In any case, all video materials are presented in 1080/AVC MPEG-4 video with optional Spanish, Portugese, Chinese, and Korean subtitles. There is no commentary, deleted scenes, or the like, which suggests Sony may be planning a double-dip of this one in the future. Given 'Hancock's $200 million-plus domestic gross, I expected more substantial extras than we get here. But nothing in 'Hancock' works, and this is a case of a movie that is far, far less than the sum of its parts. To be fair, at least 'Hancock' is ambitious in idea if not execution, and the idea of a superhero satire that isn't an outright parody was a good one. (Even in its unrated form here, the film has no real bit or subversive wit.) It's amazing that so much talent, time, and money was put into a script that's so poorly constructed and confused in its intentions. This is the kind of unsuccessful film that isn't so bad its good, nor does it even have enough memorable moments that you can call it a laudable failure. 'Hancock' has a runtime of only 90 minutes, but for me it felt like three hours. Too bad he and Smith developed such a great comedic chemistry, as their relationship is so quickly tossed aside for all the predictable action and villain elements that it never has time to mature.
Bateman is certainly the best part of the film, as he manages to create a genuine and three-dimensional personality, despite the lameness of the script. She's simply too beautiful for such a dull role, and the character has absolutely no bearing on the eventual narrative events or the story's outcome. Theron is also woefully miscast, and misplaced. Marsan is a forgettable villain, and he never seems plausible - the character has been shoe-horned in clearly because the film needs an antagonist and nothing more. Conveniently, thrown into the mix is a revenge-minded bank robber (Eddie Marsan), who will prove just the ticket to get Hancock back in the world's good graces.Īlas, little of this complex plotting works. So he concocts a plan to help Hancock do his own little celebrity rehab for his crimes, in the hopes of convincing the public (as well as Ray's beautiful wife, played by Charlize Theron) that he's once again worthy of admiration.
Ray has suffered in life due to many unfortunate events, and sees Hancock's rehabilitation as an opportunity for his own redemption. Hoping to rescue his pathetic public image, Hancock turns to idealistic PR man Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman). Too bad, then, than 'Hancock' doesn't stick with this narrative approach, but instead deep-sixes itself with lame subplots and a poor villain. Here Smith recalls the youthful enthusiasm of his early "Fresh Prince" days, and seems to be having more fun than he's had in any of his other recent roles. The beginning parody sequences of 'Hancock' are the most fun, as Smith revels in playing this sad sack of a superhero (one particularly inspired sequence sees Hancock attempting to save a beached whale). Instead, he's the equivalent of an alcoholic clown, one who is always getting into trouble with the broads and booze, as likely to inspire a lawsuit by the public as hope and optimism. The first third of the film is the best, as we're introduced to Hancock (Smith), a cynical and downright lazy superhero who apparently didn't get the memo that he's obligated to embrace his superpowers and social status for the betterment of mankind. Though not a complete fiasco, this must certainly rank as one of the biggest disappointments of the year. Alas, 'Hancock' just doesn't gel - it fails as a superhero film, it fails as a comedy, it fails as an action film, and it fails as some sort of didactic statement on heroism. Plus, it's directed by Peter Berg ('The Kingdom,' 'Friday Night Lights'), who one would think could bring a fresh, edgy sensibility and dark comedic spin to a genre that's sorely in need of a little post-modern skewering. It's got a nifty idea that's ripe for pop culture satire - a failed superhero who shirks his responsibilities as a man of virtue and valor - and mega-star Will Smith in the lead. It's a shame when a film comes along with such a sure-fire concept, only to squander almost all of its opportunities.