Wednesday, July 9, 2008

HANCOCK Review. (Spoilers)

When I first saw the "teaser" trailer sometime back in January for HANCOCK I got a little pumped. Here was a cool concept that allows for the now-traditional, multi-million dollar Will Smith July 4th blockbuster, but one with an unlikable antihero that would let Smith and Wizard Michael Mann's apprentice - director Peter Berg - just cut loose with a nasty, R-rated attempt at a dark, stylish comedy about a drunk bum of a superhero teaming up with an idealistic PR man trying to overhaul his image, but much to his chagrin, blah, blah... Yes. Great concept... Co-starring Charlize Theron in anti-MONSTER hotness... Former Wizard Michael Mann project produced by Wizard Michael Mann... Plus it has the newly resurrected Teen Wolf Too, as well. Looked like a classic in the making... How the fuck could it be any less entertaining than say, Men In Black I and II (fuck you, I like MIB II) or Bad Boys I and II levels of entertainment?

Wait a second... 90 minutes... PG-13... Shit, Akiva "I Helped Joel Schumacher Kill Batman" Goldsman is involved? Didn't see that... Rumors of a critical freezeout... Complete and total bomb... Didn't give a shit... Loved the trailer... Saw it anyway...

First off, HANCOCK is great after a couple of beers, and perhaps a shot. What better way to enjoy a movie about a whiskeybent bum with supernatural powers who leaves a drunken trail of destruction wherever he goes? It's like going to see a *ahem* "stoner comedy", er, stoned. For those who do that kind of shit. Like me. So, if there's a bar next to the theater, grab a drink. Get blunted on some shit and go. Shit, take a flask to the picture show with you. Put it in your sock. Just remember to call a cab, or your mother if you got dropped off...

When we find our anti-superhero, John Hancock, he's asleep on a park bench in downtown LA, hungover, and/or still-drunk. A small towheaded kid, who apparently is either a complete badass with either a Tec-9 in his backpack or Krav-Maga in his head and bones, either that or he has the worst parents in the world, alerts the annoyed Hancock to a phalanx of TVs broadcasting a high speed pursuit along one of LA's bullshit freeways. Hancock and the boy have words, boy calls him an asshole (Hancock's least favorite word btw in a reoccurring joke that gets hella-stale), Hancock explodes into the sky, carrying a handle of what looked like Canadian Club whiskey, which he guzzles en route to catching a carload of Asian gangsters, by the car, eventually hanging said car on the needle of the Capitol Records building while "1-900 Number" (THE GREATEST BREAK EVER) blares on the soundtrack. This scene had me out of my chair, doing the Ed Lover Dance. Recognize. It was lean, mean, and hilarious. This is everything the preview promised. Hell, this WAS the preview. Wait a second...

John Hancock eventually finds himself saving Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman), a ridiculously idealistic company man, and one who finds himself trapped on the railroad tracks (of life), staring into oblivion after he bombs with a ridiculously Capraesque proposal to his company. Hancock happens to stumble across his car while it's trapped by a bunch of typical dickhead LA motorists, and saves his ass from getting demolished by a train. Ray eventually becomes his PR man, and maps out a plan to put him back into favor with the general public, and help him realize his potential, destiny, fate, karma, luck - call it whatever.

Bateman is married to Mary, played by Charlize Theron, in what appears to be the thankless wife role, ends up the catalyst/perceived albatross of the movie, depending on how you look at it. Theron is the third piece that completes the movie's true intent. Her character draws the backstory from Hancock. This tonal shift, and complete 180 into a different movie altogether is what has many people cursing it, and scratching their heads until it snows. I didn't have that big of a problem with it, but it, like that entire last half of the film is too safe, too clean. Wouldn't it have been edgier had Theron been a mortal woman who commits adultery with Hancock, and robs him of his powers that way? That's the movie I had in my head when I saw the trailers.

Make no mistake about this, and I will throw down with anyone about this fact: Theron is great in it. Her reveal is genius, and not that shocking if you pay attention. As soon as she and Hancock trade glances, you know what's going on. You can see it in her eyes from the moment they meet. That is if you've ever seen a movie before in your life. Theron is intense. And hot.

So, is Theron the villain? Is that the "twist"?

No.

If there's a "twist" in HANCOCK, it was that it was a star-crossed romance disguised as a superhero film all along. Now whether this was demographic-pleasin' tampering (got to put something in there for the ladies), or if it was the original course of this long-delayed project, I don't know, but it works for me even though it makes a hard left against traffic and vanishes out of sight, leaving the audience a completely different movie standing in the dust of the first one.

I liked HANCOCK for what it was was walking into the theater (raucous superhero comedy), and respect what it tried to be, boils and all, in the very shaky end: essentially a love triangle with two immortals locked in a 3000-year-old dillema, a mortal everyman caught in the middle, and everyone trying to do battle with their respective destinies and fates and shit. What's so hard about conveying that in 90 minutes? It's not a ridiculous premise, it's just that it feels abridged, hurried. The explanation of who Hancock and Mary truly are is a bit flimsy, but not insulting as some critics have exclaimed (take it easy, fellas). It's a simple tale of sacrifice and destiny: Hancock has lost his way in a sea of booze (and Chad's favorite: AMNESIA) from his true calling as savior/protector, and Mary wants to lay low and be a mother (performing her heroics by "saving" a widower and his son). They can't be together lest they lose their powers, and die as mortals, but together. There's a much more compelling movie in there somewhere, and I don't know what roadblocks kept it out, but as it stands for now, HANCOCK is what it is: a good, semi-adult Summer entertainment that at least tried for something fresh and different.

1 Comments:

Blogger Dr Chaddius Feathermore III said...

Totally agree. I liked it for what it was. It opened strong, took an abrupt turn and seemingly fizzled. It really feels like there was something IN THERE. I can't help but assume studio "magic" got in the way.

July 9, 2008 at 9:33 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home