Review of Hancock (2008) by Harry W — 27 May 2015

With Will Smith headlining the film, Hancock sounded like another fun blockbuster adventure.

It's a frequent motif in superhero films for the characters to cause large quantities of collateral damage, and this is one of the key satirical themes in Hancock. The intro establishes this immediately as John Hancock flies to the rescue and happens to smash everything in his way. This immediately establishes where the $150 million budget of the film went in terms of its visual effects which do prove to be impressive. Yet this theme does not end up being expanded upon much beyond its visual style because the narrative of Hancock soon becomes clearer than the visual style which is where the film takes a downturn. Underneath the visual effects and the star power of Hancock is a story with potential which instead finds itself buried beneath comedic cliches and melodrama. The scenes which optimise the visual effects to the max prove to be the most entertaining moments in the film which prove that during its more blockbuster moments Hancock knows how to deliver entertainment. It is just that when Peter Berg tries to fit an actual story into the film that he finds himself unable to effectively do so. Peter Berg has proven many times that his form of storytelling comes more from the technical aspects of filmmaking than anything else and so what he contributes to the film as director proves to be one of its finer elements, but it doesn't precisely work together with the writing style of either Vincent Ngo or Vince Gilligan. You'd recognise the name Vince Gilligan for being the creator of Breaking Bad, so in that sense it leaves me wondering how much of a serious satire he wanted the film to be and if Peter Berg's insistence on focusing more heavily on spectacle than character interfered with the original intentions. Either way I'm not 100% on who is to blame for the story issues in Hancock, but it is just not a brilliant piece of storytelling. The main problem is that Hancock is an overblown film that wants to be a comedy and a legitimate superhero film at the same time, but it is a shallow feature and so its attempts to put depth in through its relationship subplot end up proving to work against the satire. The many shots of Charlize Theron looking blankly at Will Smith like she knows something proves frustrating until the story finally clarifies what it the answer to the mystery is. When it is uncovered, I couldn't help but ask myself why it was necessary in the slightest. The subplot relating to the relationship between John Hancock and Mary Embrey adds little to the value of the experience, even though there are some minor moments of comedic charm that come from the efforts of Will Smith. In the end, you've got a sporadically funny and occasionally exhilarating blockbuster which is unfortunately weighed down by the lack of story between these moments. And there is a lot of story lacking in the film, so it is sporadically stirring at best. Frankly, when you spend $150 million on a superhero film you're better of focusing heavily on making an awesome action spectacle, and Hancock occasionally does that. But it is nowhere near consistent enough to justify that much spending on a Will Smith superhero film. Though I will admit that the star power of Will Smith certainly matches up to the spectacle in terms of talent.

Will Smith isn't given much of a character to work with in Hancock due to the shallow nature of the story. The character John Hancock is essentially just a generic rehash of Will Smith's most common movie persona, and so though fans of his are likely to find appeal in seeing him milk it in a $150 million superhero satire he really deserves more to work with. His performance isn't really an innovative one because he goes back on his instinct, but he does that well enough in the part to justify his presence. Will Smith starts out rather basic but embraces the satirical nature of the film the more that it progresses, and in doing so he is able to work the large budget around him with a comical embrace. His charisma effectively works to carry the non-spectacle moments of Hancock with the sense of comedic charm that they really need, and even though he is not perfect he nonetheless remains the genial presence as the headlining actor of this blockbuster. Will Smith's efforts in Hancock ensure that the film plays to his fans well enough which ensure the success of the film as another in his long line of star vehicles.

Charlize Theron is an oddball in Hancock. As she is the dramatic centre of the story, she really has to take her part seriously and she succeeds at doing that. Yet the general feel of the movie around her does not always work with that because is turns her serious role into a comedically melodramatic one at times which feels rather unbalanced, as well as the fact that her character is just not particularly interesting. But either way, this is not the fault of Charlize Theron and she does her best in the role and it is clear through the way she really engages with the role on a dramatic level.

Jason Bateman also has his moments. Though he once again plays out the natural persona he has created in countless films and the television series Arrested Development, he manages to bring it along with ease into Hancock and lightens the film with his easygoing comic charisma. Seeing him deliver in such a big budget film up against the likes of Will Smith pay him a lot of credibility because it shows that he can work with big budget mainstream material with ease, and though he is not as funny as Will Smith he certainly brings a likable charm to his role in Hancock.

So Hancock has some funny moments and a sporadic series of grand action scenes, but they are buried beneath the imbalance between comic cliches and a story that takes itself too seriously to capitalize on the satirical potential.