Hancock

[Freight Train]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZQQgvhn4jg

Coming out in July. Looks like it's gonna be funny and awesome. :D

[Banner Laverick]

I am sure my brother will see this, since he is secretly in love with Will Smith. ^_^;

[Rutabaga]

I saw the first trailer for this sometime in December, and I thought it looked potentially hilarious. I will probably be seeing it. :thumbup

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I too saw the trailer a while ago (and several times since then)... It looks really funny and I really like Will Smith so of course I'll go see it. :D

[Peter McCoy]

Big Will is da man! This looks fun.

[Crusader]

Sounds like a really funny antihero movie!

[Dasquian Belargic]

I normally can't stand Will Smith - don't ask me why, there's just something about him - but this actually looks like it could be really funny! I'm going to be all out of cash at this rate, going to the cinema to see all these great summer movies.

[Dasquian Belargic]

I have to admit, I found this kind of underwhelming. The premise was pretty entertaining, but once the movie started getting more serious - Smith and Theron as angelic Romeo and Juliet? - it definitely lost some of its charm.

[Ryan Pode]

I saw it and thoroughly enjoyed it.

[Rutabaga]

I was really looking forward to this movie...looked really entertaining, and I do like Will Smith quite a bit. But for once, I completely agree with the critics.

Brilliant idea, HORRIBLE execution. Shockingly bad special effects (by John Dykstra, no less), poorly written and edited, and please please please, why all the shaky cam? Easily the worst movie of the summer. (Yes, even worse than Speed Racer.) I wouldn't recommend it even as a rental. I have even given it a new title....

My Super Ex-Girlfriend 2 :lol

Oh, and I almost forgot...the continual use of one particular seven letter insult got really, really old really really fast. Especially when it was used by kids.

[Dasquian Belargic]

It almost felt like two different movies had been accidentally spliced together, the way the story and theme changed in the latter half.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Did it seem like it was cut to shreds? I ask because I understand the first cut of the movie was longer but that cut got a R rating. I know I am not interested in seeing it.

[Rutabaga]

Did it seem like it was cut to shreds? I ask because I understand the first cut of the movie was longer but that cut got a R rating. I know I am not interested in seeing it.

In a lot of ways, yeah...it felt like it was just a bunch of vignettes strung loosely together. I'd heard that the original cut was an R...I kept thinking they should have stuck with the R and gone for broke, but I guess they wanted to make it family friendly. Although how this was family friendly, I'm not sure, especially with the language. And please don't misunderstand me, I'm not a prude by any means, but I just felt that it was out of place in this movie.

For me, the biggest flaw was that Hancock's transition from a foul-mouthed, self-hating, alcoholic anti-hero to more of a good guy was completely and thoroughly unbelievable. You simply do NOT see the basis for it in the movie, there is no character development at all. And perhaps that was because of editing as well, I'm not sure.

[Ryan Pode]

For me, the biggest flaw was that Hancock's transition from a foul-mouthed, self-hating, alcoholic anti-hero to more of a good guy was completely and thoroughly unbelievable. You simply do NOT see the basis for it in the movie, there is no character development at all. And perhaps that was because of editing as well, I'm not sure.

I disagree. Here you have Hancock, who's gone about 80 years without anyone accepting him and all of the sudden this guy accepts him and believes he can be good and well loved by everyone. The movie made it painfully clear that he believed himself to be alone and all he wanted was someone. Well, he's in jail and he's lonely, he wants to be free and with someone (see the drawings on the walls). Again, he wants to be accepted. Well he gets his chance to be free again and this time he believes in the one guy who believed in him, thus leading to his transformation.

[Rutabaga]

Sorry, I just didn't buy it at all.

[Captain Untouchable]

Woah. Talk about opinion going the opposite way to what you expect. I just got back from seeing Hancock, and thoroughly enjoyed myself. Maybe its because I wasn't expecting a "superhero epic" with endless twists, turns, and a fathoms-deep plot when I went in - I just figured that from the trailers it was the sort of thing that I'd get a few chuckles out of and enjoy watching, and it delivered.

Granted, some areas could have done with a little more attention - which maybe they got in the longer cut - but I felt that if the movie glossed over any parts (the transition from hobo to hero, for example), it wasn't a massive crime. They dedicated as much screen time to the transition as Iron Man did with Stark, and Batman Begins did with Bruce: hardly worth complaining about, IMO.

I didn't find the "shaky cam" a problem either. I may just be used to it in Battlestar Galactica, though. I felt the entire film - special effects included - was a little "unrealistic" visually, as if they were trying to be artistic about it rather than photo-real, but lets face it: we're talking about a superhero flick here. What does it matter if things seem a little "comic book"?

I certainly don't think it deserves the "worst movie of the summer" label; maybe I went in with lesser expectations than everyone else and didn't feel let down, but it'll certainly be making it onto the shelf of easy-watching DVDs for days when I'm just lounging around.

[Dasquian Belargic]

I don't think it felt comic-book at all. From the trailers, it looked like they were going for something really funny... but in the end, I have to stand by the opinion that it floundered, never really seeming to know what it wanted to be. Was it a super-hero movie, was it some quasi-religious story?

[Rutabaga]

One thing I should have said in my original post is that I actually went in with extremely lowered expectations, because of the lousy critical reviews. My usual line is, "As long as I'm entertained, that's all I care about." I was encouraged that the users' tomatometer at Rotten Tomatoes was much more positive than the critical one was.

I ended up not being entertained at all, despite my lowered expectations. And for me, it was the worst movie I've seen so far this summer, but that's just my opinion.

BTW, I was reading in the new Entertainment Weekly that apparently this movie has started a new catch-phrase in Hollywood, "toss the whale." They said it means a moment in a movie when the CGI is so bad, it breaks the illusion and never recovers for the rest of the movie. I laughed when I read that, because I agree. For a budget of $150 million, the effects should have been much better.

[Dasquian Belargic]

LOL, toss the whale, jump the shark... poor sea creatures, always getting a bad rap.

[Atreyu]

Well I saw the film today. I enjoyed it, and don't quite get all the complaining about the film.

To be fair, I had already been slightly spoiled regarding the 'revelation' (I knew that Theron's character had super powers herself, but that's all) and had heard all the complaining about the last 30 mins or so, so maybe my expectations were already lowered well enough so I wasn't let down like everyone else.

And admittedly the film does lose a bit of steam at the end, but I didn't mind so much.

[Ryan Pode]

I think what everyone here is forgetting that this will be a nice set up for Hancock II. Duh.

[Jaime Tomahawk]

Well I saw the film today. I enjoyed it, and don't quite get all the complaining about the film.


I knew it was crap and it met expectations of being crap - but is no excuse. The story made no sense whatsoever. The effects were rubbish.

I dont buy the transformation either. Nor the big revelation. Nor the third act.

But for all it's rotenness and sheer crap, the worst thing about Hancock is that is is one of the biggest missed opportunities I have seen for a long time and what makes that worse is the first 20 minutes actually is the basis for one hell of a parody of superheros. When it stayed with Hancock being a boozer, it was hilarious. As an Antihero story, this would have worked.

The tone and change to the second half was a total disaster and fouled everythign up. For this, the director should be fired. Once it switched off what was a rather interesting idea, complete and total trainwreck.

For taking a good idea that could have really worked, then inserting total stupid, Hancock gets 0/10. Pity really, the "Your head up his ....." was fracking hilarious. But when you miss such an obviously good opportunity, you should get reamed.

[Yog]

^^ I completely agree with this Aussie.

Hancock had some promise the first 20 minutes, then it just spiralled rapidly down. The second half, and particularly the "revelation" felt like utter crap. The movie was much better when it did not try to take itself serious.