This is topic Hancock in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=001436

---

Posted by Jake Lafree (Member # 3656) on 07-01-2008, 02:59 AM:
 
I thought it was just okay. Yes, I would've paid to see it. But no, I would not see it again. I thought the first reel of the movie or so was great, after that my mind started to side-track. I've always liked Will Smith, but he's done better than this.

6/10

PS>>>The 007 teaser was pretty bad-ass though.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-01-2008, 03:03 AM:
 
It started off good with an interesting premise, and then reel 4 came along with the bullshit Star Wars and E.T. stuff.

Not totally unwatchable, but they really fucked things up in the last half hour. Nobody will ever want to see this a second time.

2 out of 5
 

---

Posted by Ross Oba (Member # 3433) on 07-01-2008, 05:28 AM:
 
So this pretty much confirms how much a pile of this is. If this makes more money then The Dark Knight then I will throw myself off a cliff. And sadly, given the average American moviegoers taste in movies, I may end up doing just that.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 07-01-2008, 05:54 AM:
 
It has every chance of taking what The Dark Knight will take...

...and if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you. Lovely views of Sydney Harbour.


 

---

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 07-01-2008, 05:56 AM:
 
I guess I'll be the first to say that I liked it more then I hated it. What I can't wait for is the Blu-Ray, the cut of the movie they first to took to the MPAA was 2hrs 25 mins. It also got a hard R. There is so much that this movie could of been, and it will be on Blu-Ray. Will Smith did a good job and so did Bateman, but boy did Charlize Theron look good. The first two and half reels of this movie were great. Good laughs, good story and good acting. The acting and the laughs didn't really slow down much after the third reel but the editing to make this movie a pg 13 really cut the story to death.

I will see it again with the GF and then I will see the BLU-Ray when that comes out.

3.5/5
 

---

Posted by Ben Goodman (Member # 4770) on 07-01-2008, 02:25 PM:
 
Okay, first of all, the movie the trailers promised was not the movie delivered. With that said...

The story in the first half of the movie was interesting, but I do not think the writing or execution was very good. All the characters were super-shallow and everything was so typically hollywood. You can really tell it in the music too-- things just seemed so contrived.

The second half of the movie had a MISERABLE story. I did not like one thing about it and I do not think it was executed very well. Maybe with the extra hour of footage (which you can really tell was missing) the movie would be good. Instead, it feels like nothing is really drawn out to its proper conclusion, things jump around, and it just isn't satisfying. There are some visceral scenes, but if you turn your brain on, you won't like what it has to say.

The ending sucked.

The acting was pretty good, and I mean, the actors did the best they could with the material they were given. I just think this movie was beneath all of them.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 07-01-2008, 10:52 PM:
 
Liked the first half, then it just takes WTF turn. There must have been some plot points that were cut to get the PG-13 rating.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-02-2008, 10:39 AM:
 

quote: Jeremy Weigel

---

WTF turn

---

That's a good term. It happens in a lot of summer movies. The most blatant Will Smith example is "Independence Day." Started out scary and menacing, ended up goofy. Fist fighting with the aliens? Uploading a virus to their computers? Come on.

I propose we use "the WTF Turn" as a trademarked Film-Tech review term.
 

---

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 07-02-2008, 01:03 PM:
 
I, too, was worried about how much this movie had to be cut in order to get a PG-13, but I don't think all the R-rated material in the world could save it. The problem is not what's missing, but what's there to begin with.

Like everyone else, I enjoyed the first half quite a bit. But then the movie becomes something else. Something stupid.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-02-2008, 01:12 PM:
 
I hope they put Will Smith's universal line of dialogue "awwwwww hell no" that is in every one of his movies back in the DVD edit. It's like Samuel Jackson's "motherfucker". It just has to be there.
 

---

Posted by Ross Oba (Member # 3433) on 07-02-2008, 02:42 PM:
 
The closest he came was during the train scene when he said "Awwwww sh*t"
 

---

Posted by Mark Strube (Member # 4190) on 07-03-2008, 03:48 PM:
 
I must say this movie disappointed me. The last trailer that came out really gave me some hope for this one. It started out strongly, and I definitely appreciated the dark humor throughout, but beyond that it became typical very quickly. Even the action scenes weren't all that great. I was bored.

Also, did anyone else notice that it doesn't look like this movie was shot with scope in mind? It seems almost as if they originally intended on a flat release and then last minute they were told it must be scope since it's summer action. Scene after scene I felt like the composition just sucked. Anyone else?
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 07-04-2008, 10:14 AM:
 
When I opened the 'Fox Box' - - I kept looking for another reel. "Only 5???" I kept saying to myself. I checked the label on the box 2 make sure that's all there was.

The manager came up into the booth to drop of some advertising trailers right after I finished making up the Hancock print.
It looks kinda small sitting there on the platter.
He took one look and said "Is that IT????"
"Yep," I replied' "and half the last reel is credits".
It is kinda short for a summer 'blockbuster'-
but then again I don't think being longer would have made it any better.
 

---

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 07-04-2008, 05:04 PM:
 
CINEMA: 13th Avenue Warren, Wichita, KS
AUDITORIUM: 14
PRESENTATION: Dolby Digital Cinema DLP/THX
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: None
RATING: Three stars (out of four)

WARNING: "Call me a Spoiler...one more time."

"THIS IS YOUR VOICE OF THE THEATRE" comes on and says something about it being Independence Day, and asks us to listen to a few words from Johnny Cash. We hear his "Ragged Old Flag". Then they throw in the Mormon Tabernacle Choir's "I Pledge Allegiance to the United States" before the curtain rises.

Warren has their own "Policy/Coming Attractions" and "Feature Presentation" snipes in their digital auditoriums now. They're pretty nice. Far nicer than the crappy Pike Productions ones running in the 35mm houses (which are ALWAYS fuzzy, even when everything else isn't).

THE PLOT: An alcoholic superhero gets an image makeover. Wackiness ensues.

I'm not sure why they decided to go the route they did during the second half of the movie, but I still thought it was better than I've seen others saying. The first part of the movie was just great. I suppose the whole movie might have even reached instant classic status if they'd continued on that route.

Either way, Will Smith played the hell out of that role.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 07-05-2008, 12:35 AM:
 
Did anyone else notice the walking "rock lord" type creature in the background in the big fight scene with the twin tornadoes?
 

---

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 07-05-2008, 02:53 AM:
 
THe thing in the background was a guy on stilts that walks on sunset blvd. Not a creature. You can see him before the twisters show up in the background.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 07-08-2008, 10:18 AM:
 
I agree the half way story change was out there and damn annoying, but I kind of figured it out once 'said' character was introduced. I also couldn't stand the constant extreme closeup shots of the actor's faces - that got grating real fast.

I thought the 5.1 soundmix was pretty un-inventive as well. When compared to say 'Incredible Hulks' soundmix which was bombastic, LOUD and intense, here 'Hancock' is terribly lacking.

[ 07-08-2008, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: Jonathan Goeldner ]
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-08-2008, 05:50 PM:
 
Who is the asshole who decided that this would be the main poster for the movie?



This is one of the worst posters I have ever seen! He looks like a bug. A bug with fake stubble that is puckering up to kiss me! Oh wow, that sure does make me want to see this movie!
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-08-2008, 05:57 PM:
 
Agreed, that is a bad teaser poster at best.

Although if the poster showed him flying through the air drunkenly, the way he does in the trailer, that wouldn't be much of a sell either. (I haven't seen this movie yet.)
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 07-08-2008, 06:54 PM:
 
That is such a bad poster.

He looks like he has a sour lolly in his mouth.
 

---

Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 07-12-2008, 12:04 AM:
 
I loved it.
The editing down they did for the PG-13 rating made it feel too rushed and choppy, and I think that contributes to the WTF turn halfway through.

SPOILERS

I almost think that this might have been better as two movies.
The first where Hancock turns from the depressed, crude, jerk of a hero into what he was really supposed to be and his wife is revealed at the end.
The second would be where they battle each other and he learns about his origins and realizes why they have to stay separate.
That would probably not be a very good movie on its own though, so it's probably best left as one movie, but with the original footage left in.

END SPOILERS

I did appreciate that this was not just some slapstick hero Summer comedy people were expecting from the trailers.
There were bonuses in the lessons that can be taken away from the movie.
Unlike some of the hero movies I've seen, this one actually had a story.

Brad was wrong.
I'll see this again, but may wait for the original cut on DVD.
 

---

Posted by Louis Belloisy (Member # 3836) on 07-14-2008, 11:09 AM:
 
The poster is terrible, his mouth looks like the south end of a dog heading north

Louis
 

---

Posted by David Alexander B (Member # 4862) on 07-16-2008, 04:11 PM:
 
HANCOCK sound was utterly disappointing in bass and dynamics

can anyother confirm?
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-04-2008, 03:05 PM:
 
I thought this was pretty good. Will Smith played against his usual summer persona and, as noted above, Charlize Theron looked ex-cell-ent! I was surprised at the "plot twist" which, for once, was not in the trailers! (At least, not in the ones I've seen.)

I liked the way Hancock would tell people to "call me that one more time" before kicking their butt. It reminded me of the old Steve Martin film "Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid" in which his character would go ballistic at the phrase "cleaning woman."

I thought the sound was good, especially the big symphonic buildup near the end. It sounded like a live orchestra in the theatre. I did notice this soundtrack was recorded a bit softer than normal - we usually run most movies at 6.0, but ran this one at 6.4.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 08-04-2008, 03:58 PM:
 

quote:

---

This is one of the worst posters I have ever seen!

---