Hancock posterMonster not professional writer so not in position to offer advice to whoever wrote dis movie, but me can’t help but feel it obviously a bad idea to change direktion and tone of a skript one hour into its 90 minute running time.  Which be de case wit Hancock.

Will Smith channeling Grover for dis performance.

We introduced to our anti-hero, Hancock.  Drunk, dirty, belligerent, and dangerously clumsy, he reminiscent of Grover when he dated Paris Hilton back in summer of 2007.  Hancock try to do good – stopping crime, saving bystanders – but just can’t seem to get it right.  As a result, public consider him a super-nuisance.  Like viral meme spam, alien scabies, and Donald Trump.

Monster recommend car reps for building strong shoulders.

BUT tings change for Hancock when he save Ray, a PR guy, from getting wiped out by train.  Ray decide Hancock need an image makeover and convince him to start taking responsibility for his aktions.  Hancock make public apology, spend some time in prison and, eventually, redeem himself by stopping crazy bank heist and saving cops and hostages.  He even get new leather outfit for aktion purposes (also reminiscent of Grover in summer of 2007).

New and improved Hancock

It all make for fun viewing.  At which point, for some reason, scripwriters decide dey be tired of dis story and want to make whole other movie.  Cue bizarre late twist dat reveal Ray’s wife, Mary, be a superhero too!

Superlover quarrel.

Hancock and Mary fight.  Why?  Uh…becuz dey have bad tempers? Anyway, it all look very cool as dey tear up city and just happen to land outside hubby Ray’s office building so he can (conveniently) find out de truth about his wife.  She and Hancock former lovers but Hancock not remember becuz he have amnesia.  But dey separated becuz if dey stay together, dey lose deir superpowers.  Which beg de qwestion: If dat de case, why Mary living in de same city?  Why not live on other side of world just to be safe?  Monster hear Japan very nice.

Becuz Hancock hanging around Mary, he no longer invulnerable and get shot.  He rushed to hospital.  Despite fakt dat being together make dem weaker, Mary rush to hospital to see him – at which point vengeful bad guys show up and shoot de place up, hitting her.  Hancock fight bad guys while Mary slowly dying – along wit comedic vestiges of first part of movie.  Hancock beat bad guys and flee hospital – which allow Mary to regain her strength, survive, and get her powers back.

Happy ending for everyone!  Except monster and movie-viewing publik. 🙁

Verdikt: (First hour = 8 chocolate chippee cookies) + (Last 30 minutes = 4 chocolate chippee cookies) divided by 2 + (2 for great performances by all leads) – (1 for annoying kid charakter) =

Rating: 7 chocolate chippee cookies.

19 thoughts on “February 18, 2013: The Supermovie of the Week Club reconvenes! Cookie Monster reviews Hancock!

  1. My thoughts are like yours, Cookie. It seemed like the movie changed course part way through, like there were two ideas that they couldn’t decide between, so they used them both. It’s another example of how there is a germ of a good movie idea that never gets realized. What DOES happen to a superhero who the public comes to expect to save them and ultimately is thankless and even antipathetic. Are they the long-suffering, if unrealistic, Superman or do they just say screw it? What is it really like to be in the situation where you can do *anything*, but no one cares (until they really need you of course)? Would immortality be a blessing, or a curse? The movie comes close once it a while, but it never really gets there. Instead, it veers into the whole reunion with the female superhero melodrama nonsense. I wondered if the whole thing would have had more weight if they had both remained dead. Of course, in commercial movie land, that would be impossible and everyone lives more or less happily ever after.

    I was wondering why she rushed to his bedside too, when she explicitly KNEW that being close would make him weaker. Was she purposely trying to kill him, or what?

    With the train collision, and their relative masses the train shouldn’t have just stop… oh, never mind.

    The little kid at the start looks like a little(r) Brandon Hantz from Survivor. Not a good sign.

    I will admit that there were a few snicker worthy lines, mostly to the credit of Jason Bateman doing his best Michael Bluth deadpan delivery. That reminds me, when are the new Arrested Development episodes available? Sometime in May? Crap, I can’t wait.

    Anyway, in the end it was.. okay.

  2. I must be pretty tolerant, or completely oblivious when it comes to some movies, because I liked this film. Yeah, I’m oblivious. My downfall with many things, I’m told.

    Anyway, much as I believe that Will Smith is far too over used as an actor in virtually everything these days, I liked him in this because he seemed so genuine, something he does not do well in most of his films. The story was cute and aimed, I think, at a younger audience, so I was quite willing to allow for some of the less impressive ideas. For example, I didn’t like how willing everyone was to accept that Hancock had just destroyed part of the family’s house as if it were just a broken window.

    Other than that, I liked it.

  3. @chevron7: That’s not too bad – I figure in Vancouver that 8 mil would barely get you a crack shack in Vancouver! 😉


    As far as that condo goes, I agree with the commenter on that site that said the furnishings in the pictures are completely inappropriate for that style. Cool kitchen, though!

  4. Crud…I can’t read this one because I’ve always wanted to see this movie, but just have never had a chance. Seven cookies doesn’t sound too bad, either.

    Of course, I’m dreading next week’s review. Tell Mr. Cookie not to be too hard on my sweet prince. 😉


  5. So, is this a modern tale of exploring the human or male condition like in such books as “Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde” or “Beauty and the Beast,” etc.?

  6. I liked this film as you don’t really see this type of comedic superhero movie and have it actually work.

  7. Cookie Monster nailed it on the head. i was enjoying this movie in the beginning. Not the greatest humor, but an interesting take on the life of a superhero. Then blame. Suddenly the plot takes a sharp left and goes off a cliff, sans hero to catch it. Ruined the whole movie for me. Mind, I can see how it was difficult to come to a resolution following the original plot. But at least make the effort! When a movie disappoints me that much, forget the cookies. At best, i would score this movie at half the cookies CM does. At worst, 2 cookies max. Thanks for taking the time to get Cookie MOnster to do the review.

  8. This is one of my favorite movies.

    I love the premise. I love how Will Smith played the character. There were such spectacular things happening with a twist of humor to them. It included lots of great stuff. You really just need to say “Will Smith movie” and I know I’ll love it.

    I see Cookie’s point about it changing tone. The later part of the movie wasn’t connected enough with the early part. I’ve heard a good movie ending is one you can’t see coming, but, on looking back, couldn’t see it ending any other way. Well, the last part of the movie did feel like it was velcroed to the first. It could have ended any way just as well as they way it did.

    They could have grounded the plot better into Mary’s story early on. There wasn’t even anything out of the ordinary enough about her reaction to him for it to feel like an epiphany when we found out she knew him. A bit more Mary significance early on is all I would have needed to have considered it a perfectly cohesive movie.

    What about that beautifully tragic rule about them becoming vulnerable near each other? That could have been used all along to cause them to re-meet and for him to find her out.

    The rule was a linchpin to Hancock taking a risk by going out the window to save her so the that gem should have been better honored with consistency from the very beginning. Where the rule’s complications were dealt with head on was awesomeness on a platter, but at times it was simply ignored.

    Did Cookie mean Michele or Aaron for the annoying kid? Well, I liked the presence of both fine. Aaron was a standard only child plot tool. He made us more worried about his adoptive mom dying in exactly the way the immortal was designed to die. Michele was annoying, but his scene demonstrated that Hancock was bonding with Ray’s family in a gloriously dysfunctional way.

    I know superheroes have a variety of origins, but in a world where we never saw a radioactive meteorite, does the revelation that they are ancient gods make it not a superhero movie?

  9. Grover did not date Paris Hilton back in summer of 2007! 🙄 Who told you that Monster? Grover? Oh pleaassseee…and you believed him?

    Chev’s link – Now that’s what I’m talking about Joe when I say, how about a high-rise apartment! Go for it Joe!

    @ Das – you’re #1. 🙂

  10. @ Monster – It took me several minutes to double check your math on your cookie verdikt. I kept getting 5 not 7. Math was never my strong point. Please don’t do that again. 😉

  11. I hated this movie when I saw it in the cinema. Perhaps I was expecting a proper superhero movie rather than an analysis of the psychological pressures of immortality and heroism. Or maybe I was expecting a comedy rather than . . . an analysis of the psychological pressures of immortality and heroism.

    Either way, after a year of overanalysing superhero movies I actually didn’t mind Hancock this time round. The last half of the movie when they started talking about gods and stuff and the whole losing powers for love nonsense was distracting. I also thought that Hancock seemed to emerge from his depression rather quickly and completely . . . especially when he realised he couldn’t be with his soul mate unless he wanted to die.

    And what about poor Jason Bateman who will have to grow old while his wife remains forever young?

    Vince Gilligan was one of the co-writers. He went on to create Breaking Bad so we know that he can write good stuff. Maybe he wrote the first half of the movie and his co-writer wrote the second half. Apparently they decided to do some rewrites to “lighten the mood” hence the two different tones.

    I think 7 cookies is being a bit generous, though. I’d probably give it 5.

  12. I liked Hancock. Hey, two movies for the price of one!

    Grover needs to check under “Paris Hilton’s” skirt. Just saying he needs a little less mystery in his life.

  13. A fun movie. An interesting take on the superhero mythos, and I like new spins on old ideas(Warm Bodies had a new one for zombies, also entertaining). But it’s so nice to have someone else see what I saw: two wholly separate plots in one movie, both cut from any sense of completeness to fit inside a shorter time frame. I also agree, great acting and funny bits saved this movie.

    My only thing I couldn’t get over was Hancock’s new uniform. I’m sorry, but from the first time I saw it until now, all I can see is Black Lightning.


    Honestly, if you took BL’s uniform and “Hollywooded” it up for today, to be taken seriously, it’d look like Hancock’s. Trust me.

    -Mike A.

  14. I’d agree with Cookie on the ratings. I liked this movie but mainly because it was different than I expected it to be.

    Great condo Chevron7! Mr. M. if you’re going to buy that condo, better get those projects going.

  15. I saw this movie, and I think it was even in a theater, but I didn’t retain much of it. But I do remember the superhero wife was a headscratcher. By contrast I could give a blow by blow account of Soldier.

    @gforce They all looked like crack shacks to me so I failed the quiz. But the house on fire must be a real steal now.

    @chevron7 That sub penthouse looks like the apt in Limitless. Very nice, but I hope that’s one way glass on those windows, especially by the bathtub. All of Vancouver will see your rubber ducky if you live there.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.