Hancock

[herodad1]

i liked it.excellent fx's and good humor.worth going to see.

[Dr.Volt]

I KNEW there would be more comments on this thread the day after Hancock opened! 

Yeah, that seems to be the concensus that the two halves movie just don't seem to be mesh.  And there does seem to be general agreement that Will is good in the movie, the FX are good and that it's overall...ok...but maybe just ok.  It does look really fun.  Don't think I can take my kids too it...but it does look fun.  And I just like Will as an actor (and as a person).

Well....I may see it in the theatre.  But I'll probably hasten to see the Hulk first.  I've seen Iron Man already...twice....(which of course ROCKED...but that's a different thread).

Thanks for your in put everyone!

[stumpy]

That reminds me... It doesn't particularly affect me, but parents of young kids should note that there is some swearing by kids in the movie. (Particularly using a word referring to an anatomical point of egress.) I assume that is the largest reason for the PG-13 rating, though some of the action sequences are violent.

[The Hitman]

I saw it Wednesday. Did not like it one bit.

[spoiler]
I really liked the first part. They did a good job setting up the "surly drunk superhero" angle. That was good. Jason Bateman seemed a little weak, but this is coming from a guy who loved the sarcastic know- it- all Michael Bluth in Arrested Development. Charlize Theron's character seemed out of place from the beginning. When she first saw Hancock, I thought "OK, she knows him, knows his past, and probably has powers too." And I was right on all three counts (This is in "spoilers" for a reason, so if you really don't want to know, stop reading my little rant).

And then, there was a moment, I believe it at the resturant after Hancock's first real fight, where the secondary plot was introduced and proceded to completely take over the film. Forget the past half hour, with loveable drunk Will Smith flying haphazardly through the air, because the only nonsense from here on is purly unintentional.

So here it goes- Hancock reveals he's immortal, and has had amnisia for 80 years (that's about 1928, folks). He also says the only thing he had on him was a pack of gum and two tickets for the movie Frankenstein, which wasn't released until 1931, but I'll let that one slide. A couple of scenes later, Theron is flying through the air, kicking Hancock's rear all over the town. Turns out that the two of them are the last of a civilization that are superpowerful, but lose their powers perminently when they hook up, and that, for eons, I guess, they were married. But wait a minute, didn't she say their powers fizzle out for good if they hook up? How are they superpowered here? Plot hole #1.

So, their powers are fading now that they are around each other, and Hancock takes off to go fall off the wagon, Tony Stark- style. In the process, he stops a liquor store hold- up and is shot. Wait, I thought if Hancock and Theron were away from each other, they're powers would slowly return, and he was charged up enough to fly to the store. So, unless she was hiding in the store somewhere, I don't understand why that would happen. Plot hole #2.

Cut to the hospital. Theron is with Hancock, explaining their former life, including all of the previously- unmentioned scars Hancock had. Apparently, there super- people are attracted to each other like magnets, but they didn't seem to mind. She explained that after the last attack on his life (at the theater in 1928 watching a movie released in 1931, mind you) Hancock was bludgeoned in the head by an angry mob and was taken to a hospital. When she found him at the hospital in 1928, he had amnisia, and decided to not tell him anything. Whoa. So she decided to not tell a guy she obveously cared about a great deal (I mean, they were together for a long, long time) anything at all, just so she could live forever? Wow, that sucks. That character was pretty shallow, in my opinion. Plot hole #3.

Then, three dummy thug show up to kill Hancock. How they knew where he was, I don't know, but they're there. Bloodyness follows, both Hancock and Theron die, because if one dies, the other one dies... did I mention that? I don't think I did, because the movie didn't, either. But then Hancock get up, Jason Bateman cut off a guy's arm with a hatchet, and Hancock flies to the moon(!). Happy ending follows.

On a technical note, I understand the appeal of a "shaky cam," I really do, but there is no place for it in an office scene with no action.

There it is. I'll admit, the film had it's moments, most of which I'd already seen in the trailer and commercials. Oh well. At least the guy who wrote it is building a school in Vietnam with the procedes he gets, so that's reason enough to go see it.

And please don't think I'm grumbling just to hear myself grumbe. More times than not, I'll look past plotholes and problems Just so I can enjoy a movie. Hey, I liked the Fantasitc 4 films, for cryin' out loud!  I just had very high hopes for this film, and was very disappointed. And it wasn't just me. Ladyfriend had a same reaction. We had a whole conversation on the drive home. Oh well. I'll live.
[/spoiler]

But you know the worst part of this film? The trailer for that awful, awful, AWFUL remake of The Day The Earth Stood Still. Looks like I'll have something to rant about in the upcoming months.

[stumpy]

[spoiler]

Charlize Theron's character seemed out of place from the beginning. When she first saw Hancock, I thought "OK, she knows him, knows his past, and probably has powers too." And I was right on all three counts

Yup. I had the same reaction. Honestly, when she first showed up, I wasn't sure it was her or a look alike. I couldn't help thinking, "There is no way Charlize Theron signed on to a script where she plays Jason Bateman's nervous housewife." Then, with all of the "I obviously know something, please don't look at me" looks whenever Smith was around, there wasn't any doubt there was going to be a "they had a past" subplot.

And then, there was a moment, I believe it at the resturant after Hancock's first real fight, where the secondary plot was introduced and proceded to completely take over the film. Forget the past half hour, with loveable drunk Will Smith flying haphazardly through the air, because the only nonsense from here on is purly unintentional.

And that's where the movie went of the rails for me by trying to tack a completely different second movie (with the same characters) onto the first movie. I didn't hate the second movie, but it was a different story and it had a different tone than the first one and it had nothing to do with the rehabilitating-the-down-and-out-superhero storyline of the first movie. And, that first storyline, to my mind, was never really resolved. Let's face it, Smith's character had apparently been causing millions of dollars worth of damage and putting cops in the hospital (or worse) on a regular basis for some time now. Not to mention his method of dealing with potty-mouthed kids. I don't think all that goes away so quickly.


But, I think I could get past most of the plot holes you mentioned.

Turns out that the two of them are the last of a civilization that are superpowerful, but lose their powers perminently when they hook up, and that, for eons, I guess, they were married. But wait a minute, didn't she say their powers fizzle out for good if they hook up? How are they superpowered here? Plot hole #1.

I don't think it was ever said that they lose their powers permanently when they hook up. The implication is that their powers fade when they are close to one another for some period of time. The implication is eventually they have the abilities of normal mortals, but, as far as we know, that only lasts as long as they remain together. 

So, their powers are fading now that they are around each other, and Hancock takes off to go fall off the wagon, Tony Stark- style. In the process, he stops a liquor store hold- up and is shot. Wait, I thought if Hancock and Theron were away from each other, they're powers would slowly return, and he was charged up enough to fly to the store. So, unless she was hiding in the store somewhere, I don't understand why that would happen. Plot hole #2.

I don't find it much of a stretch that all of Smith's different powers (strength, flight, invulnerability, healing, etc.) don't each fade the same amount all at once. In other words, he loses his invulnerability before he loses his super strength and somewhere in the middle his ability to fly goes, too. So, he spent time with Theron, loses enough invulnerability to be hurt by bullets, but still has flight and enough strength to beat up the crooks. I think that's all that's needed to explain that scene. I think that's confirmed at the hospital when he is clearly super-powered while fighting the baddies, but he is being hurt by their attacks, too.

Whoa. So she decided to not tell a guy she obveously cared about a great deal (I mean, they were together for a long, long time) anything at all, just so she could live forever? Wow, that sucks. That character was pretty shallow, in my opinion. Plot hole #3.

I think the idea was that Theron knew that as long as they were together, Smith would put his life in danger for her and, since their powers fade, he would be hurt and eventually killed. She cared enough for Smith that when his amnesia hit, she took the opportunity to leave him on his own, knowing that this way he would be invulnerable again and maybe he wouldn't miss her, so he could be happy and still super powered. In other words, she was making a sacrifice of her love for him because she knew that being together would kill him. It was so that he could live forever, not just her.

It turns out that she might have been wrong in that he would be drawn to her anyway, even with the amnesia. Although, really, I don't know that the movie ever made that clear. I didn't get the impression that Smith had been unconsciously edging closer to Theron over the past eighty years and it was pretty much coincidence that he saved her husband from a train crash. To me, that was a weak point in the subplot.

Another one was that I really don't believe that, before his amnesia, with all of this inexorable attraction, Smith and Theron had been playing footsies for three thousand years and never hooked up for long enough to age more and maybe have kids or whatever else they can do when they are mortal. I can believe that they never were fatally attacked by enemies while mortal over that time period, just because before the 20th century, you could plop yourself down in a new place every so often and no one need ever figure out who you were. (I will ignore other issues involving the conspicuousness of that couple over the eons.)

That's another issue with the time scales, even post amnesia: It seemed like a big surprise to Bateman that Smith had been around for eighty years. There is no way that someone like Hancock has been stumbling around for that long during the era of mass media (newspapers, cameras, etc.) and people haven't figured out that he doesn't age. I mean, amnesiac Smith would have been around during WWII, during the civil rights movement, etc. Of course, it's surely possible that he was undercover for most of that time and only recently was driven to alcoholism and public hero activities by his loneliness. I just wish the movie had taken the twenty seconds needed to mention that, if it was the case, so we aren't left wondering.

Then, three dummy thug show up to kill Hancock. How they knew where he was, I don't know, but they're there.

I think that was explained. I mean, the media already knew Smith had been hurt and they were camped out at the hospital when Bateman and son arrive, so it wouldn't have taken anything special for Captain Hook to find out. To me, the real question is how did Hook and his merry band of idiots 1) get out of prison and 2) before they left prison, how did they think they were going to hurt Smith when that was the first time anyone had seen him vulnerable? It's hard for me to believe that a crew is going to sign up for what they have to assume is a huge butt-whoopin' with virtually no chance of laying a glove on Smith. Keep in mind that they are well aware that Smith meets out punishment in fairly drastic fashion (amputation, forced proctological training, etc.).

Bloodyness follows, both Hancock and Theron die, because if one dies, the other one dies... did I mention that? I don't think I did, because the movie didn't, either.

I'm not sure that's how it works. It might, and there certainly seemed to be a connection between the two of them in that scene. But, it could just as well be that both of them were suffering from grievous injuries that were killing them anyway while their proximity was nerfing their invulnerability and healing powers. [Note to self: if I ever get super powers, try to work it so those two are the last to fade.] Unless I missed it, we weren't shown that Smith was ever really dead, just that he went unconscious for a few secs and when he came to, he realized that he had to put some distance between himself and Theron if they were going to recover. I do agree that they did show Theron as flatlining and we were obviously supposed to think Smith might be, too. Of course, it's a superhero movie, so dead isn't really ever dead anyway and there is the added alien (or whatever) physiology angle that makes it tough to tell how dead one of them has to be before they are really dead, anyway.

On a technical note, I understand the appeal of a "shaky cam," I really do, but there is no place for it in an office scene with no action.

Yeah. The person I went to the movie with was getting a little green even from that little bit there.


Overall, I had some fun watching it. I do agree that much of the best of the first part of the movie was already in the trailer. And, I really have come to expect more from Smith. I don't know why, exactly, but it just seems that someone in the process at some point should have realized 1) that the first part of the movie was really a different film from the second; 2) that the first part never really gets resolved; and 3) there is a real problem with changing the tone of a movie mid-stream like that.

As an aside, I totally get the possibility that the mystery of who he really is and his past may have been motivated by the need to resolve his underlying issues that led to his drinking and so on. If, in fact, that was supposed to motivate the Theron half of the movie, then it would have been more convincing if he hadn't seemed to get past all his loneliness and abandonment issues before he figured out who Theron was.

IMO, they would have been much better off if they had fleshed out his character issues separately and finished the movie they were making for the first forty minutes. I mean, one minute he is starting to "open up" in his jailhouse AA meeting and the next minute none of that matters anymore because, after foiling one bank robbery, his (rather substantial) legal problems disappear, all of the world loves him again, and he is the toast of the town, with such luminaries as "David" from Roseanne fawning at his feet.

[BTW, things like that last bit (an actor taking a role in this movie just to be a random guy in a suit with two lines), really kind of make me think that there was a more substantial resolution to the lovable-drunk-superhero part of the movie, but they had to cut it to make time for Theron's half.]

They should have had a longer resolution to his time in prison and his public image rehabilitation, set in the tone of the first half of the movie, with more screw-ups and a lead-in to a confrontation with a more substantial villain or some task that was a real challenge to him and then finished the movie with him finally a real hero and turning the corner to public acceptance. At the end, they could have shown Theron's character slipping up and Smith spotting her using powers and realizing she must know something about his past, too. The movie ends there, with a quizzical look on Smith's face and that setup for a possible backstory-heavy sequel where Smith and Theron figure out who he really is.

Obviously, the problem is that Theron would never have agreed to do Hancock if her role in it was to be a minor character with a possible shot at a bigger part in a sequel that may never be made. But, too bad. They should have gotten someone else to play Bateman's wife or just created a different character that Theron plays as a walk-on who shows up near the end and reveals that she knows something about Smith's past. However they worked it, it would have been a big improvement to have one whole movie that stuck to its premise rather than to have two different movies cobbled together like this.

[/spoiler]

I am looking forward to that animated dog movie (Bolt?) they previewed in the trailers.

[AncientSpirit]

Before I went I checked in with Yahoo for reviews.  For me they're always the most revealing.   The 14 or so critics gave it like a C average.  but thousands of Yahoo movie goers averaged it as a B+.   With so many people reviewing the movie that always averages out the naysaysers who give everything an F, and the super fans who call everything A or A+.

So I went, and enjoyed the film.  A LOT.   Is it Iron Man.  Of course not.   Is it the Incredible Hulk?  Nope.  So if you haven't seen those, see those first -- but I don't expect anyone here hasn't seen those films yet.   

So go see Hancock.   And don't read anything first.  No spoilers here.  No reviews that inevitably give everything away.   I'm glad I didn't because I WAS surprised by the twists and turns in this movie.  Your smilage may vary.

All in all it looks like we're getting one great summer of movies.

[Dr.Volt]

Soooooooooooo....how about Bolt then?  Lol!   :rolleyes:

[Pyroclasm]

Saw it today with my wife.  We both loved it.  Will Smith once again proves the Fresh Prince has left the building and in his place is a great actor.  Jason Bateman was fantastic.  After learning a while back that the movie was not designed to be the laughs-a-minute that the first trailer suggested, I was ready to watch a movie that was going to have much more depth.  My expectations were correct.  While there were some laughs to be had, it was the dramatic interaction between Smith, Bateman & Theron that had me going, and at times even brought a tear to my eye.  I genuinely felt bad for each of the leads and the tough situations they have had to face in life.  Kudos to everyone involved.  While some suggest that it left itself open to sequels, I feel the ending was more like a ride into the sunset.  A sequel would be as unnecessary as the sequels to the Matrix.  This one will be added to my DVD collection.  Let's hope they have a true Unrated Director's Cut.

[Kommando]

I have to concur with Bamph.  I really liked it, and the story really did feel like a superhero story for grown ups.  In some ways, it felt more "real" (by realism I really mean verisimilitude...  really) than other recent Superhero movies.  Hancock's character seemed like he could really exist.

[GogglesPizanno]

I broke down and saw it without waiting for the cheap theater. I had really low expectations, so I actually sorta enjoyed it...not great, but not bad. Most of the complaints about the film are pretty valid, my biggest gripe like others was...

[spoiler]..The big reveal about Chalize Theron and Hancock's history as immortals was ridiculously stupid convoluted and unnecessary. There were a gazillion other more credible and less complicated ways to get the same kind of conflict/resolution to the story.[/spoiler]

[Protomorph]

[spoiler]The thing about his other half being the wife of the guy he had saved was the only real part I had a problem with. Just too coincidental. However, with the revelation that they are inexorably drawn together, whether they want to be or not makes a certain amount of sense. At Hancock's lowest point of damage and public outcry, his lonliness got the best of him and he subconsciously sought out his mate. He instead found her husband, who was about to be creamed. Had he not been searching for her, Bateman would likely have been kissing train.

She really could have/should have told him the truth sooner, but she didn't. She would have eventually had to tell Bateman, after a while of not aging. I'm sure she had gone from one relationship to another, only spending a few years in each to keep her cover. Over the course of 78-80 years, that's a lot of husbands and lovers to get attached to and have to leave.

The second half was Hancock's redemption. The only reason he was so surly and drunken was that, as he said, nobody claimed him and he felt abandoned for many years. He probably moved around a lot too, and spent many years in solitude living in his trailer in the desert. Until his lonliness drew him towards the city. Once he learned that it was her love for him that made her leave him, his feelings that 'what an awful guy must I have been' were gone, and he was emotionally free to be the hero his heart told him to be (but sober this time).

I liked the notion that the love of his mate would be his death, thus dooming both of them ultimately to a life of loneliness, if they are to survive.
[/spoiler]

[stumpy]

[spoiler]

The thing about his other half being the wife of the guy he had saved was the only real part I had a problem with. Just too coincidental.

For Sure. I could forgive it, it but is way out there.

At Hancock's lowest point of damage and public outcry, his lonliness got the best of him and he subconsciously sought out his mate.

So, one of his super powers is to track down his lover's husband? I just don't see it (though I would respect the homage to the old Letterman Top Ten list). It might have been more believable if he was somehow hanging around the neighborhood, like if that park bench in the opening shot had been around the corner from Theron's house or something. Then his meeting Theron via Bateman would have seemed more natural.

But, that's a minor flaw in the movie, IMO. Other issues with Theron's character (some of which Protomorph alludes to) were more sketchy to me. Things like choosing to marry a man with a young child without telling him that 1) she is immortal; 2) she is sort of in hiding from her immortal soul mate; 3) that person just happens to be Earth's only superhero and potentially the most powerful/dangerous person on the planet; and 4) that person is also, coincidentally, on a drunken bender in the same town they are in right now. I'm not really a relationship expert, but it seems like one of those premarital "Is there any huge baggage I should know about before my son grows up calling you 'Mommy'?" moments.

Also, I hate to say it, but it sort of seemed like a trivial ending to the movie. I mean, finding out who he really was (or, at least a little bit of it) and that Smith and Theron are engaged in an eons-long game of "my lover is my kryptonite" romantic tag is just the start of the story. The movie sort of ended on a happily-ever-after note where everyone is buddies and Theron and Bateman and Bateman Jr. are a happy family while Smith keeps it real in Gotham. Does that work? They haven't tried leading separate lives before in the course of three thousand years? I guess, given all the seriousness and tragic romance flavor of the second half of the movie, that seems too lighthearted to me. It's like that would have been the right tone for an ending to fit the first half of the movie.[/spoiler]

BTW, I should note that, whatever complaints I have about the movie that bring me to give it 2.5 to 3 of 5 stars, the acting is not among them. I thought Smith, Bateman, and Theron all turned in fine performances. The movies problems were rooted in tone and structure.

[BWPS]

I thought it was excellent, I was afraid (mostly due to poor reviews) that the ending was going to be different, so I was really happy with the ending. Very good movie!

[TheMarvell]

so, is it not a comedy? Almost every preview up until the release of the movie has depicted this movie as some sort of fun, summer comedy with some action thrown in. Now I just saw a TV Spot a little while ago and they're making it look incredibly dramatic, like X-Men 2. From what I've read about this movie, it's own studio doesn't seem to know how to advertise it. If you go in expecting a comedy, but instead get something else, it will naturally get bad reviews.

I don't know. I kind of want to see it, but from what I've read, it doesn't sound very good.

[stumpy]

Without getting too spoilery, the movie has one tone and one central storyline for roughly the first half and that's what's portrayed in most of the trailers. In the second half, that changes. It's not a 180 degree shift or anything, but it is pretty substantial and it is not just a change in pacing, which is fairly common in action movies and which, at least to me, is less disruptive.

I want to repeat that, IMO, this isn't a bad movie. It's just not especially good either. I would give Iron Man top marks for acting, action, tone, special effects, storyline, pacing, etc. I think it sets the bar for the genre this year. Incredible Hulk was pretty good, too. To me, Hancock was just okay, which comes as a bit of a disappointment after the other two, especially since it has had so much hype and has such a great cast. (And, the problem isn't just the hype, either. I know not to expect a movie to live up to all of its hype. The problems here go beyond that.)

But, if you go in not expecting too much, the movie will probably be okay. Worth ten bucks? Not really, to me. I try and see action / special effects movies on the big screen, but this is one I would have rather rented because I am curious if the commentary would address some of the issues I had with it.

[Kommando]

 :spoiler:  [spoiler]Personally I think its a very interesting take on the concept of Twin Souls.  As I recall, the predecessors of humans in Gnostic myth were two fold, and a slight reversal in that we only became human when split in two.  Still, this movie explores a spiritual concept updated for the current era.[/spoiler]

[Dr.Volt]

Finally saw it today.  Liked it.  I would agree that it's not the best superhero genre' movie I've ever seen.  But it's certainly not the worst either.  I think Will Smith did a great job.  And I especially liked the character who was Hancock's PR guy who..imho...was the real hero.  And I think the plot had a lot of potential...and came through... somewhat. I went to the matinee'...it was a good matinee' type movie.