Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Lowen SoDium
Jun 5, 2003

Highen Fiber
Clapping Larry
Hancock (in case you don't know) follows the adventure of a drunk homeless superhero, played by Will Smith, who's city hates him.

Hancock's previews would lead you to believe that the movie was going to be a comedy. While it does have it's humorous moments, the humor is pretty much over in the first 35 minutes. Also, you should know that you have seen all of the funny parts in the preview.

Hancock is actually more of an action movie, but truthfully it's not much better at that than it is at being a comedy.

The action sequences are obscured by the ever present shaky-cam. But it probably doesn't detract too much from this movie as most of the real action is so fast you wouldn't be able to see it anyways.

The characters are not particularly likable except for maybe Jason Bateman's character of Ray Embrey. Even he seems pretty two dimensional.

The one thing that I kept thinking though out the whole film is "How stupid are this bad guys that they will continue to use guns against a super hero who is bullet proof and drunk & surly?" Hell, one group of guys break out of jail after having faced Hancock once already and their sole plan is pretty much shoot him.

I won't get in to the romance part of the story because it's a spoiler, but let me just say that it wasn't very good either.

In the end, I didn't hate Hancock, but I feel like it had a lot of potintual and missed the target by a very large mark. It failed pretty much everything it set out to do. It wasn't a good comedy, it wasn't a good action film, it wasn't a good romance story.

2/5

Lowen SoDium fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Jul 2, 2008

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Plom Bar
Jun 5, 2004

hardest time i ever done :(
This was one of the few releases I was actually looking forward to, being as it was a Superhero movie with an original storyline, not one imported from a comic book or an old TV series. And on that front, it succeeds; while the story, taken as a whole, is hardly new territory for Hollywood, it does play around a bit with the standard conventions of the Superhero genre, and for that much I appreciated it well enough.

Will Smith plays John Hancock, a surly, belligerent, unshaven bum who just happens to have superpowers and feels the need, every now and then, to use them to stop criminals, often causing millions of dollars' worth of property damage in the process. After saving the life of idealistic publicist Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman), Ray offers to help him improve his image to earn the respect and adoration of the public Ray feels Hancock deserves.

To that end, the movie takes relatively few risks. One thing that rings odd is the progression of the various action scenes. Early parts feature car chases, explosions, and similar mayhem, the latter sequences seem tame by comparison. Otherwise, the story moves at a decent pace, and there are some pretty cool scenes that one doesn't fully appreciate until after the movie's over. When the ending comes, it feels as if the writers were faced with a choice of two cliches, and as such I can almost guarantee that when the DVD for this movie is released, it will come with an alternate ending wherein they take the OTHER cliche.

Bottom line, it wasn't particularly BAD, it just wasn't particularly good either. Snazzy special effects are brought down by an overall lackluster presentation, but there's enough to hold most moviegoer's interests to the ending credits.

Under the old rating system, I'd have given this movie a 2.5/5. As such, I'll round it up to 3.

Casual Yogurt
Jul 1, 2005

Cool tricks kid, I like your style.
I really thought this was going to be good.

Up until we find out that the wife is Hancocks sister/wife whatever superlady the movie was good.

"I can smell liquor on your breath" "Bitch thats cuz I've been drinkin"


If they just made the whole movie about Hancock being a homeless drunk superhero it would have been loving fantastic.

Ville Valo
Sep 17, 2004

I'm waiting for your call
and I'm ready to take
your six six six
in my heart
Really, genuinely enjoyable up until the twist about halfway through. All downhill from there. :(

2/5

novaSphere
Jan 25, 2003

Agreeing with the sentiments in this thread. Fun movie up until the shocking twist, and utterly lame afterward. Kudos for attempting something interesting, but the execution fell on its face. 3/5.

keveh
Sep 14, 2004

If you have a problem.....

Casual Yogurt posted:

If they just made the whole movie about Hancock being a homeless drunk superhero it would have been loving fantastic.

Agree 100% with this.

The first half of the movie was what I expected from the trailers I had seen, and I loved the trailers.

The second half got a little bit silly and made me uninterested in the story from thereon, especially in the last 10 minutes where the endless slow motion shots dragged out the not so surprised hollywood ending.

With it being a film of two halves I'd be tempted to give it give it a 2.5, but the action and comedy in the first half just outweighed the second half.

3/5

piles
Jul 1, 2008
A year ago, if you’d have told me I’d be going to see Hancock, and given me the premise, I’d have laughed in your face. The plot sees down-on-his luck superhero, played by Will Smith, who hiring PR guru Ray (Jason Batman) to get his life and his career back on track. However, one look at Ray’s wife Mary (Charlize Theron), and Hancock is smitten. Over the next ninety minutes, the film interweaves between action sequences as Hancock attempts to save the world and the budding romance between the hero and the wife. Of course, the marketing guys have done a lot to change that. Firstly, the assembly of a great cast said a lot, with Will Smith and Jason Bateman both being great when they’re on top form. And then there was that trailer, which went a long way to dispelling the rumours that Hancock may be rubbish. It was a bit silly, but very funny, and the action looked well handled too. But, unfortunately, Hancock acts as a living and breathing testament that first looks can be very deceiving.

Let’s start off with direction from Peter Berg, which is shoddy at best. He decides to shoot his film – a light-hearted, off the wall comedy about superheroes – with shaky cam. I’m sure you’ve heard enough about this device, and how ninety per cent of the time it’s used in the wrong context or too much or too little. Well, the percentage is considerably higher than that, and this is the worst example of it to date. It worked beautify in the Bourne trilogy, perhaps the only franchise in which it had reason or rhyme. It suggested a documentary feel, and because of the gritty and visceral nature of the film, that was welcome. We felt like we were seeing these events transpire through CCTV cameras or through mobile reporters. Of course, in Hancock, it’s used too much and in silly situations where it’s, basically, unwarranted. There’s also the camera problems, with things going in and out of focus at seemingly random points. Berg attempts to dress this comedy up as something more, but he’s going about it the wrong way. No matter how many pointless camera tricks you use, Hancock is still a slightly silly movie. It should have been handled like one.

Hancock’s major problem stems from it not really knowing exactly what it wants to be. In fact, you could pass it off as four major movie genres. Firstly, there’s Hancock as a Superhero Movie. This is perhaps the genre where it fails most, with it doing nothing to stick to the guidelines of successful superhero movies. Firstly, there’s no real weakness for the hero, until we reach the climax where a silly and confusing kryptonite is thrown in. Secondly, he has no villain apart from himself. Eddy Marsan’s hook handed Red is criminally under developed, and when we reach the final showdown, you don’t really care about who wins or what happens to the city. That’s because of the handling of the villain, who is not legitimate, not frightening, and not important to the plot. When your hero versus villain aspect becomes a sub plot in a superhero movie, you’ve got major problems.

Then there’s Hancock as a Drama. Contrary to what the trailers would have you think, this is the genre that Hancock dwindles in for the longest. There’s the seemingly never-ending relationship between Hancock and Mary, with its twist being predictable (thanks to it being spoiled in the trailer), and its pay-off being annoying. When your only nice guy in the film is Ray, why screw him over at every corner? It’s not logical for a movie like this, and it’s not entertaining or ‘out there’ either. Yes, perhaps the misery-mongers who’ve stumbled in from watching Eastenders may enjoy it, but ninety per cent of your audience is made up of teenagers baying for action and comedy, the romance aspect of your film has to be made secondary. Here, it’s basically the plot of the film. And, unfortunately, whereas other superheroes had the equal misfortunes of bad love interests, Hancock is even worse off seen as more importance has been placed on that side of the film.

Thirdly, there’s Hancock as a Comedy. You could argue that Hancock is successful in this region, and often it is. But it suffers from that age-old problem that all of its funniest bits are in the trailer, most notably Walter the Whale. And also, without being rude, Hancock’s best non-trailer joke involves a reference to Bono (“This guy is the Bono of PR”... “Actually I think Bono is the Bono of PR”), and I doubt many of the cliental of a Will Smith movie will actually know who Bono is. Then there’s a running joke (“rear end in a top hat”) that is funny the first couple of times, but wears old very fast. And when they keep bringing it up every five minutes it does grate. A lot. It even makes a re-appearance after the credits, in possibly the worst and most pointless post-finish sequence ever committed to film.

But Hancock isn’t all bad. Hancock as an Action Movie works very well, with the three major action sequences being – doubtlessly – the best of the film. It actually brings out the comedy in the movie, too, with Hancock’s opening rampage across Los Angeles being the comedic highlight of the picture. The effects work well, and the bank heist slash arrest is definitely the high point of the film. And this is what Hancock should really have been. A lot of explosions, a few jokes, a lot more laughs. But Berg’s attempts to darken the mood with moody romance, heavy-handed symbolism and philosophy, it falls well short of the bar the action sets.

The performances are pretty good, too. Theron is suitably bitchy, which gives us a sense that she has been on the planet for 3,000 years but does nothing to soften our perceptions of her character and thus work out why she has two men after her. Other than the fact that she’s a smoking hotty. Bateman is better than he was in the Ex, no doubt, but is hardly the man that he was in Arrested Development. His deadpan delivery and nice guy persona are enough, though, to put a smile on everyone’s face. Will Smith controls himself, and allows the character to be the star rather than his outlandish haminess. The leading trio have pretty good chemistry, even if this lacklustre script hardly does enough to let it shine.

Verdict
When Hancock flies, he soars. But when he loves? I don’t. 4/10.

GuitarZero
Nov 11, 2006
K-fed? More like K-fad! .. right?
Wanted to throw in my 2 cents:

Hancock does the superhero thing differently in the first half of the movie. Everyone so far has complained about the second half but I kinda liked the way the movie handled everything just different (unlike say, a Spiderman ending). Even though things end well for everyone involved pretty much.

The scenes with Theron and Smith during the second half were alright and didn't take away from the movie UNLESS you were seriously expecting drunk-Hancock all the way through. The movie needs to go forward in the story people. The reveal was actually well done and Smith's reaction was pretty much what would work the best.

There are some things they could have done more, but overall the story came off well, you get a taste of everything and it gives you enough to latch on to and enjoy the movie.

Anyway, it's a fun movie and worth watching.

7/10

FreddyJackieTurner
May 15, 2008

I really did enjoy this movie until the goddamned twist with the wife that really had no reason at all to be there other than to muddle down the movie and make it overly complicated. The whole wife subplot bull-poo poo was annoying, distracting, and just not any fun. Great preformances by ecspecially Smith. I would like to see him in something other than summer or holiday blockbusters, however.

I think this movie would have been fantastic if it would have just stuck with the the whole comedy/action genre instead of trying to do comedy/action/drama.

Loved the first half, second half was a bit weird.

2.5/5

Aggro
Apr 24, 2003

STRONG as an OX and TWICE as SMART
I feel quite differently than some of these other reviews. I came in expecting a really cheesy action movie with some special effects and nothing memorable.

I really, really liked this movie. I thought the drama was handled quite well, and I don't see why everyone hated the twist so much. Yes, you could see it coming a mile away, but it provided a weakness for Hancock and set up an ending that I very much enjoyed.

The comedy is fairly hit-or-miss, but there some extremely funny moments that definitely outweigh the times when it falls flat. I also don't get the hate for the romance in this movie, because it certainly beats the hell out of a lot of the hamfisted love stories that have come out in recent years. Its fantastical, but it works given the story of the characters.

It's definitely not as good as Ironman, but if you have the extra $10 lying around, I'd say Hancock is worth the money.

antihero
Oct 11, 2004

Like everyone in here, I was also pretty hyped up from the trailers and put this movie on my must see list. I kept an eye out for early reviews and was shocked by many disappointed critics as well as fellow goons who found the movie to be a waste of money.

I had to see what the mess was all about so I went and saw it on Friday and came out with a huge grin on my face. Everything in the movie fit well with each other. It almost felt like an incredibles live action movie. The humor was spot on and no way did anything stop after the first 35 minutes as someone said earlier in the thread. The pacing was perfect for Will Smith's character to change his attitude. What made it work for me is that it wasn't instant. You see him struggling with it and still feeling pretty miserable like an alcoholic going through withdrawals. Jason Bateman could've been used more but everything else out weighs the nit picky parts, even the twist which I adjusted to quickly.

Pros: hilarious humor, awesome action sequences, decent length.
Cons: underused Bateman, instant twist, no build up to it like him sensing something fishy about her but not knowing why, just out of nowhere HEY I HAVE POWERS was pretty blunt but i was ok with that.

4/5

Jedah
Sep 1, 2001

YOU CAN NOT BUST THE KRUST
Billed as a superhero comedy, this film comes to a total hault and the laughs begin to drop off quickly after the writers apparently hanged themselves. Initially, yes, I enjoyed Will Smith as a drunken homeless superhero, and totally agree that if it stayed in that direction, there was plenty more to explore. It was a good premise, and it was backstabbed by the stupid, unnecessary romantic plot twist.

The ending is worth discussing, because any amateur screenplay writer would gag. Deus ex machina is seen here in plain vision. Unbelievably lame. Both Hancock and his "wife" die completely yet are somehow resurrected, somehow. I mean there's even talk of them being "angels"... I guess God resurrected them. Ahem, right. Though none of this is understood and we're supposed to digest all of the heavy handed bullshit after a tiny amount of backstory during his wife's confession sequence. I just didn't buy it at all. It's just bad writing. Period, there's no excuse for that kind of tripe in a huge production.

Seems like Hollywood has been putting out the poo poo in full force lately.

A generous 2/5, just for the beginning.

Snakeskin
Aug 19, 2007

by Peatpot
Hancock didn't seem to know what it wanted to be through the different ads I saw in the lead up to release, and it still didn't know what it wanted to be when I walked out of the cinema.

The first half is amusing enough, but the story just falls to poo poo after that with pointless twists and complexities, most plot points are badly explained and come out of nowhere. Hancock as a character hardly ever opens up and there's nothing to attract you to his character. The bad guys are faceless morons you don't give a poo poo about.

Pros - the first half, Charlize Theron is ridiculously gorgeous
Cons - everything in the second half

3/5 (extra point for Theron)

unhealthyman
Jan 27, 2007

OH GOD MAKE IT STOP...
Some really promising elements that they could have made so much more out of. The concept really did have potential. But like most other reviews here, I agree that it turns retarded mid-way through.

A couple of moments felt touching, but the weird mix of comedy and drama sometimes jarred a bit. The effects were snazzy, but a bit silly. The performances were often good, but the characters were also kind of dumb. The fact that the baddies decided on some miracle plan to go and shoot invincible man was dumb enough, but turned even dumber when by some coincidence he happened to be mortal due to being close to his wife. Just plain stupid.

Overall, a strange film that doesn't add up to the sum of it's individual parts.

I'd give it a 2.5, but I'll round it down due to the disappointment of what could have been. I love concepts that mess with the superhero formula, but it just didn't work out in the end.

plushpuffin
Jan 10, 2003

Fratercula arctica

Nap Ghost
Lame. Lame. Lame. Lame. Lame. I was expecting a different take on the superhero genre. I got a slightly entertaining 30 minutes or so at the beginning followed by a boring interlude as it built up to a plot twist, finishing off with heaps of cheese for an origin story and a totally nonsensical climax involving idiotic bad guys whose brilliant plan for revenge involves shooting at rear end in a top hat-Superman with ordinary guns using ordinary bullets. I was not impressed with this movie.

2/5

hellocruelworld
Feb 28, 2003

Dude, I See God!
I agree with the sentiment here that this movie would have been great if it had just stuck with comedy the whole time. Since the movie only uses comedy for the first half hour and the most successful jokes are in the trailers. There are a lot of other jokes in the movie that really don't work as well as they could have. The movie doesn't really work as an action movie as there isn't that much action and what little there is was generally unimpressive, filled with mediocre CGI. It doesn't work as a drama because the drama feels out of place.

All in all Hancock is a movie that initially shows promise as a comedy, and then takes a left turn into WTF-ville resulting in a giant clusterfuck of a film.

I'm kinda surprised that the studio allowed the film to be made like this, as I can't see Hancock working as a franchise. If they had made Hancock an all-out-comedy, with a real villain, then the film would have had franchise potential.

Hancock is a real head-scratcher for sure

2/5

Kneecaps
Mar 22, 2003

We're not playing paddy cake here!
Soiled Meat
Yeah, I'm posting in this old-rear end thread. Wanna fight about it?

So, I was warned going in that this movie had a weirdo twist. I originally expected a cookie-cutter flick. I expected 30 minutes of drunk Hancock, 30 minutes of rehab, and 30 minutes of battling some bad guy.

Instead, I got Hancock. And it was pretty cool. People bitch and moan about cookie-cutter Hollywood movies, and they threw that out the window halfway through this movie. I was fine with it. I actually would have liked MORE of the twist-related stuff (I'm being vague to avoid having to use spoiler tags).

I have to say Will Smith was fantastic. That guy can say A LOT with just a look. He is really one of my favorite actors.

4/5 because it was too short.

twofish
Apr 17, 2006

.

Casual Yogurt posted:

If they just made the whole movie about Hancock being a homeless drunk superhero it would have been loving fantastic.

No truer words of wisdom have been spoken.

2/5

Zombie Layne
Aug 16, 2008

by Ozma
So you have Will Smith back in Fresh Prince mode acting all black and sassy towards the populace while he fights crime and abuses his superhero status. The idea of a superman who is an "antihero" would have actually been pretty interesting with a decent writer behind it and if they stuck to that concept without copping out. Alas, we have your standard hollywood hacks churning out crap that makes the producers happy which results in something that ranks alongside Shaq's movies in depth and entertainment value. The plot and character takes a long tedious jaunt into every superhero origin cliche known to man and a love interest that is pretty laughable in the end. There are also several moments where we're supposed to laugh at all the wacky insensitivity Hancock engages in but most of it falls flat and or seem like something out of a cartoon.

The only thing I could see in my head during the entire running time was Will Smith driving up to Columbia pictures studios in his Bentley to collect a paycheck for fulfilling contractual obligations.

That probably would have made a more entertaining movie.

1/5

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ramrod Hotshot
May 30, 2003

Ugh, terrible. Talk about bait and switch. I don't have much to say other than agree with everyone who wanted to see a comedy with Will Smith as a drunk anti-hero superhero but instead got a terribly awkward drama. All of the funnay happens in the first ten minutes and then we get a snorefest where he tries to turn his life around. I stopped paying attention when the "twist" and retarded origin story is revealed. Who gives a poo poo, it's Will Smith as a drunken, lazy superhero. That's all I want to see.

1.5/5

  • Post
  • Reply