B10

by Wendy Patterson

Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

Speak Up

Hancock is a very original superhero movie.

Enlarge Photo

I would also say that it's one of the more interesting superhero movies I've seen — despite the fact that the plot ran away with the writer in the second half, it has a lot of good points.

I liked the idea, first and foremost —a "super" person who just isn't that interested in being a hero; who is, in fact, a very flawed character (even more so than Tony Stark at the beginning of Iron Man). Or, as most people in the movie put it, he's an "a**hole."

Really. The guy is a total jerk. If it was a matter of getting rescued by him or dying a nasty death, you'd probably still have to take a moment to think about it. But the thing is, he's so awful you can't help but like him.

Sure, he's rude, he's irresponsible and he's usually thoroughly intoxicated (forget drinking and driving — think drinking and flying). Sure, he lives on the street, never takes a bath and breaks stuff everywhere he goes. But he also terrorizes schoolyard bullies, humiliates obnoxious bad guys and does a number of other things most of us wish we could do at one time or another. And he rescues people, of course, even if he usually causes considerable amounts of collateral damage in the process. He really is a great character.

Hancock (as in "John Hancock" - nice touch, writers) has no secret identity, no cape and no nifty gadgets.

He also has an unusual weakness. No Kryptonite for this dude … he's allergic to other superheroes. Really. And yes, there is more than one superhero in this movie, but if you want to know any more about it, you'll have to see the film for yourself.

So yeah, Hancock is a very unique superhero. He's a rather original main character, period.

And the story, for all its faults, does present a lot of good ideas about superheroes and heroes in general (sometimes what you really need to become a hero is a good public relations guy — who was also a neat character, by the way), and the story of Hancock's origins is pretty interesting. I'm glad he didn't turn out to be from another planet or something overused like that. And of course the movie had a whole bunch of cool stunts and special effects — I was especially delighted when Hancock KO'd the guy with the chocolate bar…

But for all the good things in this movie, the story still fell short. Some of the dialogue didn't help either — "Some call us gods, some angels — we have many names…" Oh, please. More melodrama, anybody? But a few lousy lines do not screw up a movie on their own.

The plot is pretty good in the first half. Darn good, actually, despite a few ill-advised comedy bits (Hancock's way of dealing with the thugs in prison was very funny, but it would have been much funnier if the writer hadn't shown it to us — that sort of thing is better heard and suggested than actually seen). But in the second half you get the impression that the makers of this movie got so wrapped up in the story they couldn't see that it was getting away from them. The second half is not exactly confusing, but it seems to go on long after it should have ended and it gets a little more odd and melodramatic (and less funny) with every twist in the plot. The twists are not predictable, which is good, but still there are too many.

And you know what else there's too much of? Hand chopping. Really. A person can only take so much chopping off of hands (and other body parts) in a two-hour period. It was funny, but like several other things, it was overdone. On the whole I much prefer Batman, who doesn't intentionally mangle people (and the Dark Knight is out this weekend! Yay!)

Anyway, regardless of its failings, I would say Hancock is still worth seeing, if only for a different outlook on superhero pop culture. It is enjoyable, even when it gets silly, and it's a refreshing change from the usual.