IMDb user comments for
Hancock (2008) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 50:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

494 comments in total

---

266 out of 390 people found the following comment useful :-
Classic case of great idea, mediocre execution. Strong performances are marred by weak CGI and a lack of a central villain., 1 July 2008

Author: Spy_v2009 from United States

Will Smith. That's all you've got to say, and you're guaranteed a big opening at the box office. Well, from the looks of it, Smith also guarantees you at least a mildly entertaining film, which is what we get in his latest movie, Hancock. In the hands of any other leading star, Hancock would probably end up being a below average film. It's Smith's charisma, charm, and unwavering likability that ultimately save the film. He can make you laugh, cheer, cry, and even root for his character (who is a total ass, as he is reminded a number of times throughout the movie) no matter what kind of shenanigans he may cause.

Hancock is not the generic superhero film and is probably one of the more ingenious ideas to come across a producer's desk in quite some time. To me, what it seems like is that the writers of the film loved the idea, started off extremely strong, and then began to realize that how hard it is to sustain a simplistic idea over the course of a full length motion picture (and it is because of this that Hancock is relatively short). The writers' plan to solve this problem is to throw in a totally unnecessary and badly handled plot twist to keep the audience guessing. The lack of a central villain also hurts the movie a lot. The character that serves as Hancock's enemy in the finale isn't even well acted. The person is laughable.

This is an action movie, so it should come as no surprise to see well done and original action in the movie. However, I felt the effects could have used a few more weeks of polishing in the editing room. The camera is also quite crampy. I also have problems with the film's score, as it does not add an epic feeling to the film like it should have. I felt like something was missing in the climax of the film (which is not the end). The action scenes, while entertaining and original, were not long enough to engage the audience like say, The Incredible Hulk, nor were they as jaw dropping as those in Wanted.

The film's strength rides on its three stars. Action veterans Will Smith and Charlize Theron both deliver winning performances as usual, and that should come as no surprise. Smith's charisma is enough to make anyone happy, and it's so easy to see why so many people love him. Theron is always a sight to behold (except in Monster, lol), and this film is no different. I enjoyed her performance the most, especially in the second act and the beginning of the third. Jason Bateman, who seems to be the bridge connecting the performances of Smith and Theron, is great as usual, and likable, marking a change from his recent turn in "Juno". There really isn't another performance to note, and part of Hancock's weakness is that there are really only three main engaging characters. It should also be noted that the kid who played Bateman's son was absolutely adorable.

Hancock is the classic case of great idea, and mediocre execution. I can see this idea being remade years from now, and pulled off even better. It's not a fault of Peter Berg, the film's director, as the real weakness is in the screenplay, which falters after an excellent and wonderful opening act. It's not a bad film by any means, nor is it great. It's in between "okay" and "good".

---

256 out of 372 people found the following comment useful :-
Not your typical "superhero" movie, but still good, 1 July 2008

Author: KoondoggSaints from Brazil, Indiana

I was lucky enough to go to a pre-screening of Hancock last night and I really enjoyed it. I don't understand all of the criticism this movie is receiving. Everyone take a second and realize this is not a Marvel or DC comic book superhero movie. Now think about that again. It is a different story entirely and has some very unique elements.

Hancock isn't action packed. It doesn't have a Superhero vs. Supervillan plot. I would probably describe it as a character study of the superhero. I think this movie does a better job of addressing some of the issues (and vices) a superhero probably would have if they existed today. The biggest conflict in the movie is within Will Smith's character's attitude, not necessarily good vs. evil.

I think much of the criticism I have read about is motivated by expectations that were not met, which isn't fair at all. If you watch Hancock with only the expectation of being entertained, you will leave happy. Its a good movie, don't jump on the bandwagon of not liking it just because you can. Give it a chance and take it for what it is, a July 4th action/comedy.

---

157 out of 257 people found the following comment useful :-
Not bad!, 5 July 2008

Author: Tim Burrell (tim-2342) from Toronto, ON, Canada

Lots of people, including the critics, are ragging on this film. Seriously, what did they expect? It's a Hollywood blockbuster with Wil Smith in. Get over it, turn your brain off, and sit back and enjoy the ride.

For what it was, I thought it pretty good. It was entertaining, took a unique take on the superhero thing, and didn't have an overt number of huge gaping plot holes or completely blithe dialog.

If you're feeling like a Wil Smith movie, go for it. It's not as bad as they say... just don't expect any more than the typical Hollywood affair.

---

169 out of 290 people found the following comment useful :-
Solid popcorn flick, 8 April 2008

Author: BlackHawk847 from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I saw the movie tonight and enjoyed it a lot so here's my take:

Pro's:

Good special effects (even though there not all done)

Excellent hour and fifteen minutes (the movie is probably 100 minutes in length if I had to estimate the pacing in that time period was spot on)

Good combination of humor and action (I'd say more humor though say in the vein of Beverely Hills Cop, which had a good mix of humor and action) Will Smith nails the character (even if the character goes through a number of sudden changes out of nowhere)

Even though there weren't as many action sequences as expected they all were pretty memorable especially a fight between Hancock and another superhero (I won't spoil it)

A really good twist that I didn't see coming at all (when you see it you'll understand)

Cons: The villain wasn't fleshed out at all in any way (they really didn't need to have one in the first place and could have changed a few of the last scenes)

The last 25 minutes shifted more into a drama and didn't totally fit the character of Hacock of the first hour of the movie

Charleze Theron didn't have much to work on for the first forty-five minutes besides not liking Hancock

The relationship of Jason Bateman's character, Ray and his wife Mary isn't fully fleshed out and the chemistry isn't all there (towards the end Will Smith has better chemistry with her and there scenes together are juicy and easily the best parts of the last twenty five minutes)

Overall I'd give the film an 8.5/10 because it was an innovative look at a superhero other then all the Batman's and Supermen we're given a truly conflicted character who isn't fully invincible. There are many quotable scenes, funny moments, and good special effects that you haven't seen in other movies before. I expect this film to make a lot of money at the box office this summer and please many Will Smith fans along with action fans or people who are looking for a solid popcorn flick.

---

290 out of 539 people found the following comment useful :-
Fix the final Act PLEASE!!!, 8 June 2008

Author: cmcmanus60 from United States

I also was at the test screening in Peoria AZ. The film was spot on for the first hour. Jokes were hitting left and right, Smith and Bateman displayed good chemistry, and the special effects, though not always finished, were eye popping nonetheless.

Without giving it away, the final half hour was flat, straying from the comical nature that had preceded it and instead tried to get philosophical and introduce a week paint'by'numbers villain. I spoke with director Peter Berg after the film and he seemed fully aware of the issues relating to the final act. Hopefully the recent "re shoot" will polish up that last act, making Hancock one of the must see blockbusters of the summer. In the form I saw it; it still has a ways to go.

---

124 out of 217 people found the following comment useful :-
I guess some people just can't take a switch in tone., 5 July 2008

Author: The_Dead_See from Wisconsin

I've read a lot of the reviews here complaining about the film flagging in its final act. I respectfully disagree.

Hancock is most definitely DIFFERENT in it's last half - it drops off the comedy significantly and introduces some fascinating superhero mythology that is almost like an ancient Greek myth in its context. It also introduces some pretty tense and violent moments that really made me wonder if they should be marketing it as the kid-friendly summer blockbuster that they are. However, both halves have their own merits - the first being the humour, and the second being the (almost tragic) origin mythos. I suspect if you are prepared for the switch in tone, rather than shocked when it arrives, you might enjoy Hancock as much as I did.

---

93 out of 169 people found the following comment useful :-
About a superhuman who is just very human, 5 July 2008

Author: from United States

Hancock was a pretty interesting as well as entertaining movie. It definitely wasn't your typical superhero movie; and it wasn't originally a DC or Marvel comic. It's more about what would happen if someone with superheroes was around in modern times, and that is what makes it interesting. If there's some property damage done while catching criminals, people will be angry; if a vigilante has a bad attitude, people will be angry. I suppose Batman explores some of that not being liked by the public, as well as the bad attitude and personal trauma of the hero, but I found Hancock to be quite original in its handling of these issues. I liked the media attention and the use of sunglasses as a "mask" of sorts. I really liked how Hancock progresses as a character, and I liked the other characters as well. Usually little kids in movies annoy me, but the son of the supporting character was pretty cute and endearing. This isn't really a hero movie where there is a superhero and a super villain; I think it's more about what it means to be a human and relate to other people, to do good things and the desire to be accepted. I think the best part of Hancock is that it's about a superhuman who is just very human. It was a lot of fun.

---

23 out of 32 people found the following comment useful :-
Bright intentions, mediocre work, 2 July 2008

Author: Mihnea the Pitbull from Romania

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

ATTENTION, PLEASE! THIS COMMENT IS IN ORDER, IT DOESN'T HAVE AN ABUSIVE CONTENT, SO PLEASE DO NOT DELETE IT (as it happened to other decent comments of my own). THANK YOU!

"Hancock" starts on the right track, only to go wayward soon enough. The main problem is that, although the subject is original and clever, the two writers, Ngo and Gilligan, are definitely not by far intelligent enough to articulate it into a fulfilled script. The story-line is messy and linear, and the intended twists, forced and predictable.

Maybe the worst mistake is that of approaching AGAIN the old trick of the "historic perspective": the super-heroes belong to an immortal and all-powerful race, the so-called "Gods" in mythology, bla-bla! We already saw it in so many movies - and, as a rule, totally compromised! (Remember, for instance, only the most recent "Jumper" or "Alien vs. Predator"!) As if this wasn't enough, they add up another time-spoiled motive: "love with the price of immortality"; incidentally, Eminescu made a better job out of it - and without throwing cars and stranded whales all around the city!). These poor attempts to give "depth" to the story simply don't add-up with the starting context, which is very snappy and funny indeed: the "disabused" hero, fallen into alcoholism and neglect, and his love-hatred relationship with society. THAT angle should have been developed... and we could have had a really good anti-hero comedy, comparable to "Wanted".

Missing that point, we just get with a nice summer entertainment, professionally enough directed and shot. Good to see it once, and forget it directly.

---

104 out of 195 people found the following comment useful :-
Go see it - it's not that bad, 5 July 2008

Author: canadell from United States

*** MAY CONTAIN SPOILER ***

I NEVER write on these opinion boards but I might start with this one. I felt as though I needed to stick up for the movie after reading all the horrible reviews. I went to see it on the 4th, mainly because the trailers looked entertaining and because I enjoy Will Smith. This movie is not at all what I expected. There is a surprising turn of events that I did not see coming. Will Smith, in his usual style, is quick, funny, witty, and charming and I thought the timing between he and Jason Bateman was perfect. If you are expecting to see a movie along the lines of Hulk, Iron Man, Batman, etc, don't go because you won't enjoy it. If you are going because you like the cast and are ready to be entertained for 1 hour and 20 minutes out of your life, then it is definitely worth the price of admission.

---

131 out of 250 people found the following comment useful :-
Will Smith Delivers another Summertime Movie Treat, 30 June 2008

Author: nolarobert from United States

I caught a preview showing of Hancock tonight. I enjoyed it for what it was which is a fun, mostly fast-paced popcorn flick. The writers of the film also tossed in a nice plot twist that I didn't see coming but it turned out to work just fine. This isn't Shakespeare so I don't demand a lot of deep thought just some escapist fun. Will Smith does an excellent job of playing the disinterested superhero with an existential crisis. It was good to see Jason Bateman again but a bummer as well seeing how he has aged. This means I am not so young myself anymore. Jae Head didn't overact nor did the script writers push the "cute" button to the point of being saccharine. It will be interesting to see how this movie performs to see if Smith wants to do a sequel. So I am more than happy to recommend Hancock to fans of the "Summer Blockbuster" and those who enjoy Will Smith.

---

---

Page 1 of 50:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Parents Guide	Official site	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history