movie: Hancock
Apr. 8th, 2009 10:12 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
meganbmooreI don’t remember hearing much about this movie when it came out, so I have no idea how it was received.
I thought the first half of the movie, with Will Smith as a drunk, amnesiac, unhygienic, hobo superhero who was almost more of a public menace was fun. At least once Ray The PR Guy showed up and started teaching him to be touchy feely and polite while his wife was in the background all “No Ray, we do not want the drunk guy who caused millions of dollars in property damage the other day to sit with us at dinner.”
I was annoyed by the gratuitous use of a****le and the sex scene early on and the icky prison scene, but I thought it was decent enough, and there was less of that once Ray the PR Guy started his makeover.
Then we got to the mythology and Hancock’s backstory.
I…uhm…I’m in love? “Gods as characters” is kinda tricky. It’s not easy to convey a presence like that into a character, because a deity is supposed to be beyond comprehension. But as Mary pointed out, they weren’t really gods. Because of their powers, they’d been called gods at one point, and angels at another. And now they’re superheroes. Not gods, just immortals with superpowers.
Or at least, immortal until the one they were “created to be with” is near them, and then they start to become human. And they love each other but apparently can’t stand each other for more than five minutes, so they’ve been together off and on for thousands of years, and every time they’re together, someone tries to use her to get to him. Which makes me bitter about how she essentially becomes the Damsel in Distress at the end-especially after she said she was stronger than him, and we saw that her temper tantrums can cause natural disasters-but I like it on a mythological level.
And between her claiming that they were siblings when he asked what their connection was and her listing off Greece in the long list of times he’s hunted her down and their spats apparently caused disasters, I’ve decided that they were Artemis and Apollo. I will not be convinced otherwise.
I also like that Mary didn’t seem remotely torn between Hancock and Ray, because Hancock was a permanent, if irregular, fixture, but Ray was the only one who made her happy, and there wasn’t really a hint that she regretted her choice at the end. And I liked the commentary on fate involved.
I did think that Hancock’s villains being a trio of hood’s was a bit anticlimactic, but the real conflict there was mortality/immortality.
Also, Hancock’s superhero costume was totally Jubilee’s second Wondra costume, but without the mask. And breast implants. But I’m pretty sure no one wants to see Will Smith with breast implants.
I thought the first half of the movie, with Will Smith as a drunk, amnesiac, unhygienic, hobo superhero who was almost more of a public menace was fun. At least once Ray The PR Guy showed up and started teaching him to be touchy feely and polite while his wife was in the background all “No Ray, we do not want the drunk guy who caused millions of dollars in property damage the other day to sit with us at dinner.”
I was annoyed by the gratuitous use of a****le and the sex scene early on and the icky prison scene, but I thought it was decent enough, and there was less of that once Ray the PR Guy started his makeover.
Then we got to the mythology and Hancock’s backstory.
I…uhm…I’m in love? “Gods as characters” is kinda tricky. It’s not easy to convey a presence like that into a character, because a deity is supposed to be beyond comprehension. But as Mary pointed out, they weren’t really gods. Because of their powers, they’d been called gods at one point, and angels at another. And now they’re superheroes. Not gods, just immortals with superpowers.
Or at least, immortal until the one they were “created to be with” is near them, and then they start to become human. And they love each other but apparently can’t stand each other for more than five minutes, so they’ve been together off and on for thousands of years, and every time they’re together, someone tries to use her to get to him. Which makes me bitter about how she essentially becomes the Damsel in Distress at the end-especially after she said she was stronger than him, and we saw that her temper tantrums can cause natural disasters-but I like it on a mythological level.
And between her claiming that they were siblings when he asked what their connection was and her listing off Greece in the long list of times he’s hunted her down and their spats apparently caused disasters, I’ve decided that they were Artemis and Apollo. I will not be convinced otherwise.
I also like that Mary didn’t seem remotely torn between Hancock and Ray, because Hancock was a permanent, if irregular, fixture, but Ray was the only one who made her happy, and there wasn’t really a hint that she regretted her choice at the end. And I liked the commentary on fate involved.
I did think that Hancock’s villains being a trio of hood’s was a bit anticlimactic, but the real conflict there was mortality/immortality.
Also, Hancock’s superhero costume was totally Jubilee’s second Wondra costume, but without the mask. And breast implants. But I’m pretty sure no one wants to see Will Smith with breast implants.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 03:34 am (UTC)I love the mythological elements too... But despite my love of Artemis and Apollo (especially Apollo -- sun god PHWOAR) I was thinking they compared more to Zeus/Hera. Not that I'm trying to convince you one way or the other. :D
You're making me want to see it again...
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 03:40 am (UTC)Zeus/Hera works, especially with her temper, but you have to wonder at all the trysts. I mean, sure, we don't know what he was like pre-amnesia, but it's hard to picture, in a way. But from the way Mary talked, I'm thinking he would try to stay away because it's what she wanted, but it didn't work, and he probably interfered with any previous attempts to find someone else. Which fits with Apollo's possessiveness.
But I think either one works, especially when we assume things got warped along the way.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 03:39 am (UTC)The mythological aspect of it was interesting. I like the Apollo/Artemis comparison, but I also like the Zeus/Hera comparison. In both comparisons, though, the male is the one off with other women; it's reversed in this situation.
But I'm glad I wasn't the only one who liked it. ^_^
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 03:42 am (UTC)I liked drunk/awkward/grumpy!Will Smith, and was expecting it to be the whole thing, but I LOVE "superheroes as new gods."
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 03:53 am (UTC)The take on it is definitely awesome. I kind of wish that they had explored that angle more, but. ^^;;
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 03:43 am (UTC):)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 03:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 04:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 04:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 04:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 04:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 04:59 am (UTC)Basically, the only thing the movie accomplished was giving the "drunken superhero" such a crap work-out that the way is still clear for Iron Man 2 to explore the same territory, except actually caring about the quality of the product they put out.
All they had to do was "Will Smith is a jerkass superhero" and they futzed it up. That takes effort. The Superman movie with Richard Pryor and the evil supercomputer he built got that one right, and it was about Richard Pryor building an evil supercomputer.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 05:54 am (UTC)Mythologies in general (as in, mythic mythologies, not modern, property centric ones) tend to not be very logical, and this is no more illogical that's Highlander's "immortal warriors who hunt the globe for each other, and when there's only one left, the whole point was that he got to grow old and die." I also have absolutely zero tolerance for the typical heroic (and, frankly, insulting) "I love you but I must keep myself away from you for your own good so you won't be used against me" so I appreciated the fact that it was essentially a commentary on that that worked both ways, and provided a legitimate reason to stay apart.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 06:04 am (UTC)Really, how many action-comedy summer blockbusters are there where a married woman leaves her friendly husband and cute kid to sex up the hero? Which in itself was done better by Superman Returns, solely for tackling the plot without either amnesia or giving a character pointless superpowers solely so she can have a pointless superfight in full view of the public. So she can conceal her secret identity.
SUNGLASSES.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 06:11 am (UTC)And that plotline was actually the only part of Superman Returns that I remember particularly interesting me.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 06:28 am (UTC)Once again, more thought than the filmmakers put into it. This is just the filmmakers realizing they need a love story so guys will drag their girlfriends along, then realizing they don't really have any compelling reason for any UST or romance between the male and female leads, so they bring up the reincarnated lovers trope from every bad mummy film ever made (I know, I know, they're not reincarnated, but same difference).
None of which explains how come, on a planet of six billion people, Hancock just happens to be helped by the husband of his ex-lover (why is she even in the same city if she wants to avoid him? Is it that hard to explain wanting to move into a city that doesn't have a dangerous superhero running around destroying property?). Or why she decides to attack him with superstrength in the first place if she doesn't want him to know who she is. Or why they can spend fifteen minutes whaling on each other at full power, then almost die when one of them gets shot walking home. Or why you introduce the concept of immortal lovers ditching each other for human spouses 2/3rds of the way through the movie with no build-up. Or, if Will Smith is built to protect people with his superpowers, what is Charlize Theron built to do, find the nearest available single father and take his kid to school for him?
I'm just saying, thinking this film was some elaborate rejoinder to superhero tropes is like saying Katy Perry has a pro-gay message. Way too much credit being given out there.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 05:36 am (UTC)And I totally <3 Will Smith. :D
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 05:43 am (UTC)One thing I liked is that there was actually a legitimate reason for (and metacommentary on) the whole "but I can't be with you for your own good." And it was on both sides.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 11:49 am (UTC)I did have a disconnect when Mary talked about how Hancock lost his memory. She never mentions race as a factor in the beating, and I kept thinking back over the dialog because I thought it should be there and wasn't sure if viewers were simply supposed to see it by implication (70 years ago, Florida, black man and white woman holding hands in public, sudden and vicious assault, him hurt very badly and her either not at all or not badly, her not allowed in the ambulance with him, etc.) or if it was being glossed over so as to let white viewers ignore it or if I was misinterpreting the whole thing.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-09 02:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-11 05:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-11 01:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-12 05:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-11 07:15 am (UTC)Just so you know.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-11 01:32 pm (UTC)