Hancock Doesn’t Rock
July 8, 2008 Movies, Reviews No CommentsJust last weekend I went with some friends to go and see the most recent Will Smith movie, Hancock. Before seeing the movie I had managed to stumble on the actual first edition of the screenplay (formerly titled, “Tonight He Comes”. please hold your laughter to a minimum), and from what I had read, it seemed that Hancock would have been a much better film if it would had stuck closer to the original screenplay.

Well, for starters, in case you don’t know, Hancock tells the story of a super hero that isn’t exactly all that super, or heroic for that matter. Will Smith plays Hancock (obviously), an alchoholic, homeless guy who possesses almost all of the same traits as Super Man, with the exception of having the same “heroic convictions”. Along the way Hancock meets a Public Relations manager (Jason Bateman), who tries to help Hancock acquire a more noble image amongst the city people. Also starring is Charlize Theron who plays Bateman’s wife.
As far as the acting goes, it isn’t amazing, nor is it bad. I would classify it just above average. Smith certainly does a good job as Hancock, and the rest of the cast is decent as well. With that being said however, the acting portraying Hancock’s villains are generic at best. More on this in a minute.
The first half of Hancock, in my opinion, was pretty good. It had enough humor in it to keep me entertained, while at the same time it seemed to flesh out personalities of its main characters. However, somewhere around the half way point, the entire film started to lose a lot of its “humorous feel”, and started to become a serious film. Now I understand why the film did this, but it really seems to put the entire film into a caddywhompus of sorts. The rest of the movie at this point really becomes bogged down by an underlined overtone of redemption, as well as trying to give the viewer a half arsed attempt at some sort of backstory for Hancock.
I guess maybe that’s my biggest problem with Hancock. It’s simply the fact that their really isn’t enough information to go on when a completely new super hero with no forehand knowledge is introduced. I really love the original idea of Hancock being a complete a-hole, and the idea of what it would be like to be a modern day super hero. Unfortunately, halfway through the film
Hancock really turns out to be nothing more than an average, cookie cutter character. I really would have like to seen this movie kept with the original idea of Hancock being a jerk throughout the whole film. I think it really would have been a fresh outlook on the superhero genre as a whole.
Another thing that this film seriously lacks is a real villain. The (main) villains throughout the movie are really nothing more than thugs with guns. Yeah I know, the main battle is suppose to be about Hancock overcoming his own personal demons, but that still doesn’t excuse the complete lack of creativity concerning the bad guys. I mean just think about it. A super hero is really only as good as his villains. Batman has Joker. Super Man has Lex Luthor. Spider-Man has Green Goblin. Who does Hancock have? Three (clumsy) guys with guns, that remind me of the burglars from Home Alone? Pleaaaase.
Overall, Hancock is your basic summer popcorn movie at its best. It’s loud, fast moving, has humorous moments here and there, and special effects up the butt. Unfortunately though, as a result of the complete lack of decent villains, a pretty lame character back story, the fact that the movie takes itself to serious by the end of the film, and Hollywood’s complete bastardization of an original screenplay, keeps Hancock from being anything other than “ordinary”.
6.5/ 10



About four months ago when no one knew what this movie was about I was pretty excited for its release. The last M. Night movie was definitely a let down, and so I assumed he was going to be trying harder this time around. What a joke that turned out to be. It seems almost like M. Night didn’t want you to know what the movie was about because if you did, their was a good chance you wouldn’t be watching it in theaters.
So, as you know by now a fourth Indy movie has been in the works for quite some time, and the truth is Lucas had always planned on doing another one assuming him, Ford, and Spielberg could agree on a script. Unfortunately for us the viewers, it took them about ten years to decide on one. However, that must mean that the it was a script truly worth waiting for right? Wrong. What we got instead was a script that truly has no place in an Indiana Jones movie, nor does it even belong in an Adventure/ Action genre, and an overall let down from a man who is continuing to betray his fans, George Lucas.
His age never really seems to be a problem, and the characters (as well as the actors I assume) do not try to hide the fact, as many of them even make jokes about how old he seems to be. Shia Lebeauf gives a decent performance as “Mutt”, Indy’s sidekick throughout the film. However, on the opposite side is Karen Allen who gives a “Meh” performance at best. A lot of the times it seems her character was thrown in for no other reason than pure nostalgia. Finally, Cate Blanchett gives a mediocre performance at best, and turns out to be probably the lamest villain in Indiana Jones history (however it’s possible that isn’t entirely her fault, and once again can be blamed on the writing).