Hancock (film) | Hancock Wiki | Fandom powered by Wikia Gross revenue $624,386,746 Hancock is a Template:Fy American action-comedy superhero film directed by Peter Berg and starring Will Smith , Jason Bateman , and Charlize Theron . It tells the story of a vigilante superhero, John Hancock, played by Smith, from Los Angeles whose reckless actions routinely cost the city millions of dollars. Eventually one person he saves, Ray Embrey, played by Bateman, makes it his mission to change Hancock's public image for the better. The story was originally written by Vincent Ngo in 1996. It languished in development hell for years and had various directors attached, including Tony Scott , Michael Mann , Jonathan Mostow , and Gabriele Muccino before going into production in 2007. Hancock was filmed in Los Angeles with a production budget of $150 million. The film was widely released on July 2, 2008 in the United States and the United Kingdom by Columbia Pictures . Hancock received mixed reviews from film critics. To date, Hancock has grossed $624,386,746 in theaters worldwide.

Contents Edit John Hancock is a drunkard with superhuman powers, including supersonic flight, invulnerability, immortality, and super-strength. Although he uses his powers to rescue people and stop criminals, his activities inadvertently cause millions of dollars in property damage due to his constant intoxication and cynical attitude. As a result, he is routinely jeered by the public and is considered a nuisance by the LAPD . Hancock frequently ignores court subpoenas and lawsuits from the city of Los Angeles to address the property damage he has caused. When public relations spokesperson Ray Embrey departs from an unsuccessful meeting pitching his All-Heart logo for corporations that want to be seen as charitable, he becomes trapped on railroad tracks facing collision with an oncoming freight train. Hancock saves Ray's life at the cost of derailing the train and damaging other cars. Hancock is jeered by other drivers for causing more destruction, but Ray steps in and thanks Hancock for saving his life. Ray offers to improve Hancock's public image, and Hancock grudgingly accepts. Ray convinces Hancock to turn himself in for his outstanding subpoenas so they can show Los Angeles how much the city really needs Hancock when they miss him fighting crime and saving lives.

When the crime rate does rise following his incarceration, Hancock is contacted by the Chief of Police to help stop a violent bank robbery. With a new costume from Ray, Hancock is released from jail and makes a triumphant return by rescuing a wounded police officer, and foiling the robbers led by Red Parker. Hancock is applauded for handling the bank robbery and becomes popular once more, as Ray had predicted. He goes out to dinner with Ray and his wife Mary, with whom he reveals his apparent immortality and his amnesia from 80 years ago. After Hancock tucks a drunken Ray in bed, he discovers that Mary also has superhuman powers. He threatens to expose her unless she explains their origins. Mary eventually tells him that they have lived for 3,000 years with their powers, having been called gods and angels in their time. She also explains that they are the last of their kind and are meant to be paired. Mary does not tell Hancock the entire truth, and Hancock departs to tell Ray about the conversation. The exchange results in a battle between Hancock and Mary that takes them to downtown Los Angeles, causing significant destruction to the area.

Ray, downtown in a business meeting, sees and recognizes his wife using abilities like Hancock's. Hancock meets Ray and Mary back at their house. Mary explains that Hancock is technically her husband, explaining that they were built in twos, and that they are drawn to each other over time and great distances. When later intervening in a liquor store robbery, Hancock is shot and wounded. Visiting him at the hospital, Mary explains that when a pair of immortals get close to each other physically, they begin to lose their powers. She also tells him that she and Hancock have been attacked as a couple many times throughout history, most recently being in an alley in Miami 80 years ago. His skull was fractured during the attack, causing amnesia. To save his life at the time, Mary deserted him, allowing him to recover from his injuries. After her explanation, the hospital is raided by the bank robber Red Parker and two other criminals that Hancock had encountered when imprisoned. Mary is shot trying to defend Hancock who, in turn, eliminates the two henchmen, but is further wounded in the process. When Red attempts to finish Hancock off, Ray comes to the rescue and stops the bank robber with a fire axe.

With Mary dying, Hancock uses the last of his strength to flee from the hospital so that their parting would allow them both to heal with their powers. Hancock relocates to New York City , and works as a superhero there. In gratitude to Ray, Hancock paints Ray's All-Heart logo on the moon, giving worldwide advertisement to his cause. Cast Edit Will Smith as John Hancock, an alcoholic superhero. [1] Smith described the character, "Hancock is not your average superhero. Every day he wakes up mad at the world. He doesn't remember what happened to him and there's no one to help him find the answers." [2] Hancock is invulnerable, immortal, possesses superhuman strength , and can fly at supersonic speeds. [3] To give a realistic appearance of superhero flight, Smith was often suspended by wires 60 feet above the ground and propelled at 40–50 miles per hour. [4] Jason Bateman as Ray Embrey, a corporate public relations consultant whose life Hancock saves. Bateman said, "My character sees life through rose-colored glasses so he doesn't understand how people can't see the positive side of Hancock. I like being the everyman.

I like being the tour guide, the one who tethers whatever absurdity might be in a film and helps make that tangible to the audience." [5] Charlize Theron as Mary Embrey, Ray's wife. Theron described Mary, "She makes this conscious decision to live in suburbia and be this soccer mum to her stepson and be the perfect wife—she lives in this bubble. But when people do that it usually means they are hiding some characteristic inside themselves that scares them. That is Mary's case. She knows who she is and what she is capable of. I find it very complex when I get to play women like that." [6] Eddie Marsan as Kenneth "Red" Parker, Jr., a bank robber. Having previously filmed the low-budget Happy-Go-Lucky , Marsan found the transition to the big-budget Hancock to be a shock. Said Marsan, "I went from being in a car with Sally Hawkins in Happy-Go-Lucky to blowing up a bank in downtown LA." [7] Production Edit Template:Quote box Vincent Ngo wrote the spec script Tonight, He Comes in 1996.

The draft, about a troubled 12-year-old and a fallen superhero, was initially picked up by director Tony Scott as a potential project. [8] Producer Akiva Goldsman came across the script, which he had considered a favorite, [9] and encouraged Richard Saperstein, then president of development and production at Artisan Entertainment , to acquire it in 2002. [8] Michael Mann was initially attached to direct Tonight, He Comes, but he instead opted to direct Miami Vice . [9] Eventually, Artisan placed the project in turnaround , and it was acquired by Goldsman. [10] Vince Gilligan and John August rewrote Ngo's script, [11] and Jonathan Mostow was attached to direct the film. Under Mostow's supervision, a 10-page treatment was written to be pitched to actor Will Smith to portray the lead role in the film. Neither Mostow nor Smith was yet committed to make the project an active priority at the time. Several studios pursued the opportunity to finance the film, and Columbia Pictures succeeded in acquiring the prospect in February 2005. A second draft was scripted by Gilligan following the finalization of the deal with Columbia.

The film was initially slated for a holiday 2006 release. [10] In November 2005, Mostow and Smith committed to Tonight, He Comes, with production slated to begin in Los Angeles in summer 2006. [9] Smith had set up a pay or play contract to film I Am Legend under Warner Bros. after completion of Tonight, He Comes. [12] Mostow eventually departed from the project due to creative differences. [13] Italian director Gabriele Muccino filled Mostow's vacancy in May 2006. Since Muccino was busy editing The Pursuit of Happyness starring Smith, which Muccino had directed, Smith switched projects to film I Am Legend first for its December 2007 release, and then film Tonight, He Comes afterward. [14] Later in the month, Muccino left the project because of an incompatibility with filming the story. Since Muccino was preparing The Pursuit of Happyness, the studio had delayed the production start for Tonight, He Comes to summer 2007, enabling Warner Bros. to begin production of I Am Legend with Smith.

[13] Filming File:Hollywood boulevard from kodak theatre.jpg In October 2006, Peter Berg was attached to direct Tonight, He Comes with production slated to begin in May 2007 in Los Angeles, the story's setting. [15] Berg had been midway through filming The Kingdom when he heard about the film and called Michael Mann, who had become one of its producers. [16] The new director compared the original script's tone to Leaving Las Vegas (1995), calling it "a scathing character study of this suicidal alcoholic superhero". The director explained the rewrite, "We thought the idea was cool, but we did want to lighten it up. We all did." [17] Before filming began, Tonight, He Comes was retitled John Hancock, [1] and it was eventually shortened to Hancock. [18] Filming began on Hancock on July 3, 2007 in Los Angeles, [19] having a production budget of $150 million. [11] Locations like Hollywood Boulevard were designed to look damaged, having rubble, overturned vehicles, and fires.

[20] Smith's character is also an alcoholic, so for scenes in liquor stores, the art department designed fake labels such as Pap Smear Vodka for the bottles because "brown-bag brands" like Thunderbird and Night Train refused to lend their names. [21] Reshoots were filmed in Times Square in May 2008, the late date resulting in the cancellation of the film's original world premiere in Australia on June 10, 2008. [2] Visual effects Edit Hancock was Peter Berg's first film with visual effects as critical cinematic elements. [16] He considered the computer-generated fight his least favorite part of the film, citing limited control in making the scene successful. According to the director, "Once the fight starts, you're very limited and you're at the mercy of your effects guys... unless they're really technically oriented... it's definitely the time we have the least amount of control as directors." He and other filmmakers worked to cut down on the fight scene, believing that the film's success would come from the character study of Smith's character, John Hancock, similar to Robert Downey Jr. 's acclaimed portrayal of Tony Stark in the previous May's superhero release, Iron Man .

[17] Visual effects supervisor Carey Villegas described Peter Berg's photography as "very high energy", to which the visual effects crew had difficulty adapting. Though the crew had estimated developing 300 visual effects shot at its initial bid, the final tally was approximately 525 shots. An unexpected shot was a scene in which Hancock shoves a prisoner's head up another's behind, and filmmakers initially attempted to film it conventionally, using sleight of hand techniques with cameras. Finding that doing so did not capture "the vulgarity of the gag", the crew was enlisted to use computer-generated effects. Visual effects were also applied in conjunction with the film's choreography, incorporating palm trees, twisters, and debris in the computer-generated fight scene and combining visual effects with a crane shot to portray Hancock's derailment of a freight train. [22] Release Edit The New York Times noted that Hancock Template:'s original story and controversial subject matter present a stark contrast to "a summerful of sequels and animated sure shots" and represent a gamble for "an increasingly corporate entertainment industry".

Hancock had been reviewed by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) twice, and both times received an R rating instead of the makers' preferred PG-13 rating to target broader audiences. [11] The MPAA questioned elements including Smith's character drinking in front of a 17-year-old and the character flying under the influence of alcohol. Scenes that were removed to garner a PG-13 rating from the MPAA included a scene of statutory rape , [11] two of three uses of the word " fuck " (the MPAA only permitted one use for the PG-13 rating), and intense shots of needles going into arms. The MPAA allowed scenes of Hancock shoving a prisoner's head up another's behind and of Hancock having explosive ejaculation during sexual intercourse , though Berg chose to save the latter scene for the DVD, explaining, "It just wasn't that funny. Never was. You'd put it in front of an audience and there'd be two, maybe three people laughing.

There was no way to do that and then regain even a modicum of emotional integrity." The director kept the scene with the prisoners since a Las Vegas test screening was overwhelmingly successful: "At the end of the day, I couldn't ignore an audience when they're laughing that hard." [23] With such elements, studio executives only became comfortable with Hancock when the marketing approach focused on action and humor. Berg noted, "The ad campaign for this movie is much friendlier than the film." [11] The MPAA ultimately gave the film a PG-13 rating, citing "some intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence and language". [3] Hancock was originally titled Tonight, He Comes and later changed to John Hancock before settling on its final title. Prior to the film's release, marketing consultants attempted to persuade Sony Pictures to again change the title Hancock because it was too vague for audiences, suggesting alternatives like Heroes Never Die, Unlikely Hero, and Less Than Hero. Despite the advice, Sony stayed with Hancock and anticipated marketing on the popularity of the film's star, Will Smith.

[24] Theatrical run Edit Hancock had its world premiere as the opener at the 30th Moscow International Film Festival on June 19, 2008. [25] To avoid copyright infringement, organizers took "unprecedented" steps to prevent illegal reproduction of the film. [26] For the film, Sony created a digital camera package (DCP) having 4K resolution, containing four times more information than the typical DCP that possessed 2K resolution. Projectors for the higher-resolution package have been installed in 200 theaters in the United States with two dozen in evaluation. The impact of the package has been debated, with one argument being that the difference is not noticeable and the counter-argument being that the higher resolution has future value. [27] Prior to the film's opening five-day weekend in the United States and Canada, predictions for its weekend performance ranged from as low as $70 million to as high as $125 million. [28] [29] According to CinemaScore , Hancock was given a B+ grade by audiences.

[30] The film was shown in advance screenings on July 1, 2008 in 3,680 theaters in the United States and Canada, grossing $6.8 million. The film was widely released on July 2, 2008, expanding to 3,965 theaters. [31] At the conclusion of the five-day weekend, Hancock took top placement at the box office in the United States and Canada, grossing an estimated $103.8 million. [32] The film had the third-biggest opening 4th of July weekend after Transformers and Spider-Man 2 . Hancock was Will Smith's fifth film to open on a 4th of July weekend and was his most successful opening to date. The film was also Smith's eighth film in a row to take top placement in the American and Canadian box office and the twelfth film in Smith's career to lead the box office. [33] [34] Hancock was also Peter Berg 's strongest opening of his directing career to date.

[35] Outside of the United States and Canada, Hancock grossed $78.3 million in its opening weekend, drawing from 5,444 screenings across 50 markets, ranking it the third highest international opening of 2008 after Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and Iron Man . [36] Hancock averaged $14,382 per screen. It placed on top in 47 of the 50 markets in which it opened; [37] its strongest openings were the United Kingdom with $19.3 million, Germany with $12.4 million, South Korea with $8.5 million, Australia with $7.3 million, and China with $5.5 million. The Chinese opening was the fourth-biggest opening to date for the country. Other international performances included $3.4 million in Brazil and $3.1 million in Taiwan. [36] In Hong Kong, the film opened in first place with $1.3 million, averaging $37,300 across the 35 venues. [38] The film's overall gross for its opening five-day weekend worldwide is $185.6 million.

[37] In the following weekend of July 11, 2008, Hancock fell to second place in the United States and Canada behind Hellboy II: The Golden Army , grossing an estimated $33 million, a "modest" 47% drop in revenue. [39] The film's recorded American and Canadian attendance was higher than the Smith feature Men in Black II in both films' second weekend, but it was significantly less than attendance records for Smith's other films, Independence Day and Men in Black through the same point. [40] Overseas, Hancock expanded to 8,125 screens across 67 markets, ranking first at the box office again in 30 markets. The film's top opening grosses for the weekend included $11.4 million in Russia (589 screens), $9.9 million in France (739 screens), $4.6 million in Mexico (783 screens), $2.2 million in India (429 screens), $1.7 million in the Netherlands (90 screens), $1.3 million in Belgium (69 screens), and $1 million in the Ukraine (81 screens).

In territories playing Hancock for a second weekend, the United Kingdom dropped 45% to total $33.4 million to date, Germany 37% to total $24.2 million to date, South Korea 38% to total $14.7 million to date, and Australia 47% to total $14.4 million to date. [41] For the second weekend, with the 67 markets, Hancock accumulated an estimated $71.4 million in the international box office, only a $7.2 million drop from the previous weekend in territories outside the United States and Canada. [42] In Hancock's third weekend of July 18, the film took top placement in the international box office a third time, grossing an estimated $44.8 million from 8,286 screens across 71 territories. The film had beaten out The Dark Knight , which premiered that weekend in 20 foreign markets. Hancock had tracked 32% internationally ahead of its performance in the United States and Canada.

It had opened in four new markets for the weekend, ranking first in Spain with $8.6 million from 562 sites and first in Norway with $1 million from 60 sites. Hancock also kept top placement in France, estimating $4.4 million from 741 screens for a total of $16.8 million to date. [43] The film experienced a late resurgence in the international box office on the weekend of September 12, grossing $10.6 million from 1,425 screens in 31 markets. Making up most of the amount was $8 million from the film's premiere in Italy on 678 screens. [44] Hancock has grossed $227,946,274 in the United States and Canada and $396,440,472 in other territories for a worldwide total of $624,386,746. [45] Home media Edit Hancock was part of Sony 's experiment in providing content to consumers who own a BRAVIA television equipped with an Internet connection.

The film's release over the Internet took place after its theatrical run and before its release on DVD. According to Sony executives, distributing Hancock is an opportunity to showcase BRAVIA, though the method has been perceived as an "obvious threat" to cable companies' video on demand . [46] The film was available to BRAVIA owners from October 28, 2008 to November 10, 2008. [47] The film was released on DVD and Blu-Ray on November 25, 2008. [48] The single-disc DVD provides a theatrical cut (93 minutes) and an unrated cut (102 minutes) as well as five featurettes and two documentaries. The double-disc DVD includes these features, a digital copy of the film, and two additional making-of extras. The Blu-ray disc includes these, an on-set visual diary, and a picture-in-picture track. [49] George Lang of The Oklahoman described the unrated cut as "a rare instance when deleted scenes enhance the final product".

[50] Christopher Monfette of IGN thought that the Blu-ray disc was a "beautiful" transfer, the audio was well-balanced, and the featurettes were well-supplied. [51] In the week ending November 30, Hancock placed first on three video charts: the Nielsen VideoScan First Alert sales chart, Home Media Magazine's video rental chart, and Nielsen's Blu-ray Disc chart. With the year's Black Friday shopping day on November 28, Hancock was the top seller in the Blu-ray format. [52] Critical reception Edit Hancock received mixed reviews from film critics. [53] Rotten Tomatoes reported that 40% of critics gave the film positive reviews based upon a sample of 208, with an average score of 5.4 out of 10. [54] At Metacritic , which assigns a normalized rating out of 100 to reviews from mainstream critics, the film has received an average score of 49 based on 37 reviews.

[53] Some critics reported that the film was a jumble of ideas that, despite starting well, did not fully deliver the edgy satire the subject matter promised, with a general consensus forming that it suffered from a weak story and poor execution. [29] [54] Todd McCarthy of Variety felt that the film's premise was undermined by the execution. McCarthy believed the concept ensured the film was "amusing and plausible" for its first half, but that the second half was full of illogical story developments and missed opportunities. [55] Stephen Farber of The Hollywood Reporter said that the opening established the premise well, but that the film came undone when it began to alternate between comedy and tragedy, and introduced a backstory for Hancock that did not make sense. He said it rewrote its own internal logic in order to pander to its audience. [56] Stephen Hunter in The Washington Post said it had begun with promise, but that the change in tone partway through was so abrupt that the film did not recover.

[57] Jim Schembri of The Age called the change in direction "an absolute killer story twist", [58] and David Denby of The New Yorker said it lifted the film to a new level by supplementing the jokes with sexual tension and emotional power. [59] Jim Schembri reported that Berg's direction helped to sell Hancock's "well-drawn" backstory, [58] Todd McCarthy said the gritty visual approach adopted by Berg did not mesh well with the "vulgar goofiness" of certain scenes, [55] and Stephen Farber said that Berg's frantic direction compounded the storytelling errors. [56] Stephen Hunter said that Berg had not understood that the shifting tone and plot twists were meant to be humorous, and that he had played straight what was supposed to be a dark comedy and subversive satire. [57] David Denby said Berg's style—especially his use of close-ups—was intended to showcase "genuine actors at work", [59] while Manohla Dargis of The New York Times insisted Berg had taken Hancock to heart and brought gravity to the film.

[60] David Denby described Smith's performance as contrasting with his performances in his other films. He said, "For the first time in his life, Will Smith doesn’t flirt with the audience... he stays in character as a self-hating lonely guy." [59] Stephen Hunter argued that Smith and his co-stars had misunderstood the material in the same manner as Berg. He added that the examination of Smith's character came across at first as an examination of "phenomenally gifted" black sporting superstars who were "marginalized", "dehumanized" and exploited as a product by society. [57] Manohla Dargis was struck by Theron's performance, saying that she enabled Smith to deepen the film's emotional complexity. [60] Todd McCarthy said that Smith's "attitude-laden quips" helped to carry the film's superior first half, and that all three leads performed capably, but he said no opportunity was offered for the supporting characters to register. [55] Roger Ebert writing in the Chicago Sun Times praised the three leads, saying that Smith avoided playing Hancock "as a goofball" and instead portrayed him as a more subtle and serious character.

[61] Stephen Farber said that Hancock was a good showcase for the leads, affirming that Smith shone in a film that was only sporadically worthy of his performance. [56] Jim Schembri concluded that the film was "refreshing, savvy, fun and fast". He said it managed to mix comedy and action successfully, and that the drama came across as surprisingly genuine. [58] Stephen Farber believed that the extended development of the film had reduced its quality, but that the visual effects were "stellar" and showed wit. [56] McCarthy praised the effects, but said the film was "both overwrought and severely undernourished." [55] Roger Ebert observed the film was "a lot of fun", [61] and Manohla Dargis admitted that it was "unexpectedly satisfying". She said that while it faltered and felt rushed towards its end, it had an emotional complexity and "raggedness" that spoke with sincerity about essential human vulnerabilities. [60] Stephen Hunter concluded that Hancock was ultimately "indigestible".

[57] Hancock won the award for "Best Summer Action/Adventure Movie" at the 2008 Teen Choice Awards . [62] Sequel Edit Director Peter Berg said prior to Hancock Template:'s release that if the film pulls in as much business as predicted, a sequel, Hancock 2, would likely follow. [16] After the film's release on DVD and Blu-ray, actor Will Smith said that there was ongoing discussion about a possible sequel, "The ideas aren't [...] developed, but we are building out an entire world; I think people are going to be very surprised at the new world of Hancock." [63] In August 2009, Columbia Pictures hired screenwriters Adam Fierro and Glen Mazzara to write the sequel, and the studio plans to bring back the producing team from the original film. [64] Charlize Theron confirmed that she would reprise her role, and Berg said to expect a third actor to star as another god with powers like Smith's and Theron's characters.

[65] Hancock Review Hancock Review By Simon Miraudo July 6, 2008 There is a scene in Will Smith’s latest blockbuster, where the film’s misunderstood superhero threatens to insert a prison inmate’s head up another inmate’s … well, back entrance. That he does it is no surprise, as we’ve already spent half-an-hour in this foul-mouthed, unhinged, alcoholic hero’s presence. It’s that director Peter Berg feels the need to SHOW it that truly left me unsettled. I don’t know what to tell you except, yes, it looks exactly as you would imagine. Strangely, that scene is this film in a nutshell: Funny, exciting and full of new ideas. But then we see too much, and it becomes tragic, and oddly haunting. I think I’ve started this review wrong – however, this is a very difficult film to talk about. It is not the goofball superhero comedy implied by the trailer; well certainly not after the first half hour. To truly look at what is wrong and what is right with this movie would mean spoiling the (for lack of a better word) “twist” that comes halfway through, and I’m not willing to do that.

Anyway, Smith plays John Hancock, a Los Angeles vagrant with amazing superpowers. Although he wants to help people, he leaves a greater trail of destruction than any criminal could attempt to imagine. Then he saves the life of Ray Embrey (Bateman), a bleeding-heart PR man who wants to reinvent Hancock’s image and remind L.A. how lucky they are to have their very own superhero. Eventually, Hancock meet’s Ray’s wife Mary (Theron), and she DEFINITELY doesn’t want him around. And then the film takes a major left turn from which it never returns. Whether you enjoy this movie or not will depend on how willing you are to follow the major plot developments in the third act. I, for one, was willing to accept the plot shift, although I would not be surprised if many others don’t. I have a sad feeling that Hancock, the story of the misunderstood and hated hero, will become the misunderstood and hated film of 2008. The cast is certainly not to blame. Smith is probably the most bankable star in Hollywood right now, and he never phones it in. He gives a nuanced performance as John Hancock, just as he did in I Am Legend last year.

Jason Bateman is given a part slightly closer to that leading man role he really deserves, and Charlize Theron is fine, despite her sorely underwritten character. The script is surprisingly good considering the usual thoughtless superhero fodder. Originally written in 1996 by Vy Vincent Ngo under the title Tonight, He Comes, the film has been through countless rewrites and re-edits to the final version we’ve got today. Considering this, it’s no surprise the ending lacks cohesion – but as a whole, it holds up surprisingly well. The problem is unfortunately with director Peter Berg, who filmed this straight after making The Kingdom … and it shows. The uncomfortable close-ups, the odd shifts in tone – he carries these flaws like calling cards, constantly reminding us whenever the film falls flat, that he is directly to blame. But I’m not going to hate on the movie anymore, because I’m sure the internet will be flooded with anti-Hancock sentiment over the next few weeks. The truth is, I really liked this movie, despite its obvious problems. I guess it was just nice to see a film that didn’t try to be like anything else, and really shot for the stars.

Even though it failed, you’ve still got to admire the despised superhero who still tries to save the world. And if you’re still not willing to forgive Hancock, and least there is the scene where he shoves a guy’s head up another guy’s butt. Hancock Netflix or Hulu | Stream Movies Available on Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and iTunes Stream Movies Available on Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and iTunes Stream Hancock Online Movie Description: Hancock is a superhero action comedy starring Will Smith, Charlize Theron, Jason Bateman and others. The plot revolves around John Hancock (Will Smith) who plays alcoholic superhero who takes on crime in his own city. Hancock soon becomes a joke and the most hated man because of his alcoholism and clumsiness and vandalism. PR Expert attempts to restore Hancock`s image as a superhero after he saves the expert`s life. The movie is a must watch for a fine combination of action, drama and fun.

IMDB review Release date: 2008 Hancock - Available on DVD/Blu-Ray, reviews, trailers - Flicks.co.nz BY tari okay i personally don't agree with you guys i mean just because will made his name in comedy doesn't mean he can break out of the box sometimes i mean pursuit of happiness you guys another good film of his and was not a comedy ...... i liked it a anti hero that no matter wat ppl think of him still does what his good at and then finds a way to have the best of both worlds ... i really liked the twist with charlize's character you dont see it coming but notice slight cues like the fact she wanted ... More nothing to do with him in the beginning until the after you find out who they really are ....i really thought it was well planed out and yeah ok cgi wasn't perfect but it did the trick and if you dont expect a comedy you find the comical inserts throughout the film ............... call me crazy lol. Hide Care to comment? BY Bonux superstar A drunk bum superhero, what a brilliant idea it was... until the good old American values make surface again (patriotism, flag, violin and tears).

Is it another pathetic attempt to convert the American public? Too bad it crossed the frontiers. There is nothing worse than turning a anti-hero into a hero. Care to comment? BY Bernie Is this just the 1st part of Trilogy? Who are the bad gus really? The movie passed pleasantly enough, at the end this felt like it was setting the scene for next episode. Somehow then got padded to a full length movie. Casting Will Smith was probabay a mistake, you expect him to be continuously funny and this was not a comedy. Care to comment? BY Hoss lister A drunk super-hero with Will Smith in the lead role? This could have been comical magic. But the laughs don’t last and it strangely turns into every other super-hero movie you’ve seen but devoid of any humour. I left feeling a little cheated and imagining what could have been. I can’t think of a really funny super-hero movie. What a unique opportunity lost. Care to comment? HANCOCK HANCOCK ï¿½ 2008, PG-13, 92 mins.

John Hancock: Will Smith / Mary Embrey Charlize Theron / Ray Embrey Jason Bateman / Aaron Embrey Jae Head / Red Eddie Marsan / Man Mountain David Mattey Directed by Peter Berg / Written by Vincent Ngo and Vince Gilligan I will find it next-to-impossible to discuss my overt criticisms of 'HANCOCK' without revealing many of the would-be surprising twists and turns in the film's plot. Please consider this full-length review one with massive spoilers. HANCOCK may be the only super hero film that I can ever recall watching that has the following exchange: Just after saving someoneï¿½s life, a innocent bystander walks up to the hero and states, ï¿½Your breath smells like alcoholï¿½ to which the hero matter-of-factly retorts, ï¿½Thatï¿½s cause Iï¿½ve been drinkinï¿½, bitch!ï¿½ Welcome to HANCOCK, this summerï¿½s first super hero film not based on any known source material.

As played by Will Smith (coming off his very stellar performance in last fallï¿½s surprisingly decent I AM LEGEND ), John Hancock (just like one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence) may be the most atypical hero of all time. Instead adorning a skintight leotard and a cape ï¿½ not to mention having a secret identity ï¿½ Hancock is a smelly, dirty, unshaven, foul mouthed, misogynistic, and raunchy hobo. He is also the only super hero to have a bottle of whiskey in one hand while he battles evildoers with the other (question: is drunk flying against any law if youï¿½re the one that is physically flying?). Heï¿½s got super speed and super strength that can only be matched by his super foul booze breath and his genuinely vulgar and impolite attitude. He also seems indestructible, but his weakness is the bottle. Hancock lives a life as a recluse, a skid row bum that ekes out his days passing out at buss stops.

Occasionally, and when the situation compels him to do so, he will come to grips with his calling and stop any type of bad guys that perpetrate crimeï¿½but often with some disastrous effects. An early sequence in HANCOCK shows the inebriated hero stopping a batch of crooks by perusing their getaway car along a busy freeway. Unfortunately, Hancock is so dang smashed that he flies right through freeway signs, which destroys cars bellow, and then he deposits the evildoers' car where it certainly should not be left (all in all: the city estimates the property damage in the millions). Yes, Hancock does save the day on occasion, but he also manages to leave a considerable amount of avoidable collateral damage in the process. Of course, he takes it all in stride. After allï¿½who in the hell would stop a chronic alcoholic that is as strong as the Man of Steel? Okay, the most fitting thing I will say about HANCOCK is that itï¿½s an utter mess of a film. Yet, this filmï¿½s premise is not the problem with it: The character of Hancock has balls, but the film that surrounds has none.

This is one of those regrettably watered down, would-be R-rated films that seems outright neutered by the marginalization of the PG-13 rating. Itï¿½s simply one of the most obvious attempts a studio taking a character and subject matter that wants to soar up, up, and away to pleasingly coarse and scatological heights of politically incorrect debauchery and instead tames it down to reach the broadest possible audience demographic. On those terms, HANCOCK is totally disingenuous to itself. Even worse is the fact that this film has a really great and nifty premise and goes nowhere with it fast. The opening moments of the film do, if fact, have a nice balancing act of alternating between large-scale comic book spectacle and satiric laughs.

The whole concept of a self-loathing super-hero thatï¿½s more addicted to Jack Daniels than saving lives is intriguing enough, but HANCOCK soon spirals way out of control with what has to be one of the most telegraphed plot ï¿½twistsï¿½ Iï¿½ve seen in a film this year, not to mention that when the story provides a horrendously handled change in tone and gives the entire history and origin of Hancock, the entire universe that this film sets up implodes on itself. Thatï¿½s a bona fide disgrace, seeing as Smith and his co-stars give thanklessly respectable performances here. The story itself, as stated, has a hopeful beginning. Hancock has a life-changing day when he manages to come to the rescue of Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman, whose carved out one good supporting performance after another, and does so again here) who he later finds out is in the field of public relations. Rayï¿½s heart is in his dream project, the ï¿½All-Heartï¿½ charity, which has a foundation thatï¿½s so flimsy that most corporate big wigs want to have nothing to do with.

Okay, so Rayï¿½s PR mission is really flaky at best, but he is a good man and sees real potential in Hancock to radically depart from his nightmarish image as a no-good menace to one of an adored and esteemed super hero. Ray, in consideration for his life being saved, makes it his mission to make Hancock the media super-darling he rightfully should be. Rayï¿½s loving wife, Mary (Charlize Theron, who has never been more agreeably sexy in a film) seems a lot more guarded about dealing with Hancock. When Ray brings the hero home, she gives him many distrusting stares. Nonetheless, Ray has what he thinks is a foolproof plan, but one that does not initially sit well with Hancock. Ray wants him to actually turn himself in to police and do time in prison. Why? Well, maybe by serving a sentence in jail might garner up some serious PR points, not to mention respect from those that feel Hancock owes the city something back. Of course, no correctional facility could ever hold Hancock, but thatï¿½s not the point. Ray hopes that the public will revere Hancock more if he allows himself to succumb to a jail sentence.

Also, Ray feels that the crime rate will rise so much while Hancock is in prison that the public will do anything to get him back on the streets. The logic here sounds right, but Hancock has a mighty tough time adjusting to prison life (one of the filmï¿½s funniest and most shocking scenes has him literally backing up his words about shoving one belligerent inmates head up another oneï¿½sï¿½you know). While Hancock serves his time, Ray coaches him on super hero etiquette (like, saying ï¿½good jobï¿½ to the police that are trying to get control of things before he takes control, and to hold back on his landings so he doesnï¿½t cause costly craters in the streets). Finally, there is the obligatory costume, which Hancock begrudgingly decides to wear, although he would much rather wear cargo shorts, a tank top, and sunglasses.

The filmï¿½s story (originally attributed to a 1996 spec script named ï¿½Tonight, He Comesï¿½ by Vincent Ngo) has some real fun with these early moments, but just after Hancock is released from prison and starts to become a real hero, the film takes a categorical nosedive. The first major problem the plot has is its rigid, almost inane, predictability, especially the way it slavishly adheres to Roger Ebertï¿½s ï¿½Law of Economy of Charactersï¿½ (which states that "any apparently unnecessary or extraneous major character is undoubtedly the villain"). Perhaps the central problem is with the casting of multiple Oscar nominee and winner Charlize Theron as the unassuming wife. Her marquee as an A-list actress is so large that we know with alarming certainty that Mary will undoubtedly not just play second fiddle as a loyal wife persona in the background. From the very first minute she appears and gives Hancock one of several beyond-obvious suspicious glances, you know that she will play a prominent role later. When Mary inevitably reveals that ï¿½ gasp!

ï¿½ she too is an all-powerful super hero, there is not one head in the theatre that did not displeasurably shake with a ï¿½saw that coming from a mile awayï¿½ demeanor. Even more awkward and confusing as hell is how the story provides exposition as to how she and Hancock relate to one another, which only exasperates the film as one consisting of wildly incongruent tonal shifts. Early in the film Hancock recalls how he awoke 80 years ago without much memory of what occurred before that, which leads one to wonder why anyone in the media for the last eight decades has not caught on to the fact that this very public hero has not aged a day during that period? This is only the beginning of HANCOCKï¿½S frustratingly ill-mannered attempts at laying down the rules for its world. We later learn from Mary that she and Hancock are actually immortals and are nearly 3000 years old. Okay. Fine. But then she offers up a rationale as to why there are no other members of their ancient race around anymore.

It seems that this race dies out because of a weakness which causes its members to lose their powers when ï¿½ get this ï¿½ they are very close to one another. Members of this race were created in pairs, and are inevitably drawn to one another. In short, Hancock and Mary are a ï¿½pair.ï¿½ Huh? I simply donï¿½t understand. Why would an ancient race create beings where their disastrous Achilles' heel wasï¿½close proximity to one another? This race has to be one of the stupidest of the last 3000 years, seeing as only morons would have created pairs of super men and women that would idiotically make themselves mortal if they occupied the same small space. The further problem with this rationale for Hancockï¿½s existence is that it never is able to hold itself up to flimsy scrutiny later and eventually contradicts itself. Why, for starters, does Hancock not get weak in early scenes with Mary (when he and the audience does not know her heritage), but later in the film (when we learn everything) he becomes nearly mortal in her presence?

I have no problem when films establish little rules by which their characters occupy for the sake of narrative, but when their arbitrarily abort them for the convenience of the story, its unforgivable. The purpose, I guess, of this is to make Hancock very weak at a key moment in the film while being pounded by bad guys to drum up the tension. Then, the film conveniently gives him his strength back, just when he needs it. HANCOCK was directed by the usually very competent Peter Berg (who last made one of the most underrated action thrillers of 2007 in THE KINGDOM , not to mention one of the better sports films of the last few years in FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS ). In anything, his aesthetic choices in HANCOCK are at least interesting: He shoots things in a laid back, fly-on-the-wall, vï¿½ritï¿½ style, which provides a nice stark contrast to the typical sheen and polish of most summer comic books films. He is also adept at marrying million dollar visual effects and convincingly integrating them into the live action. The performances by Smith and especially Bateman are solid.

Yet, it seems that all the players behind the scenes lacked the foresight to notice that HANCOCK is woefully inconsistent, lazily conventional, and has a story with faulty logic that implodes on itself in the last hour. As an action comedy, the film gets a few chuckles and the action set pieces are first rate, but there is no pardoning HANCOCK for its cheap, game-changing plot twists and lame execution of its premise, so much so that it becomes disappointingly nonsensical. As a result, the film infuriatingly perplexed me more than it did joyously entertain, which certainly is kryptonite to any successful summer, super hero action film.

Question: Who plays alcoholic John Hancock in the 2008 film ‘Hancock’?
Answer: Will Smith