Hi, I'm a Hancock apologist!

Topic started by TheLawnWrangler on May 19, 2010. Last post by TheLawnWrangler 3 years ago.
Post by TheLawnWrangler (1,426 posts) See mini bio
My only problem with this movie is how it handles it's middle and end. There is a really dumb twist, which we a forced to watch play out for the rest of the film. Then things get kind of cheesy, and then things get weird, and then I'm a bit bored, if not entranced in something... dumb. Sad, yes, but man, the writing more than makes up for it. A bit witty and clever, the script is just great, as well as the directing. This could've been a great movie, but God, that was a dumb twist.
 
Does anyone else here like this movie more than most people?
Post by RainbowReelCinema (155 posts) See mini bio
I agree that the twist was kinda dumb and the movie had lots of little things that niggled at me. That fight between the two with the storm just seemed really out of place in the context of the film. At times it didn't seem sure if it wanted to be an over the top comedy or a dramatic movie, with the later half turning more into a serious drama. I do enjoy this film though a lot more than other people seem to, but I have to put myself in a further minority when I sat that I actually liked the last third of the movie the most. I felt that the fight was handled well, primarily because Bateman's character ultimately delivering the final blow with an axe, despite having no superpowers was handled well and in a nice stylistic manor.  
 
The problem I have with the ending (other than the cheesy bit at the end) is that I misunderstood what was happening at the end of film, and when I realized what was actually happening it didn't seem as powerful. I didn't realise that Hancock was trying to get away from Charlize Theron's character so that they could both live. When it was happening I thought that he was purposely trying to bash the living crap out of himself and with every wound inflicted upon him bringing him closer to death, it was also bring Theron's character back to life. Then it turns out that wasn't what he was doing at all and I was sort of just left there in a state of 'oh...that would have been cool if thats what he had been doing. 
 
That being said, I think I liked the serious parts of the film, and it seemed like they were setting up an interesting villain, showing him recruiting people to his anti Hancock cause in the Prison, but then thats the last characterisation you ever see of that character and he becomes just another bad guy that doesn't even have the crutch of having super powers to make him interesting. If they weren't going to give them to that character then make sure you make someone who is dam interesting. 
  
I would definitely pay money to a sequel all and all, but I would hope it would be more serious. Don't get me wrong the humor can still be in there but I mean take out some of the more goofy crap that was in the film, especially the first five minutes or so minutes.
Post by Lydian_Sel (2,023 posts) See mini bio
I would have enjoyed that film so much more if it had really just been about a complete asshole with crazy super powers. No redemption, no deep seeded troubles, gimme Melvin Udall with super strength.
Post by Sandor (613 posts) See mini bio
Nah
Post by Creamypies (482 posts) See mini bio
I am too! Though I don't think this movie is a real accomplishment in any particular way... it certainly has the power to keep me entertained over the 8 or 9 times that I've seen it. Will Smith being a dick is obviously appealing to me, I guess.
Post by GunstarRed (207 posts) See mini bio

Theres definately something about it, It's well made and Peter Berg is a pretty good director. As was mentioned above about the lack of a really interesting villain is what really brings it down. The Charlize Theron stuff is verging on weird and comes out of nowhere, It would be interesting to see if there was  a lot of stuff cut out that the film would have benefited for including. Will Smith and Bateman are as likeable as usual and it's stylishly directed by berg who really knows how to shoot action well. 
I would like to see more of Hancock, I'm thankful that in a world where all films are based off existing properties films like this get made for the big summer season. Theres a great film in amongst all of the mess  which is a little bit of a shame.
Post by TheLawnWrangler (1,426 posts) See mini bio
@RainbowReelCinema: I feel the same way with his actions in the end, and Bateman's final blow was pretty fuckin funny considering where he hit (poor bad guy.) You make a lot of good points sir, and it seems we're on the same level :D I just felt that it took way to weird of a turn for me to change pace along with it. I was all lyke, "wat." 
 
@SeamonsterNeil: you should watch Breaking Bad. The guy who wrote Hancock is the director/writer/producer of Breaking Bad, which is an amazing show with tons of comedy and drama, and action. and yes, it had a really good set up around it, and definitely could've used some trimming. I completely agree that there's something awesome here, and i feel the same with other films too :P 
 
@creamypies: exactly, it's just good entertainment. also, ass-hole will smith needs to come out more. 
 
@Lydian_Sel:
 God yes. 
 
@Sandor: 
155 votes, 2.8 avg.

  • 6.5

  • B

  • 3.5

  • 49

  • 41
General Information Edit
Name Hancock
US Release July 2, 2008
UK Release July 2, 2008
AUS Release July 3, 2008
Runtime 102
Language(s)
Add a new language
Genre(s)
Add a new genre
Theme(s)
Add a new theme
Rating PG-13
Alias(es)
Top Rated Lists
Watch these NOW! a list of 154 items by gangly
Films Seen: 1/1/2011 - 31/12/2011 a list of 180 items by Joe
Movies Watched 2012 Edition a list of 93 items by Acura_Max
  • In today's dollars
    Domestic $227,946,274
    Foreign +396,440,472
  • = total worldwide gross $624,386,746
  • - a reported budget of $150,000,000
  • = a 316.3% net profit of $474,386,746
Top Editors
Mandatory Network

Submissions can take several hours to be approved.

Save ChangesCancel