| Author |
Message |
|
MadGez
Dont Mess with the Gez
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 9:54 am
Posts: 22674
Location: Melbourne Australia
|
 Hancock Hancock Quote: Hancock is a 2008 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 (Smith) from Los Angeles whose reckless actions routinely cost the city millions of dollars. Eventually one person he saves, Ray Embrey (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.
In the United States, the film was rated PG-13 by the Motion Picture Association of America after changes were made at the organization's request in order to avoid a "restricted" (R) rating, which it had received twice before. The film was presented and widely released on July 2, 2008 in the United States and the United Kingdom by Columbia Pictures. Hancock received mixed reviews from film critics and grossed more than $620 million in theaters worldwide.
_________________
What's your favourite movie summer? Let us know @
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=85934
|
| Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:19 pm |
|
|
|
Box
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 12:52 am
Posts: 25990
|
Re: Hancock For some reason, I just want to hate this movie.  _________________In order of preference: Christian, Argos MadGez wrote: Briefs. Am used to them and boxers can get me in trouble it seems. Too much room and maybe the silkiness have created more than one awkward situation. My Box-Office Blog: http://boxofficetracker.blogspot.com/
|
| Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:28 pm |
|
|
|
Shack
Devil's Advocate
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 37969
|
Re: Hancock "Audiences love 'Cock!"
_________________Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:13 am |
|
|
|
misutaa
je vois l'avenir
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Posts: 3841
Location: Hollywood/Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Hancock It's an alright movie. Not that good. I was kinda disappointed with it...
C-
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:16 am |
|
|
|
The Mr Pink
What would Jesus *not* do?
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 829
Location: Going Up the Down Escalator
|
Re: Hancock The film starts off ok with some humorous moments and at least a mediocre attempt at some dramatic elements, in other words dumb, very dumb, mindless fluff. It wasn't trying to hard to be anything other than what it was then out of nowhere it takes a mind numbingly awful turn that it cannot recover from. Their married immortals WTF?! Who become mortal when they are together, that is until they seperate again and become immortal. Are they freaking serious? Oh and the thing with the moon at the end, puuhhlease. and then it was over because they had to cut the hell out this to BUY a PG-13 rating. Man the more I think about this the more I hate it, and I originally kinda liked it. That ain't good. I still say its better that WWW Or BB2. Grade D
_________________
Top ten of 2008, Updated!
1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Wall-E
3. Dark Knight
4. In Bruges
5. Tropic Thunder
6. Young @ Heart
7. Mongol
8. The Band's Visit
9. Visitor
10. Iron Man
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:02 am |
|
|
|
Darth Indiana Bond
007
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:43 pm
Posts: 11004
Location: Wouldn't you like to know
|
Re: Hancock Not to support this film because it is starting to look pretty bad, but a "D" from you really doesn't mean that much. You're one tough grader Mr. Pink  _________________
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:13 am |
|
|
|
misutaa
je vois l'avenir
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Posts: 3841
Location: Hollywood/Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Hancock Mr Pink:
You are completely right about the story thing. It is just STUPID! I was so glad that they were making an original superhero film, but this turned out to be a mess...the script needs sooo much more work. It had so much potential but wasn't in the right hands I guess.
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:35 am |
|
|
|
Mannyisthebest
Forum General
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 3:53 pm
Posts: 8636
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
Re: Hancock Quote: Not to support this film because it is starting to look pretty bad, but a "D" from you really doesn't mean that much. You're one tough grader Mr. Pink if people were more harsher critics we would get better blockbuster films, but this year has been very good, but it appears last year, audiences were very harsh towards the three sequels. However they then found TF to be one of the best films of the year. _________________The Dark Prince 
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:33 am |
|
|
|
JURiNG
ef star star kay
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 7:45 pm
Posts: 3016
Location: Cairo, Egypt
|
Re: Hancock The first hour was solid, pretty good actually. It was exactly the 'Hancock' movie I was expecting to see. Great actions with high amount of humors (the crowd ate it up). It went on really in a pretty good shape. Until when THAT storyline took the big role. When everything was revealed. Suddenly, it all felt more serious (in the bad way), and eventually, tiresome. In the end, it turned itself to be exactly the 'Hancock' movie I was fear it would be. Wrong step of storyline, it took there. I can't believe I'm giving this C+, despite how much I enjoyed the first hour. Which although not much, but at least, I did enjoy it. The following 30 minute wasn't just a let down, but ruined the whole thing.
And one more thing, it was too short. The climax came out really lame. If somebody invents the excitement meter, at that moment of the film, the meter would stand below zero. It kind of made me feel like 'This is all I paid for? That's it?'
C+
_________________
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:52 pm |
|
|
|
Korrgan
problem?
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:52 am
Posts: 15515
Location: Bait Shop
|
Re: Hancock Guuuuuuuuys, I've got a question! From the commercials I've seen on television, it sort of looks like Charlize might be the villian. In a few of the TV spots, she's shown smiling a bit evil like, along with it sort of looking like her fighting Will Smith. So is she? Would be cool if she is, and a bit different.
_________________
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:08 pm |
|
|
|
getluv
i break the rules, so i don't care
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 4:28 pm
Posts: 20411
|
Re: Hancock Korrgan wrote: Guuuuuuuuys, I've got a question! From the commercials I've seen on television, it sort of looks like Charlize might be the villian. In a few of the TV spots, she's shown smiling a bit evil like, along with it sort of looking like her fighting Will Smith. So is she? Would be cool if she is, and a bit different. i would see Hancock if it is like u describe korrgan.
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:30 pm |
|
|
|
JURiNG
ef star star kay
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 7:45 pm
Posts: 3016
Location: Cairo, Egypt
|
Re: Hancock Korrgan wrote: Guuuuuuuuys, I've got a question! From the commercials I've seen on television, it sort of looks like Charlize might be the villian. In a few of the TV spots, she's shown smiling a bit evil like, along with it sort of looking like her fighting Will Smith. So is she? Would be cool if she is, and a bit different. I agree, it would definitely be cool if she was. Actually, I would love the film to have one!!
This, lacking in a (true) villain, is what I think, leads to the unsatisfied climax. _________________
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:35 pm |
|
|
|
Rev
Romosexual!
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:06 am
Posts: 32095
Location: the last free city
|
Re: Hancock B-i agree with Magnus & JURiNG but i grade it a bit better cause it was still an enjoyable summer movie. stay during the credit to see a funny scene.
_________________
Is it 2024 yet?
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:25 pm |
|
|
|
MARVEL_ROCKS
Forum General
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 6:11 pm
Posts: 8202
|
Re: Hancock Eh I am sure this movie could have gotten in 60's on rottentomatoes and you guys would have liked it more if the movie was longer and was R rated. I mean common a 150 million budget movie that is 80 minutes long is downright horrible. SHITLOAD of scenes were edited man and that is why it is such a fucking disjointed movie. I haven't seen it yet but the reviews echo that.
|
| Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:34 pm |
|
|
|
billybobwashere
He didn't look busy?!
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Posts: 4308
|
Re: Hancock I bet the 20-minutes-longer unrated DVD cut will get a far warmer reception. I'm thinking what problems this film had can mostly be attributed to all that they have to cut out. It was originally titled, "Tonight, He Cums," after all  _________________ Retroviral VideosA film-based project created for the purpose of helping raise awareness about HIV/AIDS, specifically in South Africa.
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:04 am |
|
|
|
snack
Extraordinary
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 12159
|
Re: Hancock 80% of the votes so far are a C or lower.... 
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:23 am |
|
|
|
Webslinger
why so serious?
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:24 pm
Posts: 4110
Location: Stuck In A Moment I Can't Get Out Of
|
Re: Hancock All things considered (bad test screenings, reshoots, cuts made for the PG-13, etc.), Hancock is actually a piece of solid popcorn entertainment. Will Smith is a huge reason for the film's success. He brings his typical charisma to the role and pulls off the character transition despite an unsteady script. Jason Bateman pulls in some laughs in a fun performance as a bright PR exec, though Charlize Theron's character isn't given the screen time her character needs. Just as expected, director Peter Berg shows off his eye for action, trading in the gritty style of The Kingdom with sanitized but attention-grabbing effects-driven action. The opening and ending are both on the weak side (and the slim 90-minute running time isn't enough to fully develop some of the characters and relationships), but most of what happens in between is a big spot of summer fun. Hancock is the weakest of this summer's superhero slate (though it takes a radically different approach than any of the comic book based flicks) and doesn't live up fully to its potential, but it works as a fun popcorn flick.
Grade: B
_________________
This Post Has Brought to You by Your Friendly Neighborhood Webslinger.
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:29 am |
|
|
|
billybobwashere
He didn't look busy?!
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Posts: 4308
|
Re: Hancock Will Smith is allowed to have one of these huge-box-office, lower-quality films amidst a pretty damn impressive run. I'm sure Seven Pounds will make up for everything this lacks in quality.
_________________Retroviral VideosA film-based project created for the purpose of helping raise awareness about HIV/AIDS, specifically in South Africa.
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:14 am |
|
|
|
snack
Extraordinary
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 12159
|
Re: Hancock billybobwashere wrote: Will Smith is allowed to have one of these huge-box-office, lower-quality films amidst a pretty damn impressive run. I'm sure Seven Pounds will make up for everything this lacks in quality. He has a lot to make up for. He hasn't made a good film since 1997.
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:44 am |
|
|
|
Darth Indiana Bond
007
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:43 pm
Posts: 11004
Location: Wouldn't you like to know
|
Re: Hancock *cough* I am Legend
_________________
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:57 am |
|
|
|
The Mr Pink
What would Jesus *not* do?
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 829
Location: Going Up the Down Escalator
|
Re: Hancock LadiesMan217 wrote: Eh I am sure this movie could have gotten in 60's on rottentomatoes and you guys would have liked it more if the movie was longer and was R rated. I mean common a 150 million budget movie that is 80 minutes long is downright horrible. SHITLOAD of scenes were edited man and that is why it is such a fucking disjointed movie. I haven't seen it yet but the reviews echo that. Watching the film you can tell that they made a different movie than the one they released. It's 'R' rated material from the start. They cut out all the necessary plot points from the 2nd and 3rd acts to get this down to a PG-13. Hence the wtf? moment in the middle. I'm thinking the DVD will be much better. Darth Indiana Bond wrote: Not to support this film because it is starting to look pretty bad, but a "D" from you really doesn't mean that much. You're one tough grader Mr. Pink I'll probably be giving this an F by the end of the week.  The more I think about it the more I hate what happens in this film. I may be tough but at least I'm consistant.
_________________
Top ten of 2008, Updated!
1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Wall-E
3. Dark Knight
4. In Bruges
5. Tropic Thunder
6. Young @ Heart
7. Mongol
8. The Band's Visit
9. Visitor
10. Iron Man
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:28 am |
|
|
|
Kitana
Full Fledged Member
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:43 am
Posts: 94
|
Re: Hancock loyalfromlondon wrote: snack wrote: billybobwashere wrote: Will Smith is allowed to have one of these huge-box-office, lower-quality films amidst a pretty damn impressive run. I'm sure Seven Pounds will make up for everything this lacks in quality. He has a lot to make up for. He hasn't made a good film since 1997. BOOOOOYAH I can't think of another actor who deserves his box office and critical success less. Wil Smith didn't earn it. He simply regurgutated his big willy harmless negro persona from tv and music and the unsuspecting white majority fell for it. May I offer you some ....  Btw, 2 oscar noms and counting b!tches.
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:11 am |
|
|
|
Darth Indiana Bond
007
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:43 pm
Posts: 11004
Location: Wouldn't you like to know
|
Re: Hancock I think Will raped loyal in 1997 on a visit to London.
_________________
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:41 pm |
|
|
|
billybobwashere
He didn't look busy?!
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Posts: 4308
|
Re: Hancock snack wrote: billybobwashere wrote: Will Smith is allowed to have one of these huge-box-office, lower-quality films amidst a pretty damn impressive run. I'm sure Seven Pounds will make up for everything this lacks in quality. He has a lot to make up for. He hasn't made a good film since 1997. you say it like it's some sort of fact, when in reality it just means that you're missing out on enjoying a bunch of very good/entertaining movies. I pity you.  _________________Retroviral VideosA film-based project created for the purpose of helping raise awareness about HIV/AIDS, specifically in South Africa.
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:27 pm |
|
|
|
BacktotheFuture
I'm Batman
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:53 pm
Posts: 5554
Location: Long Island
|
Re: Hancock It has one of the worst first scenes ever, and the ending feels rushed and disjointed. However, the middle is very fun and I really enjoy Smith and Bateman. Some stuff misses, such as kids cursing = funny, but it does have a lot of legit funny moments. Effects aren't that great though which surprised me.
- B-
|
| Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:30 pm |
|
|
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72943395/HERON_img_7.0.jpeg)
