a minor issue for me , but it would have been a terrific little twist if those guys turned out to be immortal also .
Y'know, I missed all that. I was just seeing the slapstick, near potty humor of, "stick his head up ur ass."

However, for those who saw more meaning in that scene than was there, maybe it was a red herring to throw u off the other twist, as there was talk going around about an equal rival.

That may be why so many were disappointed that there wasn't a real "villain" (with superpowers) in this movie. Maybe they were looking for one and read it in that prison scene.

[RustyRazor]

SPOILERS****


















I liked it.
Pleasantly surprised, considering there were no "super villains" to counter the super hero and the actual threats were regular humans and the hero's own condition.
Jason Bateman was hilarious, as usual.
Will Smith does his thing: action, comedy, little bit of drama.
Charlize Theron was good, though her character was a bit oddly approached. The explanation of their origin lacked some definition BUT overall, I thought it was a good film.
Not "Men In Black" or "Independence Day" by any means, but a solid, rewatchable Will Smith film and a good effort.

And I even liked the Mike Epps cameo at the very end too.

8/10

[CyclicNightmare]

And I even liked the Mike Epps cameo at the very end too.
"Handjob" was the funniest line of the movie. I think it went over a lot of people's heads.

[DareDevil]

Might go see this tonight... I remember when the very first teaser trailer came out my first reply was "This looks on par with My Super Ex-Girlfriend" and well I basicaly feel the exact same way 6 months later, hopefully it's better than I expect, I like me some Peter Berge and Smith is usualy always fun buuut something bout this seems really lackluster.

[dellamorte dellamore]

Mike Epps has to be in the sequel ;) . He's prob one of the super dudes also , that's why he laid down such an insult lol . I'd love the sequel to be in Manhattan , there are more possibilities for humor . It looks like that's where they are going with it , unless there are some radical changes .



Spoilers



I can easily see some rogue immortals in the sequel , ones who rebelled against good , and who get stronger around other immortals instead of weaker . I have no doubt the sequel will be even better . It's the typical setup story , there is always something missing . Now that the premise is established , they can expand on the themes that were only hinted at in the first one .




end spoilers





You know what i love about the film , how deftly they mixed the comedy , drama , action , and pathos . It never felt abrupt , but natural . Some scenes could have easily been way too silly to take seriously , and at times the melodrama threatened to devolve into soap opera sentimentality , but Berg balanced all the elements in an expert fashion , it worked .

It's almost impossible to create a brand new cinematic superhero . They all had comic book origins and years of history on their side , so were already known and accepted by a large number of people , i like how this character of Hancock is a totally " fresh " creation without the baggage of comic book offerings . They can do whatever they want with this franchise now without the limitations of the comics .

[fooknasty]

I am really shocked to see all of the high scores for this movie. It was not very good. The story lacked from underdevlopment on Hancock's side, and the CGI action scenes were too flimsy. We get a weak explanation of who Hancock is, and it is beyond lame. Good Lord, it was like they were shooting that scene and they told Will Smith "Oh, well, just go ahead and make something up".

And they used the same damn joke over and over again. "Call me an asshole..." and then Theron used it.

I love Will Smith and his brand of humor, and I can completely understand where he is coming from when even he thinks it wasn't very good.

The twist was stupid and unnecessary, and the ending was lame as hell. (A man wth a hook for a hand as the villian :rolleyes:)

On the plus side, Bateman was very good, and there were some fairly funny parts. (Even though we went to see this and Get Smart at the drive in, and I laughed a lot more throughout Get Smart).

Very bland, and average at best. Peter Berg has talent, but it didn't show here.

5-6/10

[thedudeman69]

I feel like that Berg felt helpless in his direction because this was his first movie using CGI, and he said that he had limited control on it. Also, this script has gone through numerous rewrites and The end product of this was dissapponting. If the film was more like the first half, and they just took it from there, then this would've been better, but they just lost the audience with the last few parts. But for there are cons there are pros, as the action sequences were really good, and Smith gave a good peformance. The directio was decent, not Berg's best, but it's passable but disspponting.

7/10

[Shockwave]

This movie keeps reminding me of I AM LEGEND, because its first half is pretty good, but its second half just apart and feels like it sufferd from massive reshoots and studio fudging.

[anakinsrise]

I have had mixed feelings about Hancock since i saw the trailer months ago,and then about 20 more times with each film i went to see.
So i was pleased to find myself so amused by the first half of Hancock.
Smith does an excellent job as the "anti-hero Hancock.
Jason Bateman also did well as his P.R rep
As for the second half when the "big twist" is revealed which i didnt have a problem with,and it actually leads to some very amusing scenes.
But so much is just touched upon after the revelation that could have made the movie more interesting, and packed more of a emotional punch,its frustrating because you see how Hancock could have been great instead of good.I wanted to know more about Hancocks past.So much was passed over.
Plus i found the villain to be lame.I will get to that in a spoiler below
In the end i was entertained and i laughed out loud quite a few times
but Hancock could have been so much more
Scale of 1-10 a 7













SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
It would have been so much better if the villain "RED"
was someone who was seeking out the immortals, to destroy
them and manipulated Hancock in a way to draw out Hancocks "mate" to destroy her too.

[Rukas]

I really liked this. I cant see why traditional media is saying it sucked so much, I mean, what "sucked?" I can see how some people may not like this type of film, and it has its flaws, but I think to say it flat out sucked is a bit harsh.

The twist was fantastic and I didnt see it coming, I didnt even expect there to be one of that extent, I thought it was going to go where it seemed to be going and then BANG, literally.

[dellamorte dellamore]

I agree , it was a great film , yet another " superhero " film this summer that delivered on it's promise and i like how this one is entirely original . Maybe the critics were expecting another IM , or they feel the bar has been raised because of that film , but the funny thing is IM had almost the same type of narrative shift concerning the character , they both developed a conscience , so why is it that some people feel that's the point in the film when things went downhill . I got better after he started to realize maybe he was destined for greater things and he had a more noble purpose .

[bigred760]

It was a fun movie and better than I expected. The story was interesting, and the twist halfway through the movie caught me off guard. It also had it's funny moments with Will Smith playing the bum superhero really well. Jason Bateman and Charlize Theron ("Arrested Development" reunion!) also played their parts well. I won't give away too much about the story, but part of the 'explanation' of how things work kinda confused me . . . maybe some repeat viewings will clear them up for me. All in all, a good fun summer movie, which Will Smith seems to excel at lately.

7/10

[snoopmish]

Spoilers








Y'know, I missed all that. I was just seeing the slapstick, near potty humor of, "stick his head up ur ass."

However, for those who saw more meaning in that scene than was there, maybe it was a red herring to throw u off the other twist, as there was talk going around about an equal rival.

That may be why so many were disappointed that there wasn't a real "villain" (with superpowers) in this movie. Maybe they were looking for one and read it in that prison scene.


I kind of agree with that. I also think this was just intro to the character. I could see them finding out there is another....someone whose partner died and has been all alone and wants to take on Hancock because of his good press or something.....obvious sequel yes...but if the other character was written properly could be fun.

[Rapture27]

This movie keeps reminding me of I AM LEGEND, because its first half is pretty good, but its second half just apart and feels like it sufferd from massive reshoots and studio fudging.
Truth.org

[soda]

None of those films have gone into these darker areas that Hancock seems to do . This is an unrepentant alcoholic , womanizing , kid hating drunkard , this is something new .


Personally i don't think these types of films are dark enough because they are straddling the line between appealing to the younger people in the audience and the adults . I want to see some real neuroses on display , i don't want it just hinted at .


No, for a comic book fan like myself, this is decidedly NOT something new. And, in fact, this is something DANGEROUS, that ought to be avoided. A quick history lesson....

Silver Age comics (1960-1985) was very happy go lucky, as I've said in other posts, then, in 1985, a slew of titles came out that shifted the industry, this slew was headed by Alan Moore's Watchmen and Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. Over the course of the next 10 to 15 years, almost everything that came out was grim and gritty, what you're talking about in your post, double D. You want the kind of thing you're talking about?

read Preacher, a book that is so sacriligeous and messed up, it leaves you wanting more

Read Sin City, if you've seen the movie, you know this is the thing with anti-heroes.

but most of all, read Kingdome Come (I think it's the best trade paper back in the history of comics) a book where the next generation of DCU super heroes and portrayed as all the things that you wanted them to be.

During this era, there were thousands of books that were trying to immitate (ie, copy) what DKR and Watchmen acheived, unfornately, very few succeeded. As a result of dropping sales, DC was acquired by Warner Bros and Marvel declared Bankruptcy, and with a few execptions (mostly stuff that Jeph Loeb was writting), people thought the industry was dying.

Then, in 2001, a funny thing happened. A bunch of comic book writers and execs thought long and hard about how to fix things, and they looked at each other and said "whatever happened to making comics fun to read?" A new age was started by Brian Michael Bendis and Ultimate Spider man #1. There's still grim and gritty, there's still heroic decontruction, and all those things, but the big difference between comics as they are now, and as they were ten years ago, is that writers are making them fun to read, and artists are making them fun to look at again.

Its one of the problems with the grim and gritty approach. Done correctly, like in Kingdome Come, it can be spectacular ("...and he cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth....and when he cried...seven thunders uttered thier voices....SHAZAM!) however, it's also unbelieveably easy to mess up, more so than silver age corniness. In fact, the industry's major plot point these days is to look back at the silver age, keep what worked and what made comics fun, and to re-imagine the stuff that didn't work into a more palatable means. These days, we have the "phantom zone arrow" in Green Arrow's quiver, and a slight reimagining has transformed it from the dumbest thing of all time into something very cool.

I would argue that what comics are putting out now, a "Silver age reborn" is the optimal way to go. grim and gritty failed comics for a reason, and I don't want to see movie studios learn that lesson the hard way.

[Crazy Dud]

This is a tough movie to review. The first two-thirds of the movie are great, but it veers off in a rather strange and unwelcome direction in the final act. However, though I first hated this "twist," after thinking about it a while I realize that it fits the film better than I initially thought and gives it more thematic depth than it would otherwise have had. Most importantly, Will Smith turns in another fine performance. Just as he did in I Am Legend, Smith's stellar performance elevates what would otherwise be a rather standard film. As of right now, he is the only actor in Hollywood who is almost guaranteed to open a movie big, and for good reason. He is a good actor, and has an incredible amount of charm and character on screen. In Hancock he has perhaps created his most memorable character yet. Before seeing it, be forewarned that there is a left-field twist in the final act that definitely could have been better, but that you are ultimately watching this movie to have Will Smith entertain you with his character of John Hancock, and in that regard the movie most definitely succeeds.

7/10

[dellamorte dellamore]

Soda , i'm not referring to the comics , i'm commenting on actual adaptations or in the case of Hancock , a superhero that didn't originate in the comics .

Sin City isn't even part of this conversation , because it wasn't superhero based , it was just inspired by the comic . Yes , that film was dark and gritty , and violent , but it didn't have any superheros running around , although it did feature some fantastical characters .

I'm talking about a real life dark , mysterious , psychotic comic book hero , we haven't seen one yet . Tdk doesn't seem to go far enough , because much like BB , Bale plays him like an angst ridden teenager , not a conflicted , totally pissed off , cynical , borderline psychotic . He's congenial , seemingly well adjusted , yeah he has some issues , but nothing a talk with Oprah ( Alfred ) can't solve . I gotta get me one of those Butlers , they seem to be the cure for any type of neuroses . Just making a point , because i loved BB and i will no doubt go bonkers over Tdk .


My point is , we will never see the true dark side of comic book heroes in a mainstream H wood offering , it would be too dark and depressing , although for me , way more realistic and intriguing than what we are getting . None of these types of films delve deep enough into the heroes psyche to have any sort of lasting emotional resonance , i always get the feeling they are holding back something . Sm didn't do it , IM didn't , Hulk tried but only went halfway , and from what i can see , Tdk will go a bit more into Wayne's dark side , but not too far , so as not to scare off the mainstream viewers .


Hancock is the one film that actually went into those dark areas that are only dealt with in the comics or novels , even though it's not based on either one of them . Don't let the surface fool you , Han is chock full of realistic pathos and regret and conflict concerning the main character . For me it came the closest to fleshing out all aspects of a superheroe's motivation , doubt , and their ultimate disdain for the public when they feel they aren't being appreciated .

[xage]

I dont know if it was mentioned in this thread.. but anyone noticed?

A black superhero's greatest weakness (a kryptonite) is a white woman?

[bigred760]

I dont know if it was mentioned in this thread.. but anyone noticed?

A black superhero's greatest weakness (a kryptonite) is a white woman?

What's your point?

[spacemonkey]

***SPOILERS AHEAD************************

Did anyone think that when Charlize Theron is talking to Hancock in the hospital, the way she was spewing her lines was kind of robotic? I kept hearing her deliver the dialog about "the gods" (who the fuck are these gods that created them anyway? Greek gods or something?) and about them having to be apart and what not, the dialog didnt come off as believable in the least.

It was just as if she was saying this lines, but she wasnt believing them. It felt to me like what was going through her mind was something along the lines of "this dialog is ridiculous! Do I really have to say this?" Honestly, that scene looked like it was part of those reshoots they did in at the last minute.

She was the worst thing in the movie for me!

[bigred760]

**MORE SPOILERS**






***SPOILERS AHEAD************************

Did anyone think that when Charlize Theron is talking to Hancock. . .

Not really, no. She wasn't saying that they were created by Gods, she was saying they were Gods, and she was explaining to him who and what they were. I thought it was kind of a touching moment.

[spacemonkey]

****************SPOILERS************************** ********************

Yeah, but she says they "were created in two", who created them again? Didnt she say some people called them angels, some gods and now superheroes, shes making some sort of allusion to their divine origins?

And whats that dumb idea about them having to be seperated in order to do good? Whats that all about? I mean if its to be taken in a symbolic way thats fine, cause ok, men and women have to learn to let their guards down to be together, and they have to make themselves vulnerable in order to do that, I get that.

But in the movie, whats the practicality of them having to be apart? Why do they loose their powers when together? Whats the point of it? Whats the meaning for it?

Also, I got some Highlander vibes going on here. Inmortals who are drawn together and once together they have to fight each other? "There can be only one" type of deal going on here. It seems like Will just decided to mix the current superhero craze with his version of the Highlander films.

[bigred760]

**MORE SPOILERS**

****************SPOILERS************************** ********************
[quote]
Yeah, but she says they "were created in two", who created them again? Didnt she say some people called them angels, some gods and now superheroes, shes making some sort of allusion to their divine origins?

As to who created them, I don't know - I don't remember if she said so. As far as what they are, apparently they've been called different things at different times. I kinda liked this aspect of the movie: in "olden times," they were considered Gods; at another point angels; in this era, Hancock became known as a super hero.


And whats that dumb idea about them having to be seperated in order to do good? Whats that all about? I mean if its to be taken in a symbolic way thats fine, cause ok, men and women have to learn to let their guards down to be together, and they have to make themselves vulnerable in order to do that, I get that.

But in the movie, whats the practicality of them having to be apart? Why do they loose their powers when together? Whats the point of it? Whats the meaning for it?

I came to think of it as kind of like "Adam and Eve eating from the forbidden tree." They have all the power in the world, but if they fall in love, they will "leave paradise," and become human. That's what happened to the rest of them, and is why there are only two left.

It was obvious that she still had strong feelings for him, but had to let him go if she wanted to be the "god." Same for him.


Also, I got some Highlander vibes going on here. Inmortals who are drawn together and once together they have to fight each other? "There can be only one" type of deal going on here. It seems like Will just decided to mix the current superhero craze with his version of the Highlander films.

They didn't have to fight each other once they met. That's not how they died off. These two just happened to fight each other because he pissed her off.

[spacemonkey]

I'm commenting on actual adaptations or in the case of Hancock , a superhero that didn't originate in the comics .

I'm talking about a real life dark , mysterious , psychotic comic book hero , we haven't seen one yet . Tdk doesn't seem to go far enough , because much like BB , Bale plays him like an angst ridden teenager , not a conflicted , totally pissed off , cynical , borderline psychotic . He's congenial , seemingly well adjusted , yeah he has some issues , but nothing a talk with Oprah ( Alfred ) can't solve . I gotta get me one of those Butlers , they seem to be the cure for any type of neuroses . Just making a point , because i loved BB and i will no doubt go bonkers over Tdk .

My point is , we will never see the true dark side of comic book heroes in a mainstream H wood offering , it would be too dark and depressing , although for me , way more realistic and intriguing than what we are getting . None of these types of films delve deep enough into the heroes psyche to have any sort of lasting emotional resonance , i always get the feeling they are holding back something . Sm didn't do it , IM didn't , Hulk tried but only went halfway , and from what i can see , Tdk will go a bit more into Wayne's dark side , but not too far , so as not to scare off the mainstream viewers .

Hancock is the one film that actually went into those dark areas that are only dealt with in the comics or novels , even though it's not based on either one of them . Don't let the surface fool you , Han is chock full of realistic pathos and regret and conflict concerning the main character . For me it came the closest to fleshing out all aspects of a superheroe's motivation , doubt , and their ultimate disdain for the public when they feel they aren't being appreciated .

Hey Della, I used to read this comic book in the 90s that was actually a lot like Hancock. He was the laziest dude with super powers, and was same as Hancock a reluctant superhero. Dubbed the "first inaction hero", he doesnt want any of it...but what the hell, if he is pushed enough into it, he will help out.

I thought it was a pretty original idea back when I was reading the comics, but now that I see kind of the same idea in this movie I started to wonder if the makers of Hancock were more then a little influenced by this DC comic book from the 90s.

Created by John Arcudi and Doug Mahnke. Major Bummer, ever heard of it? It was actually pretty obscure since it was completely original and came out of left field, but when it first came out I remember it being hailed as one of comics "best kept secrets" cause it was so well written. Sadly it was cancelled after just 15 issues.

http://image.milehighcomics.com/istore/images/large/50590050762.1.gif

[spacemonkey]

They didn't have to fight each other once they met. That's not how they died off. These two just happened to fight each other because he pissed her off.

I hated how they brushed over parts of their past so quickly, so you wont get much info, just glimpses into their past, vague lines that dont say much. I hate that thing! Some might think its signs of a weak script, but I see it for what it really is. For what they were really trying to do.

Movies are doing that now so much, most recently I noticed this in Jumper, where they did the same thing, they dont give you much of the information so theyll give it to you in some future sequel that they dont even know will get made.

[bigred760]

I hated how they brushed over parts of their past so quickly, so you wont get much info, just glimpses into their past, vague lines that dont say much. I hate that thing! Some might think its signs of a weak script, but I see it for what it really is. For what they were really trying to do.

Movies are doing that now so much, most recently I noticed this in Jumper, where they did the same thing, they dont give you much of the information so theyll give it to you in some future sequel that they dont even know will get made.

Very true . . . moreso in Jumper though. I was surprised that Hancock was only 90 minutes, and they probably could've use taken a few minutes to explain a bit more what was going on. Instead, they went with the short movie route and threw in an extra screening a day.

[Jig Saw 123]

My Review:

Hancock is another Will Smith popcorn flick, that has a very dull and not so unique storyline. Will Smith plays the John Hancock, a hero who doesn't know what his real purpose is and has a serious identity crisis. The cast is nothing to scream about, Charlize Theron gives a mediocre role as the super-goddess of the film. Jason Bateman is a very boring and most of the time an idiotic character with no since of personality or shape. The action is somewhat entertaining, and Will Smith plays the funny man, which is something we haven't seen since Men in Black II. The twist is not at all surprising, any person who is above the age of 10 should be able to figure it out. And like most of Will Smiths movies, the ending is predictable and leaves a moral for the moviegoers life. Expect a sequel since this film is doing so well at the box-office. I guess Will Smith will play any role just to be in a blockbuster every year...

6/10

[Bourne101]

http://l.yimg.com/img.movies.yahoo.com/ymv/us/img/flickr/05/16/002432490516.jpg?x=660&y=660&sig=ccW4It.Q9ZgAvgPX0OPfMw--

Hancock - 7/10 (some spoilers)

Just pure fucking entertainment. This is what summer movies are all about. The movie starts out very, very funny with many great jokes (the McDonald's one was brilliant) and lots of superb action. This is really the highlight of the movie and I wish there was a little more of this in the last quarter of the movie. Then Hancock runs into a man who really wants to help him. Hancock spends some time in jail, and then comes out and acts a little more humane than he had previously. This part still very, very good. Then it is revealed that the wife of the man who helped Hancock has very similar powers to Hancock. This is when the movie gets a little iffy. It starts out very well with some very funny moments including a kitchen scene which had myself and the audience nearly in tears. The moments of emotion, depression etc. are all very good to this point, but then it gets a little bit out of hand. Entertaining, but a little too far for my liking. The connections between Hancock and this woman are way out there and this part nearly falls flat on its face, but is saved by some great emotional, heartwarming moments, some fun action, and a few laughs. The part that I was a little iffy with is just a quarter of the movie. The first three quarters are brilliant, funny, action-packed, fun and emotionally engaging. The last quarter... well, let's just say that I'm looking forward to the possible uncut edition which hopefully cleans a bit of the mess up. Don't rush out of the theatre too quickly, the final scene is just after a few credits have hit the screen, features Mike Epps, and has one very funny moment. Overall Hancock is an extremely funny, entertaining, wild ride with a last quarter that will probably be cleaned up a bit when the uncut edition hits DVD. If you're looking for some summer popcorn fun, Hancock is the movie to see!

Pissed Fat Guy: You know? Somebody should sue you!
Hancock: You know what? You should sue McDonalds, cuz they fucked you up!

[Sgizzy316]

not at all what i was expecting, yet still entertaining

[smok3h]

Hancock - 7/10 (some spoilers)

Just pure fucking entertainment. This is what summer movies are all about. The movie starts out very, very funny with many great jokes (the McDonald's one was brilliant) and lots of superb action. This is really the highlight of the movie and I wish there was a little more of this in the last quarter of the movie. Then Hancock runs into a man who really wants to help him. Hancock spends some time in jail, and then comes out and acts a little more humane than he had previously. This part still very, very good. Then it is revealed that the wife of the man who helped Hancock has very similar powers to Hancock. This is when the movie gets a little iffy. It starts out very well with some very funny moments including a kitchen scene which had myself and the audience nearly in tears. The moments of emotion, depression etc. are all very good to this point, but then it gets a little bit out of hand. Entertaining, but a little too far for my liking. The connections between Hancock and this woman are way out there and this part nearly falls flat on its face, but is saved by some great emotional, heartwarming moments, some fun action, and a few laughs. The part that I was a little iffy with is just a quarter of the movie. The first three quarters are brilliant, funny, action-packed, fun and emotionally engaging. The last quarter... well, let's just say that I'm looking forward to the possible uncut edition which hopefully cleans a bit of the mess up. Don't rush out of the theatre too quickly, the final scene is just after a few credits have hit the screen, features Mike Epps, and has one very funny moment. Overall Hancock is an extremely funny, entertaining, wild ride with a last quarter that will probably be cleaned up a bit when the uncut edition hits DVD. If you're looking for some summer popcorn fun, Hancock is the movie to see!


I agree with you completely on everything

also... did anyone else feel like they had already seen the whole movie though just from the trailers and TV spots before seeing the actual movie? Granted the last 20 minutes or so weren't really spoiled but the rest of it I pretty much could guess what was going to happen when just by the trailers.

[dellamorte dellamore]

I'm positive that whatever questions were left unanswered in Hancock will be explained in the sequel in more detail .


Spoilers




I'm satisfied with some of the explanations i've read so far in here concerning the reason they lose power when immortals are in close proximity for too long . The adam and eve angle makes sense . It's like when a guy falls in love , he loses his power and independence , as he begins to bond with his chosen mate , in most cases taking on the persona of the one he loves . There were shades of Supe 2 in there somewhere , Superman had to make a sacrifice in order to be with the woman he loved , and he had to renounce his powers and become a mortal in order to share a life with one . In Hancock , you made the choice to stay with your " twin " and die a mortal , or remain alone and live forever . That was the choice the immortals had to make , it seemed most of them couldn't bear a life of emotional solitude in exchange for immortality , so they bonded with their twin and eventually died .

Hancock would have experienced the same fate , but in a twist of fate ( i'm thinking this was a sly reference to divine intervention and providence ) , he was injured and taken to a hospital . Because of this injury he lost his memory , he was sort of reborn , with no recollection of his origins , his twin , or how he came to be . If he stayed with his mate , both of them would have died and their would have been no immortals left in existence . I'm thinking there are , " evil " ones , and the ones who are motivated for good will be needed , that's why Hancock was injured and he lost his memory , he was going to be needed at a later date as the world became more dangerous . he didn't make the choice to leave his mate , the choice was made for him , and i think he gradually realized this , there were other forces at work concerning his creation , powers , and the events that happened in his life . That's one of the reasons he found the strength to escape from the hospital , he was saving his mate and himself , and he realized he had to preserve the last vestiges of an immortal race , it was his responsibility . He finally understood his purpose and his duty to the mortals he was meant to protect .

There was something else that made me think there are more of them , Theron said something to the effect of anytime we are together , they find us or will come after us . I'm thinking they encountered some rogue immortals in the past whose sole purpose was to hunt down and kill the " good " immortals . Those were the ones that attacked Han those 80 years ago and put him in the hospital , i'm guessing . He was vulnerable at the time because he had lost almost all his powers from being with his twin so long , and they must have known this , so they waited until they knew he could in fact be killed as a mortal . That is the twist of fate i was referring too though , he was attacked and they tried to take his life , but instead they altered his fate and saved his life , because Theron took off after that and both of them regained their powers and immortality .



end spoilers





Uh , yeah Bourne , the Mac D thing had to be one of the funniest product plugs ever .

[CyclicNightmare]

Minor, maybe not even a SPOILER
Did anyone notice the robot thing walking on the street when the tornados are coming down? Whassup with that?

[Bourne101]

Minor, maybe not even a SPOILER
Did anyone notice the robot thing walking on the street when the tornados are coming down? Whassup with that?

Haha. Yeah, I did. I completely forgot about it, but now that you bring it up I definitely remember it. That was a big WTF moment.

[soda]

Soda , i'm not referring to the comics , i'm commenting on actual adaptations or in the case of Hancock , a superhero that didn't originate in the comics .

Sin City isn't even part of this conversation , because it wasn't superhero based , it was just inspired by the comic . Yes , that film was dark and gritty , and violent , but it didn't have any superheros running around , although it did feature some fantastical characters .

I'm talking about a real life dark , mysterious , psychotic comic book hero , we haven't seen one yet . Tdk doesn't seem to go far enough , because much like BB , Bale plays him like an angst ridden teenager , not a conflicted , totally pissed off , cynical , borderline psychotic . He's congenial , seemingly well adjusted , yeah he has some issues , but nothing a talk with Oprah ( Alfred ) can't solve . I gotta get me one of those Butlers , they seem to be the cure for any type of neuroses . Just making a point , because i loved BB and i will no doubt go bonkers over Tdk .


My point is , we will never see the true dark side of comic book heroes in a mainstream H wood offering , it would be too dark and depressing , although for me , way more realistic and intriguing than what we are getting . None of these types of films delve deep enough into the heroes psyche to have any sort of lasting emotional resonance , i always get the feeling they are holding back something . Sm didn't do it , IM didn't , Hulk tried but only went halfway , and from what i can see , Tdk will go a bit more into Wayne's dark side , but not too far , so as not to scare off the mainstream viewers .


Hancock is the one film that actually went into those dark areas that are only dealt with in the comics or novels , even though it's not based on either one of them . Don't let the surface fool you , Han is chock full of realistic pathos and regret and conflict concerning the main character . For me it came the closest to fleshing out all aspects of a superheroe's motivation , doubt , and their ultimate disdain for the public when they feel they aren't being appreciated .


One thing to consider is that movies are at least ten+ years obsolete in comparison to comics. Most of the stuff that you guys are getting in the theatre is not modern (Iron Man? Wait till you see what a slimy, scheming double crossing dick he is right now. You don't take up your sword against Captain America, you just don't, that's "rules of comics" 101.) It's actually pretty antiquated. The most modern stuff is probably in batman (the long halloween is only about ten years old) That's important to consider, when you think about what you're talking about because you guys haven't yet seen some of the utter brilliance that's coming out these days. I refer, in particular, to one book above all others.

You guys haven't seen the last 39 issues of Captain America.

To me, that is heroic deconstruction at it's pure finest. If you don't read Captain America, you really should. It's not really about the dark side, or about a hero doubting himself, or his mission, or anything like that, but the point is, you don't have to do those things to make a point, and cap does that in spades. Cap is, at it's core, about a relationship, the relationship between Steve Rodgers and James Barnes, about how that relationship ebbs and flows, about how steve is determined to save his friend, and about how his friend is determined to carry on Steve's legacy. It's about the love Steve feels for Sharon Carter, about the guilt and emotion Sharon feels. Ahout the Red Skulls utter determination to ruin the whole thing, and about how the Falcon stands by everyone in their time of need. Cap is pure brilliance, and it, more than anything else, proves to me that real meaning, real feeling, and really great story-telling don't have to go to the dark side. That sentiment, that the dark-side is what makes a story have true impact, was what nearly killed comics a decade ago, and is something I don't want to see transcend into the movies. It's a cop-out, it's a fallacial way for a bad director/screen-writer to imbue their work with "omph". I haven't seen Hancock yet, but based upon what I'm hearing, that's pretty much what it is.

[Crazy Dud]

http://l.yimg.com/img.movies.yahoo.com/ymv/us/img/flickr/05/16/002432490516.jpg?x=660&y=660&sig=ccW4It.Q9ZgAvgPX0OPfMw--

Hancock - 7/10 (some spoilers)

Just pure fucking entertainment. This is what summer movies are all about. The movie starts out very, very funny with many great jokes (the McDonald's one was brilliant) and lots of superb action. This is really the highlight of the movie and I wish there was a little more of this in the last quarter of the movie. Then Hancock runs into a man who really wants to help him. Hancock spends some time in jail, and then comes out and acts a little more humane than he had previously. This part still very, very good. Then it is revealed that the wife of the man who helped Hancock has very similar powers to Hancock. This is when the movie gets a little iffy. It starts out very well with some very funny moments including a kitchen scene which had myself and the audience nearly in tears. The moments of emotion, depression etc. are all very good to this point, but then it gets a little bit out of hand. Entertaining, but a little too far for my liking. The connections between Hancock and this woman are way out there and this part nearly falls flat on its face, but is saved by some great emotional, heartwarming moments, some fun action, and a few laughs. The part that I was a little iffy with is just a quarter of the movie. The first three quarters are brilliant, funny, action-packed, fun and emotionally engaging. The last quarter... well, let's just say that I'm looking forward to the possible uncut edition which hopefully cleans a bit of the mess up. Don't rush out of the theatre too quickly, the final scene is just after a few credits have hit the screen, features Mike Epps, and has one very funny moment. Overall Hancock is an extremely funny, entertaining, wild ride with a last quarter that will probably be cleaned up a bit when the uncut edition hits DVD. If you're looking for some summer popcorn fun, Hancock is the movie to see!

Pissed Fat Guy: You know? Somebody should sue you!
Hancock: You know what? You should sue McDonalds, cuz they fucked you up!

This review is absolutely spot on about everything!

[paul calf]

i am one of will smiths biggest haters his films generally do nothing for me,but i really enjoyed this movie.
it had great action,laughs and some great acting jason bateman was superb in every scene he was in and will smith was very likeable in this role.
it was a very easy film to just kick back and enjoy.
7/10

[Nazgul]

Wherever Will Smith goes, I go too. And this was a great popcorn flick. B+ for me

[a7xfan]

my opinion of this is generally the same as my opinion of 'i am legend'

1st half great, 2nd half quite shitty.

some funny moments and decent action gives this about 7/10 for me
Minor, maybe not even a SPOILER


i was also like 'WTF???' WIERD.

[AcE7447]

I thought this movie was entertaining, which is all I expected it to be. Pretty funny at times (guys head up another guys ass) and then some pretty sick action at other times (fight with tornadoes in the background)

All in all I'd give the movie a 7.5/10.

[LordSimen]

I thought it was a very funny and entertaining movie. My one complaint with it was it felt like it was two movies in one, you had Hancock, a movie about Hancock overcoming his own personality and becoming a respectful and helpful superhero. Then you had Hancock 2, where Hancock discovers the truth about his origins and confronts the past he never knew he had. All of which was sped through at a rush of a pace in order to fit both stories in one movie. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't.

7/10

[Badbird]

I really enjoyed this. It got a lot darker and a lot more serious than I expected it to.

As for the "twist?" Well, that was pretty easy to spot in the trailer.

I would have liked it to have been a half hour longer, but I think a lot of what was cut out was probably in the beginning with him being an asshole, so it's possible it was just redundant.

I had no problem with the clashing story lines, or like many have said: "It felt like two movies." That just didn't bother me. Lots of movies do that.

I was expecting a comedy but got something a lot more rewarding. I found the end sequence at the hospital actually quite touching and powerful.

Let's say 8/10.

[dellamorte dellamore]

I agree with everything you wrote , and i don't understand why people didn't appreciate the change in tone , it never felt forced , but natural because of the revelations that are revealed about himself and his past . I def want a sequel to this , there is much more to this character that was only touched on in this film .

[john_rambo]

I saw this movie with really no expectations, positive or negative, and really liked it. I do not get why the reviews are THAT bad from the critics. Do they want every superhero popcorn movie to be Spiderman and Iron Man? I do agree that sometimes the camerawork was a little much when it would cut from one thing to another to another, but other than that I really liked this movie. I liked the twist and the whole ending, but hey I seem to be one of the only people that liked I am Legend too. The acting was really good to. It was really deep for a Superhero movie.

8/10

PS Disaster movie makes Meet the Spartans look like The Godfather

[snoopmish]

I liked I am Legend too. I thought Will Smith was fabulous in it...especially the scene with the dog. Still makes me bawl like a baby.

[bigred760]

PS Disaster movie makes Meet the Spartans look like The Godfather

Meet the Spartans makes a lot of movies look like The Godfather.

[CyclicNightmare]

http://www.cracked.com/article_16517_if-hancock-was-10-times-shorter-100-times-more-honest.html

Spot on.

[Bourne101]

http://www.cracked.com/article_16517_if-hancock-was-10-times-shorter-100-times-more-honest.html

Spot on.

That was probably the most unfunny thing I have ever read. It wasn't clever in the slightest.

[daddiefatsacks]

That was probably the most unfunny thing I have ever read. It wasn't clever in the slightest.

i wouldnt go that far, but it was pretty fucking lame...i want my 5 minutes back

[Spidey]

Minor, maybe not even a SPOILER
Did anyone notice the robot thing walking on the street when the tornados are coming down? Whassup with that?

Yeah I saw it too, it looked like one of those cylons from Battlestar Gallactica.