After seeing a lot of Hancock previews, I think they should cast Will Smith as Tike "The Anarchist" Alicar if they ever do a film adaptation of the Milligan/Allred run on X-Force and X-Statix.Which they won't, but I just thought I'd float that thought into the blogosphere.
So... good? Most of the bad reviews I've seen seem to be of the "not what I was expecting to see" variety rather than telling me anything useful.
I enjoyed it to a point. Hancock the misanthrope and slowly finding a purpose was good. Ray's hero moment in the hospital was cheer worthy. However the character Mary annoyed the crap out of me by the end. "Why aren't you being a superhero too, bitch?" was pretty much all I could think of during the credit.
I liked it a great deal myself, but there are big old flaws. The studio clearly demanded some last minute tinkering. And there is never any reason to use the Sanford and Son theme in your film. The way it was used in this film was borderline psychotic, and maybe a little racist. I still don't know how I feel about some of the film.
"The way it was used in this film was borderline psychotic, and maybe a little racist. I still don't know how I feel about some of the film."I feel the same way. I'm ambivalent about it.My favorite review quotes for the movie:"Fate, mythology and even racism in America are tossed in to a climax so grim it's like watching "Men in Black" morph into "Requiem for a Dream."and "it's always nice to see someone revisit Christopher Reeves' drunken Man of Steel act from Superman III."
Hulk am love Hancock.But that costume sucks. Any thoughts on the Eagle Symbolism? I think it means he was Ra or Horus.I disagree strongly with klcthebookworm, though. My guess is in her long life she's done some heroics, but I think it makes sense to problematize the idea that everyone who acquired powers would necessarily become a hero. Not her bag. Not where her heart is. It takes more than ability to be a hero, I think that's the point.I think a lot of people with powers would be very highly sought after construction workers.
From bradydale: "My guess is in her long life she's done some heroics, but I think it makes sense to problematize the idea that everyone who acquired powers would necessarily become a hero. Not her bag. Not where her heart is. It takes more than ability to be a hero, I think that's the point."I'd agree, except it never was given any hint of in the movie. Her characterization was just so poorly done. The hospital scene with her going overall of Hancock's scars was a list of you saved me when. Um, you can do wacky weather stuff and pick up a semi to crush somebody with, but you can't save yourself? Though I did like the reveal about what happened in Miami. Had she had one line saying all she wants is a family or she doesn't want to fight or her powers never help anyone, I'd be happier with it. I guess it could be the "who I identified with in the movie has a penis" problem. This is the first movie I've experienced it in. Neat.
Poor Jason Bateman... he's married to a beautiful, drop dead gorgeous wife (who is from South Africa!), and he can't have sex with her...And what happened between Miami and the present day? When did Hancock start superheroing? Was he involved with the Civil Rights Movement? Why is he such a mess? And if the loss of his powers was gradual while near Mary, why did they come back so fast? Will Smith (RT 53%) is bullet-proof. Teflon coated. Reviews bounce off of his box office. Legend. Wild Wild West. Hancock.Coulda been better. Akiva Goldsman and superheroes do not mix well.
From bookworm: "Um, you can do wacky weather stuff and pick up a semi to crush somebody with, but you can't save yourself?"She was human, too, at the time, though. He was human and she was human. They were both powerless together, but he saved her... because he's got the heroics in him. I'm not trying to enter into the fight over why it's always the guy who has the heroics in him, I'm just saying that I think that's what the scene was meant to illustrate. Hancock is brave whether he's powered up or not.
SpoilersIt seems to me that part of the message of "Hancock" was, if you are the strongest woman (and, for that matter, being) on the planet, the most noble thing you can do is give it all up to be the wife of a sensitive PR exec in the suburbs.
Overall, my wife and I enjoyed it, even with some 'holes.' However, I appreciate a movie that doesn't feel the need to explain every detail . . . we don't know where they exactly came from, what they've done for the last few years, etc. And I don't think we need to know. It was somewhat bothersome that a god seemed to find happiness being the supportive wife . . . but I think there's more to it than that. A) She wanted to have love, which she couldn't have with Hancock without dying as the others had. B) I think she had done and seen a lot, to the point that she was tired and wanted a 'normal' quiet life. C) She was heroic in her own way, coming to the rescue of a man who lost his wife and had a baby. (Actually, my wife and I thought she said something like B at one point).Sure, it smacks of 'super-nanny' but I think to some extent, we give her the benefit of a doubt as a god. Do we really think she's willing to play a nanny? Or should we believe that she is in love with her PR hubby? Unfortunately, I think the director did a poor job with this. As far as the eagle goes, I assumed that it was a vague explanation of how certain images were recurring images for gods. Plus, it has a historical association with kings and heroes. He likes eagles in the same way my daughter likes dolphins. :)