Hancock

Honestly, the most difficult review I’ve had to write this year so far is for Hancock, Will Smith’s latest film. The whole project just feels odd – not bad by any means, but definitely odd.

Essentially Hancock is a darkly comic superhero film. Although he can fly, has limitless strength, and is completely invulnerable, title character Hancock is no Superman. He has a drinking problem, dresses like a bum, is permanently grouchy and has nothing but contempt for the Los Angelinos he is frequently called on to rescue. Hancock still gets the job done, but his “Don’t give a shit” attitude means he usually leaves millions of dollars’ worth of destruction in his wake.


Enter public relations executive, Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman), who accepts the challenge of changing Hancock’s image in the eyes of the public, who despise him. This includes Ray’s wife Mary (Charlize Theron, looking absolutely stunning).

Apart from some horribly fake-looking CGI, and the fact that the trailer has already given away many highlights, Hancock’s opening scenes are actually very enjoyable. Will Smith and the filmmakers have a lot of fun subverting the stereotype of the virtuous superhero – Hancock uses his powers on anyone who annoys him, and, in one of the film’s funniest moments, backchats ungrateful citizens with brutal honesty.

The film trundles happily along, thanks largely to Will Smith’s appealing performance. As much as the character of Hancock tries to come across as unlikeable, it’s almost immediately obvious that a lot of his indifference is feigned, and deep down he’s a decent if lonely being driven by a desire to help others.

At a certain point though the movie makes a hairpin change in direction (a girl in front of me in the cinema actually yelled out “Shit!” when the big revelation occurred), and the film’s humorous, gently touching character study is obliterated. It’s replaced instead with tornadoes, explosions and a largely nonsensical theory about gods and superheroes that is full of gaping holes.


Worst of all, the film has no real resolution. Of course, there’s a big final battle, but the film makers seem to wimp out at moments where sacrifice would add some much needed emotional resonance, and logic, to the film. In the end the character of Hancock seems to achieve some kind of acceptance of his nature, but it’s not a satisfying happy ending.

Perhaps if Hancock had been R-rated instead of PG-10 it might have been more daring in terms of its unconventionality, and less prone to falling back on genre staples when its writers found themselves boxed into a narrative corner. As it currently stands the film really is a mixed bag, and the last impression audiences receive is that the film makers didn’t quite know how to wrap up what they started so strongly.