So, an action comedy about a drunken, sleazy superhero, eh? Sounds like a promising premise for an action comedy, don’t you think? I thought so, at least, when I bought tickets to see Hancock. I wasn’t much dissappointed.
John Hancock is a superhero, but he is also a bum and a rude asshole. He almost routinely causes immense collateral damage when performing heroic acts, and as a result the population of Los Angeles, his chosen city of residence, hate him and want him to go away. One day, he saves the life of the idealistic public relations guy Ray, who is so grateful he promises to renovate Hancock’s public image. Hancock reluctantly agrees, mostly because he is interested in Ray’s hot wife, Mary.
After a more or less fun opening, it looked as if Hancock was gonna fall flat on its nose. The crazy antics of an impulsive, angry, drunk and careless superhuman looked as if they would be replaced by a sappy buddy movie with a triangular love drama as the driving conflict. This, approximately halfway through the movie, was where the plot took a sort of absurd and unexpected twist, and suddenly became interesting again.
Or, allow me to be more specific: it made at least parts of the movie interesting again. There was still no real central villain to cause problems or act as a foil for Hancock, and the triangular love drama remained — although in a fairly cliché-free way, surprisingly enough. Seeing as the twist was one of the few real strengths the movie had, apart from Will Smith’s charisma and all the slapstick — I won’t say too much about it, except that it involved the introduction of a supernatural element. This supernatural element was not what you’d call well integrated into the rest of the movie, nor was it particularly advanced or logical or anything. It did have some things going for it, though, and what it lacked it didn’t necessarily need, either, making it a point of interpretation whether or not the absent elements really were missed.
All in all a fun movie to watch once or twice — preferable in theatres; in spite of some dubious handheld camera work, the action scenes need a big screen — but probably not something you’d ever come to love for its own inherent qualities. 6.0/10.

Posts
Ah, good. I was worried I might maybe have missed out on something from not having time and money for this one, but seems like it’s an okay movie to skip then.
Now, if I could only find the time (and cash) for Arn 2, Sisters Boleyn, Ghengis Khan and possibly a third watching of Dark Knight before they all disappear unwatched like Hulk, Clone Wars, Mummy 3 and that Chinese movie did.
5. September 2008 @ 01:42 ( Permalink )
I’ve been meaning to write up this movie myself ever since I watched it, but since I truly loathe to write mixed reviews, I’ve never gotten around to it. Good thing you decided to do it for me, because you’re saying nearly the same things as I would’ve, only with bit less biting sarcasm about the second half’s craziness and the surprisingly entertaining first half. I did like it better than “I Am Legend” though. At least this one does everything it says on the cover.
6. September 2008 @ 14:20 ( Permalink )