|
I went to a sneak preview screening of Hancock tonight and figured I'd give ya'll my review.
If you've seen the trailers, most of what you've seen comes from the first half of this 90 minute movie, and that is probably 70% of the best stuff from the half (there are still a few good bits that they haven't shown yet from that half). Unfortunately, that tone and pace doesn't continue into the second half of the movie. In fact, the nature of the movie changes dramatically, going from a hard-edged comedy to some bizarre drama thing, that really has a hard time deciding what it wants to be. It has some problems following its own rules, using them occassionally just to remind you that they exist, then letting them disappear into the background.
The acting is decent, with screentime split between Will Smith, Jason Bateman, and Charize Theron. Will pretty much only has one character trait in this movie (ornery) and its probably the weakest role I've seen him in in quite some time. Charize's character largely doesn't make any sense, and Bateman is barely able to hold the plot together (not the actor's fault, pretty much all of the problems for the movie I'd put on the directors lap).
I wish I could just write it off as "summer movie", but it doesn't really treat itself like one. At best I'd recommend it as a matinee, more honestly, I'd say wait for Netflix or cable.
Aww man, that's unfortunate. I'm taking the wife to see this June 3rd for our monthly date...I guess I'll have to find a really good place for dinner...
It does not matter. It is superhero movie. We all must see it.
hehe; thanks for the review; but I see all the super flicks anyway; so is this Marvel; independant or what; anyone know?
Am wondering what the background is; does it have a comic prior to the movie?
|
|
hehe; thanks for the review; but I see all the super flicks anyway; so is this Marvel; independant or what; anyone know?
Am wondering what the background is; does it have a comic prior to the movie?
It is a new creation, not picked from a comic book. The writers have written for television (Vince Gilligan wrote a lot of X-Files stuff, Vincent Ngo has mostly done commericial work).
Read the title and assumed it was a bio-pic about Herbie Hancock. Imagine my disappointment...
Disappointing. Hollywood finally does a movie that is not a remake or rip-off from a book/tv show/video game/children’s cereal and it has to fall on its face. I guess we can all look forward to Rocky X with a computer generated Sylvester Stalone.
Just saw this. Totally enjoyed it. Vince Gilligan is a genius writer and Will Smith delivers the goods. Loads of fun this.
|
|
Not a bad movie, a very good final fight scene.
Does seem very similar to "Unbreakable" on many levels.
Actually, I adore "Unbreakable" and its hands down one of my favorite superhero movies. It sets and maintains its tone throughout and doesn't break its own rules.
I guess the main problems I had with Hancock have to do with the tonal shift mid-movie and the lack of meaningful conflict. I firmly believe that good stories rely on conflict that change the protagonist, whether the conflicts are man vs self, man vs man, or man vs nature. While those types of conflicts are present as individual scenes within the movie (fight scenes, Hancock's acceptance of Ray's challenge to be more), there is no overarching conflict that shapes the story. At the end of the movie, Hancock is pretty much the same as he is at the beginning of the story, just cleaner. Joseph Campbell would look at this movie and go "WTF?"
And the thing is, they could have generated the conflict so easily. They had options that were set up. They just didn't follow thru on them, and thats what disappointed me the most.
My wife and I really liked it! It's not the most ground breaking movie ever, but it's a lot of fun in a more serious vein. Like popcorn-fodder, only brainier. Ish. ;p
Go see it!
|
Not a bad movie, a very good final fight scene.
Does seem very similar to "Unbreakable" on many levels.
Actually, I adore "Unbreakable" and its hands down one of my favorite superhero movies. It sets and maintains its tone throughout and doesn't break its own rules.
I guess the main problems I had with Hancock have to do with the tonal shift mid-movie and the lack of meaningful conflict. I firmly believe that good stories rely on conflict that change the protagonist, whether the conflicts are man vs self, man vs man, or man vs nature. While those types of conflicts are present as individual scenes within the movie (fight scenes, Hancock's acceptance of Ray's challenge to be more), there is no overarching conflict that shapes the story. At the end of the movie, Hancock is pretty much the same as he is at the beginning of the story, just cleaner. Joseph Campbell would look at this movie and go "WTF?"
And the thing is, they could have generated the conflict so easily. They had options that were set up. They just didn't follow thru on them, and thats what disappointed me the most.
Indeed, I did not mean to disparage Unbreakable at all, it is by far my favorite M. Night film. I still get goosebumps when watching the scenes where he is lifting weights, and the last fight.
I agree about the conflict thing. The "villain" character was not very sinister.
I enjoyed the film. Thought the acting was solid through out. I did have a problem with the story though. I thought Will Smith's character's turn around felt a little rushed, and there wasn't enough foreshadowing for the end of the film.
Not a bad little movie. Just could have used some more story development, a little more foreshadowing, and a smoother character arc for both Will Smith's character and Charlize Theron's character.
I'm sorry, but after seeing Hulk 1, they lowered the bottom line, so this can't be nearly that bad.
I wish Will Smith would take more roles where he DOESN'T play 'ornery'.
He's billing himself as a "one-trick pony".
|
RPG Superstar 2013
|
I dig Will Smith. He's funny, he's an action hero, he's charismatic, etc.
Funny thing about one trick ponies. If you want to pay Will Smith what he's worth, it's gonna have to have a big budget, have eye candy, etc. Maybe in future years he'll do stuff just cause he wants to stretch himself.
Which we know he can do, cause this one trick pony got his film start in Six Degress of Separation.
Hancock was wonderful to me. Rewally funny, great visually. A lot of CGI stuff even today is rough around the edges. But This was better. When the camera focuses on him coming out of one of his divots, it looks like real rocks under his feet.
We played a very serious Aberrant campaign for a while, and we made up the completely grabasstic concepts as our replacement characters to ensure nothing bad would happen to the ones we loved. For example,we had a guy whose special power was he could explode with massive power. Once. He wore a helmet.
I was gonna go from playing a mellow, teleporting Mr Inky Whatsit to a hypertensive, under-acheiving accountant with ADD. When he got really stressed out, he would explode into thousands of dense, high-energy rubber balls.
Anyhoo, why dysfunctional alcoholic superhero never occured to us is beyond me.
As a final note: I have never loved Charlize Theron more than I do right now.
I gotta go.
Ok. Just saw this movie today.
First things first....if you have any photosensitivty or get virtigo, wait for video. There were times in the movie where I just couldn't follow what was happening right then because of it.
I have to agree that the character development was sorely lacking. No real explanation of the backstory. Or who or what they were. Very much more action movie than a movie with a cohesive plot.
My amigos and I loved the first 3/4ths or so... The last 1/4th, however... meh.
|
|
Joseph Campbell would look at this movie and go "WTF?"
lol. Tru'dat.
I saw this, and was a bit disappointed. I didn't understand Charlize Theron's character's motivations, and her actions seemed inconsistent from scene to scene. It felt a lot like something important was left on the cutting room floor.
I agree that the movie changes tone dramatically mid-way through the movie, but since this change seems to hinge on Theron's character, and her character is a confused muddle at best, it doesn't make the transition smoothly, and sets up the final conflict in a way that left me scratching my head wondering what exactly had happened.
did you see the Avengers animated movie? Thor was presumably on greenpeace ships running off whaling ships :) Hancock would only be a copy cat; I could see him doing something maybe about all the trash dumped in ocean or all the barges that sail around looking for somewhere to dump trash.
|
did you see the Avengers animated movie? Thor was presumably on greenpeace ships running off whaling ships :) Hancock would only be a copy cat; I could see him doing something maybe about all the trash dumped in ocean or all the barges that sail around looking for somewhere to dump trash.
Like throw a garbage scow at New York's Freedom Tower...dont see it myself.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I saw it - meh.
It was ok. I don't feel like I wasted my money, and I was entertained.
Not a masterpiece, will never win an Oscar, but it was an ok popcorn flick.
The movie did change radically halfway through though, it dipped for a little bit, but picked itself back up at the end. (I did roll my eyes during Theron's big reveal.)
All in all I'd give it a 5.5 out of 10.
Ok. Just saw this movie today.
First things first....if you have any photosensitivty or get virtigo, wait for video. There were times in the movie where I just couldn't follow what was happening right then because of it.
I agree with this- sit way back and avoid a big screen cinema- better yet wait for DVD. My wife got serious nausea and had to close her eyes a fair bit. She had to lie down for about 15 minute after it just to recover from the stupid flitty focus hand held camera schtick.
Otherwise a fine movie - not great but decent enough.
|
|
Ok. Just saw this movie today.
First things first....if you have any photosensitivty or get virtigo, wait for video. There were times in the movie where I just couldn't follow what was happening right then because of it.
I agree with this- sit way back and avoid a big screen cinema- better yet wait for DVD. My wife got serious nausea and had to close her eyes a fair bit. She had to lie down for about 15 minute after it just to recover from the stupid flitty focus hand held camera schtick.
Otherwise a fine movie - not great but decent enough.
The same thing happened with CLOVER FIELD. Maybe its the CGI handling software they use to make it look like its being shot from camcorder.
Damn thing took out the dudes in front and give me a damn headache. Subliminal strobling, flashes, interlaced images that had no part in the film, shit that could kill unsuspecting viewers. I thought Terrorists had infiltrated Holywood and used their films against the viewing Audience.
I think whether or not you enjoyed Hancock depended entirely on expectations. Honestly it felt more like an "indie movie with powers" than a Marvel/DC big-budget slugfest (like the 3rd act of new-Hulk, meh). I loved it, quite frankly. The "villain" was kind of bland, but honestly he was just a dumb object to beat Hancock with, not any kind of important element.
(Mild spoilers for the movie's key conflict):
IMO, Hancock was a little rough around the edges, but basically distilled the classic (super)hero story to its essence. Maybe a slightly longer runtime could have expanded on the backstory, or given us more examples of how the other main characters interacted with the public/world-at-large, but neither was really necessary to the main story, and might've disrupted the pacing.
I didn't notice any weird vertigo problems (although camera-shaking usually pisses me off), but the flying scenes were really well done and the bank scene was my favorite effects-wise.
I thought it was a good box office showing. I won't be buying the DVD but I definitely enjoyed it. If you have $20 to blow and you want to go to the theatre then it's likely as good as or better than whatever else is showing.
The biggest weak point to me in the movie involved a big and IMO completely pointless fight scene in the movie. It was almost like the director thought that the only way the directory thought one of the characters could react to a stressful situation was through brute force and violence and that was way out of character. After that scene the character drops back into character without batting an eye...
Other than that, it was not a landmark movie that will be remembered and revered throughout cinema history but it is an enjoyable afternoon. Not as good as Iron Man but generally much better than the rest of the tripe that is generally servered up in spandex costumes for mass consumption (Hulk, X-Men III, Spiderman III, Fantastic 4 I and II, I'm looking at you).
Joseph Campbell would look at this movie and go "WTF?"lol. Tru'dat.
I saw this, and was a bit disappointed. I didn't understand Charlize Theron's character's motivations, and her actions seemed inconsistent from scene to scene. It felt a lot like something important was left on the cutting room floor.
I agree that the movie changes tone dramatically mid-way through the movie, but since this change seems to hinge on Theron's character, and her character is a confused muddle at best, it doesn't make the transition smoothly, and sets up the final conflict in a way that left me scratching my head wondering what exactly had happened.
I agree completely. The whole "twist" of this movie was it's demise.
I've heard the original script for this has been floating around Hollywood for years with the 'wonderful concept but totally unfilmable' kiss of death attached to it. I'd love to read the original treatment of this film.
As it is, it's simply clumsy. It's really like they set out to make a good comedy superhero film ('My Super Ex-Girlfriend' being the closest we've gotten so far) and then realized 'well, crap, we still need 40 more minutes worth of movie'.
The reveal makes no real sense. It could have, but the whole thing is clumsy, fumble-fingered, and almost boring at the final confrontation. The villain is - and I normally hate this term, but it is so appropo - weaksauce. He comes from no-where and goes no-where. Even his defeat is, I suppose, supposed to be comedic but winds up horrific. The movie makes up addition world rules when it damn well feels like it, and that blunts the last half of the movie, badly. Even it's half-handed attempt at an explanation comes as too little, waay too late.
Furthermore, then entire concept behind the 'reveal' is just deeply, deeply stupid. There really isn't another word for it. I might strongly suspect some studio or editing meddling went on; it could be interesting to see what sort of deleted scenes pop up in the DVD.
The first 40 minutes or so, though, are pretty darn good. The superhero sequences are nicely done and I wish some other superhero movies had had the combat scenes and power-usage scenes we see in this one.