Review: Hancock

Hancock

OPENING DATE: 07/02/2008

STUDIO: Sony

TRAILER: Trailer

ACCOMPLICES: Official Site

The Charge

There are heroes. There are superheroes. And then there’s…

Opening Statement

Despite its powerful box office showing, Hancock has taken some beatings by critics, lambasting the film for being flimsy and poorly written with a catastrophically fatal second act. If you ask me, the only thing Hancock is guilty of is being misleading. Audiences have become soft and comfortable with their “Will Smith + July 4th weekend” combination, time-tested and proven over the years, and many walked into theaters with firm expectations of what they were seeing. Much to this reviewer’s delight, Hancock delivers something else entirely.

Facts of the Case

The city of Los Angeles has itself a superhero protector: Hancock (Will Smith, Independence Day). He isn’t much of a superhero, unfortunately. Hancock lives like a homeless bum, drinks constantly, and has little care for those around him. Any act of so-called “superheroism” is almost accidental on his part, and ends up causing more financial damage to the city infrastructure as to greatly outweigh any good deed he does.

After Hancock saves the life of PR expert Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman, Arrested Development) he thanks the unpopular superhero the only way he can: offer his services. Together, they try to better Hancock’s public image and get to the root of his anti-social behavior, much to the dismay of Mary (Charlize Theron, Monster), Ray’s wife. Hancock is barely tolerant of the experiment, but deep down cannot deny his own tormented feelings on the subject. Despite his bravado and angry exterior, he yearns for acceptance and laments his unique status in the world. He has no idea who he is or where he came from, but perhaps he can find a place in this world.

The Evidence

With a tight running time of barely ninety minutes, Hancock wastes little time in getting to business. Its first act plays out in style and aplomb, and every trailer cut for the film is taken exclusively from this material: down-and-out unpopular superhero man causing more trouble and financial damage than benefit, and a hapless PR agent determined to bring him into the spotlight. The laughs flow easily, the jokes are numerous, and everyone has a great time. Then the director flips the light switch, turns off the comedy, and the film gets dark, depressing and melancholy, riding out a wave of angst into its finale. This unexpected twist no doubt derailed more than a few audience members and critics alike, simply because it is so unexpected—we have seen superhero film before (maybe not drunk, surly ones) and we know how they play out. The delight in Hancock comes from this twist of our expectations, of manipulating a genre film into an unexpected direction. It might feel like a dramatic shift in direction, but it is a delightful and refreshing change of pace in a summer filled with big-budget predictability.

Smith would have a gigantic grin plastered upon his face the entire time in Hancock, had the part not required him to scowl and look surly throughout. A drunken, surly, swearing asshole, he clearly relishes the part, playing into every bitter moment. This is probably the closest Smith will ever get to a villainous role in his entire career, and he knows it. He is jaded, unpopular and crass, and the role fits him surprisingly well, especially during the more somber denouement where his emotion surfaces. Jason Bateman plays exactly the same straight man/sardonic role he has played in every movie and television series since his career revival and it is still fabulous. You might have no idea that Charlize Theron is in Hancock based on the trailers, but she is, and the first act largely ignores her. The second act is her place to shine, but the less said about this, the better. No spoilers, you see.

Though all the good action bits are housed entirely in the first act (and conversely, in the trailer) director Peter Berg has crafted a stunning visual film, full of superb composition and stylish cinematography. Cameras rocket wildly and violently through the air along with Hancock, who does not fly as much as careen explosively from place to place, destroying everything in his path. Colors are lush and vibrant, and the special effects are impressive throughout. Much of Los Angeles gets destroyed single-handedly by Hancock, and the illusion has been sold—nothing looks artificial, excessively phony or unbelievable. My only gripe is the PG-13 rating, which tones down the film’s natural dark tendencies somewhat, especially in the later act. The violence (such as it is) is tapered and watered down.

A complex film Hancock is not, but it veers to the left enough to disorientate the casual viewer. The intrinsic nature of the film lies not in the plot, which is bone-dry simple, but in the emotional complexity of Hancock and the characters’ lives he wrecks. Hancock is less a superhero film about a superhero, and more an action film about a normal man who wakes up one day and finds himself able to fly and destroy everything in sight. There is nothing inherently superheroic about Hancock, which is exactly what makes the film so much fun. After all, Superman never drank this much; if he did, maybe Superman Returns would have been, you know, fun to watch, and not so painfully boring.

I love when a film defies my expectations—I went into Hancock weighed down by negative reviews and boredom, and came out delightfully stimulated and entertained, thoroughly taken aback at the unexpected adventure. Not everyone is going to have this reaction, but do not let the bad reviews fool you: Hancock may be the most underappreciated film this summer for those with open minds. Nobody’s going to be winning any Oscars for this one, but that’s okay—at the end of the day, all you can ask for a summer blockbuster is to not insult your brain, and to deliver enough entertainment to get your money’s worth. On both fronts, Hancock delivers. You get the best of both worlds: enough CGI eye candy, exploding vehicles, chaos and destruction to whet your action appetite, and a pensive, brooding tale of love, self-worth and destiny to stimulate the brain.

The Rebuttal Witnesses

There is admittedly a fine line between bad story writing and plot twists, and Hancock dances this line during its dramatic gear-change midway through the film. Critics were universally critical of this shift, and to be fair, the criticism is not without merit. Hancock runs short and fast, and not much time can been given to developing subtle character development. Hancock is a one-dimensional sketch of an asshole, and he moves from surly to superhero awfully fast, almost unbelievably so.

Simply put, audiences are asked to take a leap of faith in Hancock, in putting aside their expectations of what a summer blockbuster film should be. Taken at face value, Hancock is a surprisingly fun and introspective film, one with soul and passion, but one that fails to deliver on unspoken promises. The trailer advertised the film quite clearly as a superhero adventure, and frankly, there isn’t much of that in Hancock.

Genre films are dangerous things to flip on their heads. Twist them a bit, and you add new refreshing life into a genre stale with convention… but change them enough, and all you end up doing is irking the fans of the genre that piled into the theater and dropped their hard-earned money, expecting to see one thing and getting another thing altogether; something Hancock gets perilously close in doing.

Closing Statement

For people who want to see a rip-roarin’, high-falutin’ superhero film, watch the trailer to Hancock on repeat and save yourself ten dollars—all the good bits are there. The second act will just piss you off. For everyone else that likes a splash of soul and brain in their movies, Hancock is refreshingly fun; an unexpected and entertaining affair full of hubris and introspection.

The Verdict

Surprisingly good.

8/10

• “”>