Hancock Spoilers !!!!

How "Hancock" Could Have Been a Good Movie…or Two

Will Smith is Mr. July 4th weekend. “Independence Day.” “Men in Black.” To a much lesser extend, “Wild Wild West.” And this year he’s back in multiplexes with another big budget July 4th action movie called “Hancock.” I saw it last night.

“Hancock” is an incredibly frustrating movie because its concept is so damn good. And the story points in the movie only improve on that great idea. But ultimately the film tries to accomplish so much in such a short period of time that it fails miserably. There are some cool moments and some good performances, especially from Big Willie Style, but the film is very disappointing.

However, no matter how mediocre the film is chances are many of you are going to see it this holiday weekend. It’s going to be a monster simply because Will appeals to so many different demographics. So my hypothesis is this. Say it in deep trailer voice guy.

This Fourth of July weekend. MILLIONS of Americans are going to be discussing the same thing. How “Hancock” Could Have Been A Good Movie..or Two.

So let me get the ball rolling first. However to do so I have to delve DEEP into spoiler territory. So if you plan on seeing “Hancock,” you should definitely walk away after this paragraph. But please come back after you’ve seen the movie to see if you agree with my assessment.

Okay - This is your Official Spoiler Warning .

x

It’s spoiler time.

The trailers make it pretty obvious what the film is about. A drunken, depressed superhero looks to change his negative image by using a public relations expert. Wow - what a great idea. The only problem is the film picks up that story right in the middle. When we meet Hancock he’s already drunk and depressed and after two incidents (and a YouTube montage) we just have to buy that he’s been wreaking havoc for a long time.

Why rush this? Because you want to get to the rehab, sure, but if you are starting a superhero franchise, give us more to work with. Isn’t a drunken Hancock far more interesting then a cleaned up one? Wouldn’t it have been cool to have a drunken Hancock save the day and really dig into his psyche?

I know what you are thinking. We DO get more back story. Of course we do. We get it when *DUM DUM DUM* it’s revealed that Charlize Theron is also a superhero! Now, I called this from Trailer 2. The second Hancock says “I’m the only one of my kind” I knew he wasn’t. Plus you see her wearing leather.

But even if you didn’t figure it out before seeing the movie, Peter Berg’s elementary direction gives it away the second she comes on screen. Reaction shot after reaction shot of her being disturbed by Hancock make the reveal almost embarrassing. (And don’t get me started on his liberal use of the circular tracking shot. We get it. The character is confused.)

To me, at the point of the big reveal, “Hancock” almost becomes “Hancock 2″ as he begins to discover who he really is. Theron’s explanation is the stuff of comic book genius too, making the rush job that much more frustrating. Superheroes, as they are now called, were put here by the Gods to keep the Earth safe. An insurance policy.

Each has an opposite that is drawn to one another but when those two come together, the immortal powerhouses slowly become more mortal. Because of their need to love, all the others have died. Except Hancock and Theron. How awesome is that? So awesome in fact that it’s glossed over in about 30 minutes of back and forth banter and action. Ugh.

What if drunk Hancock was one movie, with the reveal of his origin and opposite hero at the end, and the second movie was he and Charlize battling it out while we learn about their torrid love affair over several centuries? How epic do those movies sound? Then, the third film could be the actual inevitable “Hancock 2,” with him in NY and her in LA. Instead, both of these stories are crunched into 92 minutes.

But even if the screenwriters, producers and director were set on making those two stories one movie, they still have a major issue. They don’t know who their audience is. Part of the movie plays to comedy fans while the other half plays to superhero fans and by playing to both audiences, they disrespect both.

For example, any time someone calls Hancock and A-Hole he gets really upset. This happens at least 4 times in the movie. It’s very Marty McFly-ish. But after the second time, the joke just gets tired. And when we find out that Charlize can’t stand people calling her “crazy” it’s down right insulting. Superheroes have flaws, that’s for sure, but verbal bating rarely one of them. That’s the filmmakers trying to be funny but simultaneously letting down superhero fans.

On the flip side, superhero fans love a great origin story. And while we never get specific origin stuff, what we do get is a brief scene teasing the centuries long relationship between superheroes. But we get no flashbacks. What is this, radio? Show us something!

So yeah, if you couldn’t already tell, I was extremely frustrated by “Hancock.” It’s so forced, so rushed and so full of potential. There was definitely a good movie in there - two actually, by my count - but instead we get a mishmash hour and a half that does very little right.

At least superhero fans have “The Dark Knight” and comedy fans have “Tropic Thunder” and “Pineapple Express” to look forward to for the rest of the summer. Those movies know what they are. At least, I hope they do.