Hancock

I could hear the sounds in my head: CRASH! KABOOM! BANG! WHOOOOPS! They sounded remarkably like a movie plot derailing from its tracks. Kinda like the train that drunken superhero John Hancock (Will Smith) crashes in order to save PR rep Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman). Follow this metaphor: if the train represents the plot, then Hancock himself represents the unnecessary plot twist. When Hancock steps in front of the train, it completely demolishes the locomotive and prevents it from any further smooth traveling. Not only was there so much more that the train could have seen, but the distance it had already traveled was just a happy buildup to a disaster waiting to happen.

But I'm getting ahead of myself, so let's shift it back. Hancock starts out with genuine comedic gold. That is, Will Smith portraying a curmudgeonly, inebriated superhero that leaves more damage in his wake than is necessary. When he stops three bank robbers in a high-speed car chase, he causes $9 million in damages to the city of Los Angeles. Therefore, in a unique spin on the superhero genre, he is actually an unwanted superhero, and he generally does not care about what or whom he saves.

Sample dialogue:
Jeering woman: "I can smell that liquor on your breath!"
Hancock: "'Cause I been drinkin', bitch!"

Then things take a turn. He saves idealistic PR rep Ray Embrey in the aforementioned train collision, for which Ray decides to repay Hancock by changing his public image from one of resentment to one of responsibility. When Hancock meets Ray's wife Mary (Charlize Theron), she gives him a strange, lingering look of...well, she looks like she knows something. Meanwhile, Ray decides to allow Hancock to be arrested for all his outstanding warrants in order to show the public that Hancock takes responsibility for his carelessness. Initially apprehensive, Hancock goes to jail and learns how to say "Good job" to policemen. After a few days, Ray's plan pays off when the LAPD calls on Hancock to stop a violent bank robber. He does...in a very Superman-ly kind of way. (There is even a sample of the Superman theme in this scene.) All of this setup is hunky dory, enjoyable, and even hilarious at times; although, I had a hard time forgiving the tasteless scene in which Hancock punishes a couple of cellmates who clearly don't know what he can do.

And then...it all comes crashing down. A little over halfway through, the plot twist arrives, and all that terrific buildup is rendered useless. Everything that follows it is melodramatic and cliche. Any time a movie shifts from comedy to drama at the midway point, it's a sign that something must have gone wrong somewhere in the writing...or maybe the directing. It almost seems that the second half of the movie could have also been funny, but it was acted straight. Every line, every facial expression, every lighting scheme - all shot as if the movie were a character drama. And I just don't understand why. I don't know why Hancock had to step in front of that train.

Theron can not play comedy, although her scenes with Bateman are especially good, considering the two have played a (slightly mismatched?) couple before in Arrested Development. Smith starts out as an unshaven slob, and when he cleans up he looks like...Will Smith in Independence Day. Or I Am Legend. Or I, Robot. After he loses the edge of the first half of the movie, he loses the interest of the audience. Bateman, too, goes from hilarious to sappy. But like I've already said, all these problems are brought on by the destructive revelation at the halfway point.

I suppose Hancock will open to big - maybe even huge - box office numbers. I concede that the moviegoing public's taste has degraded. I have a friend who dismissed my warnings by insisting that, "as long as we get to see Will Smith prancing around for a couple of hours and maybe a few car crashes and some pretty people on screen, it will be worth the price of admission. I don't want to think when I'm watching a movie." Okay, then. I suppose it has come down to a shallow appreciation for attractive movie stars and pointless special effects to please us. But even movies with pretty people and car crashes can be decent films - Wanted, for example. Hancock is just an exercise in frivolity - a movie that verges on insulting us with its ridiculous tone shifts and completely arbitrary explanations as to why the story backpedals for a good half hour. And the ending is so obviously a last-minute change brought on by unfavorable test audience reactions. I can just hear Joe Filmgoer saying, "Movies must end happily, dammit! This isn't real life!" Indeed, it isn't, Joe. Indeed, it is not.

VERDICT:
Hancock is not a good movie. If anything, it is merely a star vehicle for Will Smith, who is admittedly entertaining in, at least, the first half of the movie. It is a very short film - mercifully so. But it is weak - there is such promise in the setup that just is not delivered. The twist in Hancock is not the kind that delights with its unexpectedness - it is the kind that is added in an attempt to make the movie more than what it should be. Unfortunately, the sudden shift in tone snaps the film in two, and, like Hancock himself, leaves a messy trail of debris. Even a superhero couldn't save this disaster.

So should you spend your money?
Absolutely not. Don't shell out two gallons' gas worth of dough for this dreck. Don't pay for a disappointment. A very generous 4/10.