Review of Hancock (2008) by Dalton H — 10 Apr 2012

I can name about three superhero movies that are on the same level as Hancock off the top of my head. Batman & Robin, Elektra, and Catwoman are definitely some of the worst the genre has to offer. Hancock, however, could serve as the face of what happens when a serious lack of imagination can cripple even the most epic of ambitions.

The movie begins with Will Smith, at his most listless, as Hancock, basically a lush version of Superman, who halfheartedly saves the day with a devil-may-care attitude. Smith starts out well enough. He communicates Hancock's bum life style effectively and manages to bring something underneath that makes him interesting. When he meets PR Ray Embrey, after saving him from a one-on-one meeting with an oncoming train, I could telegraph where the story was heading, as Hancock battles his public image and tries to change himself into a better person. Its not a particularly new story, but its really heaps better than what the filmmakers decided to go with.

I would really love to get into whats really wrong with what transpires in the second half, that turns Hancock from an okay, if not really great, movie, to an outright disaster, but it would be drowning in spoilers. I will say that the entirety of Charlize Theron's presence is annoying and vapid, and it gets worse as it trudges along. Another problem is that the script takes an annoying "tell don't show" policy. Despite its problems, Hancock has interesting origins. Origins that need to be shown, that need to be explained if you have any hope of making his story worthwhile. Origins that don't need to be vaguely explained at a fucking restaurant. Memories, flashbacks, and a dozen or so other techniques could have been used to show how he came to be who he is now. But it never happens. Its all explained in a tiring monologue by Theron with nothing showing for it. She drones on endlessly for what feels like forever and you never get the feel for his story.

Whats also a problem is its action. For a blockbuster type film, its relatively light on action or thrills. A lot of the special effects are covered up in really cheap ways (clouds of dust, annoying camera angles, etc.). Its worse when they actually decide to show some of f/x. In one huge battle that goes through the streets of LA, a lot of piss poor dark blue atmospherics are slapped on, almost out of convenience than anything else, and awkwardly CGIed tornadoes that come out of nowhere (just try and wrap your head around that one). They should have realized they didn't have the budget to make a Superman styled movie.

The story is a wash, mainly at first because its execution is more than little sophomoric, and then because it becomes way too self important, making this oddness truly ridiculous. If it had stuck with one idea it would've been nice, but it tries to cram in too many vague, uninteresting ideas with nowhere to go and nothing to show for it. Its hard to believe that they managed to rope in Will Smith and Charlize Theron for this. Both are fine actors who have done fine work in the past, but here their talent is nonexistent. Smith, unfortunately, is uncomfortable with the role and is struggling to find the right tone for his character, mainly because the script just doesn't know what it wants to do. Theron's character is awful, vapid and many other bad adjectives that doesn't need much repeating. Jason Bateman tries to save it, but he gets a major shove into passivity after the first half, abandoned by a script that doesn't really know what it is. Its far from his impressive performances in The Kingdom and Juno. He, Smith, and Theron all deserved better.

This movie also deserves a credible villain. A superhero needs a villain to anchor around, to give him a reason as to why he is actually there. Spider-Man and Batman have a plethora of villains that define them, that makes them who they are. Hancock doesn't have that. All he has is some douche with a hook for a hand (sliced off by Hancock during a robbery) that escapes prison with a shotgun. Puh-lease! Give him someone who can actually match him not only in ability and physicality, but philosophically as well.

It's really hard to recommend Hancock. Even its relatively enjoyable first half is littered with bad music cues and half-hearted CGI that doesn't really gel effectively. The script's utter lack of coherency and depth negates the epic undercurrents Hancock would have had it been executed better. What's there instead is poorly acted, poorly directed, and poorly written trash that had so much potential.