·  News ·  Travel ·  Food ·  Arts ·  Science ·  Sports ·  Advice ·  Religion ·  Life ·  Greensboro · 

One night in Hancock... Movie Review.

by Sanjuro | Published on July 7th, 2008, 8:41 am | Arts
So, I was well on my way to catching another showing of Wall-E on Saturday. I was right on time, ready to buy a ticket, when I realized the show-times I read online were wrong. Rather than wait another hour I decided to catch the next available showing for Hancock.

movieposter.jpg


Um, this will be a Spoiler filled review...cause I just cant cover this any other way... Believe me. I'm doing you a favor by revealing plot points to save you the trouble of discovering it yourself in the theater.

Hancock stars our favorite Scientologist in denial, Will Smith. It also stars Jason Bateman and Charlize Theron. Will Smith had shown some promise in "I am legend", but I saw none of that promise here aside from a couple of scenes.

2008_hancock_003.jpg
Will Smith falls into the rubble that is the movie Hancock

To be frank, this film is a mess. Hancock opens much like the trailers you've seen. John Hancock is a drunken mess of a person with super human abilities. When he tries to do the right thing, he ends up doing more harm than good. I had a baaaad feeling when the movie kicked off with badly shot action scene and a ridiculously obvious (read: Over the top) soundtrack choice and music cue. We meet Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman) in a conference room trying to pitch the concept of giving away TB drugs to kids... the drug manufacturers he was pitching to however saw it differently. Actually the only person to save this movie in any way Jason Bateman. Like everything else he is in, he simply walks away with the scene. His wife Mary is played by Charlize Theron...more on her later.

2008_hancock_020.jpg
Will Smith tries recruiting a Scientologist

So one day Ray is driving home from work, distracted on his mobile. He gets stuck between two cars and is sitting in the middle of the train track. Hancock happens by, and saves him. Woo. Hancock flies Ray home and here is where we meet Rays wife Mary. She gives Hancock a look.. no wait that's not quite right.. she sorta uses the acting equivalent of driving a large steel mallet into someones skull to sell the point that she has a past with Hancock. This scene was awful. I almost yelled "Aw, Hell naw!!" myself in the theater. I mean, how dare we use any subtlety in this movie.. :roll:

2008_hancock_002.jpg
Poor Jason Bateman tries to escape from this movie but is stopped by super Scientologist

The movie would have worked.. it could have worked.. but it didnt work. I seemed like the humor was tacked on.. matter of fact, I read where they did reshoots and rewrites, and I think you can tell. Seems that they tried to turn what was to be a more serious film with some dark humor into a straight up comedy. BIG mistake.. the scenes that actually WORK are the serious ones.. the humor just seems hackneyed and ridiculous.

Allow me to showcase one scene that encapsulates the ridiculousness.. There is a scene where a bank is being robbed. This ends up being a pivotal scene as it is introducing us (a third through the film) to the main baddy. A cop is pinned against a squad car.. The gunmen are heavily armed (Machine guns, C-4, grenade launchers) and they have hostages. So Hancock waltzes over towards the cop. The baddys bring out granade lanchers and start blowing things to hell. As hancock picks up the squad car to protect the cop from bullets, the cars to the left and right explode as the granades hit... let me get this straight.. the cars all around can be hit with the grenades but they decide just to shoot the one Hancock is walking with??? Stupid, stupid, stupid!!

2008_hancock_014.jpg
Will smith tries to sneak off set to save career

I wont even touch the fact the robbery comes out of left field.. and in this sequence we have no set up for a person who ends up being a pivotal character at the end. One imagines perhaps a lot was left on the cutting room floor, but one cant be certain with all the re-writes that took place. There are some plot devices that make no sense, scenes that aren't very well set up (if at all), and a very disjointed feeling about the whole picture.

It ends up that Hancock and Mary were married for generations. Hancock has forgotten this due to a hit on the head-eh, surprisingly that actually makes sense within the context of the plot. They have lived throughout human history and there is one plot device revealed between them referring to their powers that is pretty cool, but yet again, not fully realized.

2008_hancock_026.jpg
The cast, wishing this was the real movie premier since people aren't stabbing their eyes out.

I guess the reason I disliked this movie so much was because it could have been a great movie. It actually had a wonderful premise, and a great cast. The writers and director failed this one. I honestly think everyone did the best they could with the material they had to work with..They should have made it a drama with dark humor mixed in as breathers for the audience, tackled the emotional issues that Ray and Mary were going through, and dealt more with Hancock's isolation... Oh yeah, and left out the bad guy all together.

Is it too late to call for a 'do over'?
 
 
I knew very little about Hancock before I went to see it. Quite honestly, the only thing I knew was that Will Smith was in it. I hadn't read any reviews or seen the trailers.

I didn't hate it, but it had A LOT of improvement opportunities from a writing perspective, and after reading Sanj's post that this film had rewrites and reshoots, it makes sense. They were so busy with whatever nonsense, they missed out on how disjointed some of the elements had become. It could have been two separate films. It seriously felt like they took a comedy version and a drama version and accidentally edited them together.

I'd say more, but I don't feel this movie deserves any more of my time.
When it is not in our power to follow what is true, we ought to follow what is most probable. –Rene Descartes

I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. -Douglas Adams
July 7th, 2008, 8:56 am
User avatar
Serendipitous
This is my world and I am the world leader...pretend.
 
Location: in the now
If it's as bad as you say, it will be interesting to see how the "Will Smith" golden touch works.... If it does well in spite of the obvious... then Smith will be in every movie for the next 15 years. (he almost is now.)
This is our chance to change things, this is our destiny.
July 7th, 2008, 8:57 am
User avatar
Liv
I show you something fantastic and you find fault.
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
Sanjuro wrote: Is it too late to call for a 'do over'?

Probably would be worth it. You could hit all your typos. :mrgreen:

So... could you give me a sense here of where to stack these blockbuster movies for this year? Is Hancock perhaps needing to be set between "Get Smart" and "The Love Guru"?
July 7th, 2008, 8:58 am
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:
Sanjuro wrote: Is it too late to call for a 'do over'?

Probably would be worth it. You could hit all your typos. :mrgreen:

So... could you give me a sense here of where to stack these blockbuster movies for this year? Is Hancock perhaps needing to be set between "Get Smart" and "The Love Guru"?


Sorry man, at work and distracted.. I'll leave you to fix them.

Bet...er...Liv, Hancock grossed $66 million over the weekend.. they bumped it to $107.3 million since it opened Tuesday night to get a jump on the holiday. I imagine it will drop a whole lot very soon. For perspective, Wall-E grossed $33.4 million this weekend with Its 10-day total is $128.1 million.
July 7th, 2008, 9:06 am
User avatar
Sanjuro
Expert...on everything...
 
Sanjuro wrote:
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote: You could hit all your typos. :mrgreen:


Sorry man, at work and distracted.. I'll leave you to fix them.

Very rarely will I EVER touch someone's post with my admin powers to edit what they said. I've only ever corrected the "quote" tags, which are very easy to screw up without a visual-style post editor.
July 7th, 2008, 9:30 am
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.
Sanjuro wrote:I guess the reason I disliked this movie so much was because it could have been a great movie.

Hm. Let me think here. Sanjuro urged me to try out "Sunshine" based on the great visual experience -- and it sucked. He urged me to go see "Wall-E" at Greensboro's only digital projection theater, and the theater itself reeked. How should I view his dislike of this film...? 8)
July 7th, 2008, 10:14 am
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:
Sanjuro wrote:I guess the reason I disliked this movie so much was because it could have been a great movie.

Hm. Let me think here. Sanjuro urged me to try out "Sunshine" based on the great visual experience -- and it sucked. He urged me to go see "Wall-E" at Greensboro's only digital projection theater, and the theater itself reeked. How should I view his dislike of this film...? 8)


Sunshine Ive never seen. I told you not to outright dismiss it without seeing it because some people made very good reference to it. And you watched it an complained about the physics.

I told you to see WallE in digital at Greensboro because of the picture and sound quality, and last I checked you went to Durham... but anyway, You pissed and moaned about bathrooms and seats, then claimed you cant see the difference between a 4k digital projection and a (expletive) film projection.

Seriously man, what the freck?
July 7th, 2008, 10:27 am
User avatar
Sanjuro
Expert...on everything...
 
Sanjuro wrote:
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:Hm. Let me think here. Sanjuro urged me to try out "Sunshine" based on the great visual experience -- and it sucked. He urged me to go see "Wall-E" at Greensboro's only digital projection theater, and the theater itself reeked. How should I view his dislike of this film...? 8)
Sunshine Ive never seen. I told you not to outright dismiss it without seeing it because some people made very good reference to it. And you watched it an complained about the physics.

Actually, I also complained about the crappy, worthless story line and pathetic dialog... but hey, it's in the past now. :mrgreen:
Seriously man, what the (expletive)?

Just poking you to see if you're still alive. It appears to have worked. :lol:
July 7th, 2008, 10:32 am
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.
What's up with that pic of Will Smith on the movie poster? Did someone snap that shot right as someone kicked him in the nuts?
July 7th, 2008, 12:49 pm
User avatar
Pineview Style
 
Location: A Dumpster Behind McD's
Pineview Style wrote:What's up with that pic of Will Smith on the movie poster? Did someone snap that shot right as someone kicked him in the nuts?


Funny you should ask that, given his advice to Ray's son on how to deal with bullies...
July 7th, 2008, 1:24 pm
User avatar
Serendipitous
This is my world and I am the world leader...pretend.
 
Location: in the now
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:
Seriously man, what the (expletive)?

Just poking you to see if you're still alive. It appears to have worked. :lol:


No harm, no foul.

Seriously though.. I will never understand how you can't see the difference between a DLP theater and an old film projector. Time for a visit to the eye doctor to have that prescription notched up I suspect. :wink:
July 7th, 2008, 1:27 pm
User avatar
Sanjuro
Expert...on everything...
 
Sanjuro wrote:Seriously though.. I will never understand how you can't see the difference between a DLP theater and an old film projector. Time for a visit to the eye doctor to have that prescription notched up I suspect. :wink:

Well, there are two issues at play here. First, I am only allowed one update of my prescription every 2 years, according to my vision insurance plan. What was interesting there was that I got my prescription updated last January (and my eyesight has degraded a fair amount since '06), but wasn't allowed to order new glasses until last week.

Second, and I've mentioned this on a few other occasions, I'm a dullard. I'm borderline tone deaf (which irked my fellow violists to no end in high school) and I never figured out how Beta was superior to VHS. I've looked at MANY hi-def TV screens and not seen this "world of difference" between regular and hi-def. I've attended many wine tastings, but for the life of me, I've never been able to "detect" all the flavors and aromas everyone else claims to sense. The only sense I have that comes close to being of normal acuity is touch, and really... what use is that? If I ever go completely blind, I'll be screwed so far as braille reading is concerned. :cry: :oops: :(
July 7th, 2008, 1:45 pm
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.
Well, saw it last night... finally...

I liked it. It was quarky, and definitely not the most remarkable movie of the century... but I liked it.. it was popcorn. It's the kind of movie that would be fun to watch at the drive-in, or a sleep-over. No emotional involvement, no over thinking things... just in your face, imaginative scenes, and with a 1980's "the more you know"-feel; message at the end of the movie. If they can make a sequel out of XXX then I'm certain one can hope that this movie if it should be revived for a sequel can and will be better the second go round, but as is... is a fun, dumbed down superhero movie which belonged on the small screen but made it too the big.
February 12th, 2009, 8:16 am
User avatar
Liv
I show you something fantastic and you find fault.
 
Location: Greensboro, NC

Return to Arts