Jump to content
Jazzy Jeff & Fresh Prince Forum

Hancock: master thread


Recommended Posts

  • Admin

The first half's a comedy, the second half is a drama.. I'm just not sure how that's gonna play.. Maybe they should have mixed the humor and drama throughout the whole film..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 557
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm afraid this one is going to turn out to be a WWW type of movie, I was sure it wouldn't be, with the people working on it, but too many reviews point out the same thing. I so wanted this to be Iron Man, 90+% on RT, 100M+ OW....the ultimate success. But so far it looks like a giant mess :shakehead: . I'll be attending this movie with the lowest expectations, I used to be hyped but with all the extremely negative reviews coming in... :paperbag:

Opinion seems to be very mixed. Yes, there's some real negative ones, but there's been some pretty postive ones too! here's another postive review http://dellagoodpinarich.blogspot.com/2008/05/i-love-la.html

That's not exactly a review, a girl stated she loved it. Doesn't tell much.

I have yet to see a positive one for the 2nd half of the movie. With 10 negative ones there's only 1 positive one.

And every movie will have ''some'' positive ones. Remember IAL ? There were some positive ones too for the ending but overal the consensus disagreed.

Sad though, the first half feels like Iron Man type of quality, almost every reviewer liked that A LOT.

I wish they could've kept some of that magic into the 2nd half. I mean making a movie on multiple genres doesn't mean you have to jump entirely from one genre to another and split the movie in two, instead of balancing it out without making it look corny. Ah well.

I'm definately not excited anymore, I think it'll get an 40+% on RT and will make some money, though people may get dissapointed with its box-office, I don't see it making 200M+. I really hoped for this one to be something special :shakehead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another review:

I was at the May 7th test screening and here is my opinion/review:

Thanks guys for the reviews, I won't read them yet ..hehe

Ale, how could u be at the test screening?just for curiosity, I've always asked myself how people know about those things and how it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the MPAA issue, not sure if it's been posted.

WILL SMITH'S 'HANCOCK' FIGHTS RATINGS BOARD: Producers want PG-13 but MPAA twice slapped it with an R.

*The upcoming Will Smith movie "Hancock" is having trouble getting the PG-13 rating desired by the film's producers.

According to the New York Times, the $150 million film has been submitted twice to the ratings board and tagged each time with an R, citing several objectionable scenes.

Director Peter Berg revealed that the movie – starring Smith as an unconventional, alcoholic superhero – contained scenes of a statutory rape up until three weeks ago. Another scene, changed before filming began, had Hancock getting drunk with a 12-year-old. The final version features the same scene with a 17-year-old.

Nevertheless, Berg says that the film "remained surprisingly sexual, violent and true in spirit to an original script" from screenwriter Vincent Ngo. His early draft was considered "brilliant, but unfilmable" in early studio buzz.

The current film is now undergoing a tug-of-war of sorts between the filmmakers who want to keep the darker and more dramatic meat of the story - and both the studio execs and ratings boards who want something that will pull in as big an audience as possible under a PG-13 rating.

Helping soothe this is the film's marketing campaign, which apparently plays up the lighter and more comedic moments of the film. [see trailer below.] Berg admits: "The ad campaign for this movie is much friendlier than the film." Sony chief Amy Pascal says "It’s scary in that it goes farther than we’ve gone before."


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best thing to do with movies is not read the reviews and watch it for yourself! You are the best critic and you don't need somebody telling you whether a movie is bad or not! Thats exactlty what I'll be doing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Early 'Hancock' Review!

Oh man, am I jealous of this guy. I have been a fan of Peter Berg since I was a kid, thanks to Shocker, and as a director he is even more impressive. Every film he has made has not only been good/great, but also one of the best examples of their respective sub-genres, thanks to his ability to take a story that has been told a hundred times (“two guys who don’t like each other have to team up”, “sports team fights their way to the big game”, etc) and approach it from a different angle than other filmmakers might have. So now he is tackling the superhero movie, and from the sounds of this review, it lives up to the expectations I have for a Berg film. Also, I don’t see how a film with two of the most effortlessly charming actors of our generation (Will Smith and Jason Bateman) and one of the most ridiculously beautiful women in the world (Charlize Theron) can be anything BUT pure entertainment. Hancock opens on Smith’s traditional July 4th weekend, and I guarantee I’ll be there opening day (especially since Sony never invites us to press screenings). But for now, read on for SimSandwich's thoughts on an early cut!

Hey there, SimSandwich again. I got a test invite last week for a “major Hollywood summer movie”, but it didn’t give any other clues as to what it might be. However, they asked if I had seen a bunch of recent action/comic type movies in theaters, so I assumed it was either Hancock or Hellboy II (Dark Knight? know I’m just not that lucky). And as we were all seated, we STILL didn’t know what movie it was; even the screening people said they didn’t even know. But once I saw Peter Berg walk in, I knew one of my guesses turned out to be true.

Recent articles have dubbed Will Smith one of the last remaining true movie stars – a guy who people will go see in pretty much any type of movie. Romantic comedies, dramas, action, sci-fi... he’s conquered them all (unless “Ghost haunting golf pro” is a genre). So who better to cast in a film that is on the surface, a crowd-pleasing superhero film, but in reality is a dark comedy-drama about the toll that a lifetime of heroics takes on our protagonist?

Smith plays John Hancock, an alcoholic, irritable, and burnt-out superhero who technically protects Los Angeles (the film appears to take place in the ‘real world’, where Batman and Spider-Man are fictional) from every day criminals. As the film begins, he more or less accidentally stops the escape of a car full of robbers, and in the process destroys countless buildings, sections of the freeway, and vehicles. Meanwhile, our other lead, Ray (Jason Bateman) is also on the outs – he’s a PR rep who wants to save the world, not his client’s bottom line. As luck would have it, Hancock saves Ray from near death when his car gets stuck on the train tracks, and to repay him, Ray decides to take Hancock as a new client, working to repair his image. Ray takes Hancock home to meet his family: a young son, and his beautiful wife (Charlize Theron), who is automatically suspicious of Hancock’s intentions.

While the new trailer spoils the 2nd half of the film, I won’t do that here, only to say that a ‘twist’ occurs halfway through that you will either hate, or simply go with. It’s a bit of a tonal shift (OK, a LOT of a tonal shift), but without it, the film would simply be traveling in circles, and at the end of the day, the film is about all three characters, not just Hancock. And this is a big part of what I liked about the film – Bateman was more than just comic relief, and Theron was more than just the thankless wife, a role that many of her peers have been relegated to in other high concept summer films (such as Kate Beckinsale in Adam Sandler’s woeful Click). Bateman in particular gets to play his most well-rounded role since Arrested Development, and it’s great to see him onscreen as much as he is (I was expecting him to simply be a supporting character, not a full fledged co-star). Since Smith is such a huge star, it’s not uncommon for the other characters in his films (particularly his recent ones) to sort of fade into the background, but that is not the case here.

It’s also a balls out hilarious movie. Bateman is as dryly hilarious as ever, and Smith gets in quite a few laughs (usually at the expense of others in the earlier parts of the film). Few actors can manage to get a laugh out of throwing a 10 year old kid into the stratosphere, but for Smith it’s practically second nature (not the kid throwing, the ‘easy laugh’ing). Even if you hate the twist, there are still at least unrelated laughs to enjoy for the rest of the film.

One cannot ignore Peter Berg’s work here, either. It’s his biggest budgeted film yet, but it’s still very much a Peter Berg film, in that it’s not only great, but far from typical. He makes a different type of film every time (Sports, black comedy, action, thriller, and now superhero drama), but the continuing thread is that they are unconventional takes on well-worn material, and always for the better. He also has perfected the art of the un-distracting cameo (M. Night Shyamalan, take note), appearing in the film as a doctor in a scene so frenetic one might not even realize it’s him. Perhaps it’s his background as an actor, but he also continues his streak of getting some of the best performances of the respective careers from his actors. Christ, the guy even made Cameron Diaz entertaining (in Very Bad Things), and she’s the most loathsome and boring actress in modern history. Smith sheds almost all of the “Big Willie” charm here, and in turn gives his best performance since Ali. He’s not playing Will Smith, he’s playing Hancock, and the film is the better for it.

As this was a test screening, some things may change for release. This version seemed to be a bit too harsh for the PG-13 they are going for (a scene with Hancock drinking with a minor has already been shed; Berg has reportedly received an R twice now). There were a few F bombs, and a scene that shows what happens when a superhero... “finishes” with a woman. If the MPAA ever truly wanted to make a sort of PG-15 rating, this would certainly be the best film to start. In my opinion, they should restore whatever’s been cut and just go for the R, since the film isn’t about big action spectacle (there is some, naturally, but it’s not the selling point Sony will try to make you believe it is), and other than Hancock himself, there’s nothing really marketable in terms of action figures or Happy Meals (“The Jason Bateman character comes with briefcase and laptop!”). In the end, the movie is simply about three people learning to accept their entwined roles in life, set against the backdrop of a big budget superhero movie. And that's precisely what makes it work.

Score 8/10


Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lolsign: Sandy, I wasn't at the test screening, I just copied that. I wish I could have been there.

:lolsign: ok!!! Don't worry one day we'll be at one test screening!!haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best thing to do with movies is not read the reviews and watch it for yourself! You are the best critic and you don't need somebody telling you whether a movie is bad or not! Thats exactlty what I'll be doing!

I'm with you 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...