Home > Television & Film, Uncategorized > Hancock- Quick and Dirty

Hancock- Quick and Dirty

Not only is he a possible Scientology candidate but like Tom Cruise it seems that this is affecting Will Smith’s movie making as well.

Saw Hancock yesterday at the Pavillion with Silbe. We both knew to expect some amount of light cheese but the movie turned out to be cheddar sharp…like the kind no one likes.

It was off to a good start. The basic premise is a good one. Superhero guy who doesn’t care about being a superhero. Throw in a bit of alcoholism and light swearing and you could have yourself a pretty good character.


The movie takes a turn for the worse when you find out Charlize Theron’s character, Mary, and Hancock are actually married and have been for something like 3000 years. She keeps referring to whatever made them as “they” which in never explained and you find out that there were more of them who died out because they paired up. Apparently in the world of Hancock these superhumans were created in pairs and once they find their pair they begin to become human. Why? So they can live like normal people which seems slightly pointless to me. Mary and Hancock were attacked in what they allude to as the 1930’s (they were going to see Frankenstein). Hancock takes a blow to the head that results in amenesia. When Mary arrives at the hospital Hancock doesn’t’ know who she is and they part ways. Fast Forward 80 years or so and Mary is married to a PR guy and Hancock is an alcoholic mess living in LA in a trailer.

Questions for the writers:

If Hancock and Mary never age how was she going to explain that to her very mortal husband and adopted son? I mean it would have definitely come up eventually.

The best parts of the movie:

  • The sexification of Charlize Theron once you find out she also has powers and magical use of eye-liner
  • Jason Bateman (as usual)

Hancock falls way short of what could have been a very cool portrayal of how a super-hero is made.

  1. July 7, 2008 at 6:43 AM

    I agree w/ you completely to inquire about the logic behind Hancock. I think that age thing was the ONLY plot hole in the movie.

  2. July 7, 2008 at 6:43 AM

    This review was not dirty, as promised in the title.

  3. July 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM

    I love this blog!

  4. ren
    July 17, 2008 at 12:22 PM

    and what the fuck was with all of the homophobic undertones??? i acually cried out, “i’m a norwegian homo!” in the theatre because of all the snickering going on. grr.

  5. lisa..... ......what.
    July 17, 2008 at 12:45 PM

    the subject of this post made me giggle.

  6. August 21, 2009 at 11:51 PM

    I also feel like commenting on this as well… I remember seeing this movie in the theatre around when it came out… I can’t remember what other movie I saw at the same time, but I do remember that seeing the other movie made me feel better about myself after wasting my time with this one…

    First off. He dies. How does he come back to life? Plot hole 1.

    Plot hole 2. Already mentioned, but I feel like elaborating further… This is the modern world. People would KNOW that they are superheroes because don’t you think the government would notice that this person has been walking around the Earth the past 3000 years?

    I also don’t like the fact that they don’t even act like superheroes. Hancock’s attitude is understandable, but I find it hard to believe that she can live her life as a superhero disguised as a human being without having a Freudian slip every now and then…

    The movie started out amazing but ended horribly…

    For that matter, I felt like mentioning that the ONLY movie I’ve ever seen in theatres that I felt like I should be given back my money and actually asked them if I could get my money back was Jumper.

    Jumper was the most disgusting piece of shit movie in the world, and unfortunately my best friend had to witness it with me.

    The movie was about an hour and a half of a guy jumping from one spot on the planet to another, and that was pretty much it.

    And for that matter, don’t even get me started on this “nu-horror” genre that’s coming out, such as Vacancy…

  1. November 17, 2008 at 1:53 PM
  2. September 11, 2009 at 10:41 AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: