*** Official HANCOCK Discussion Thread

Malcolm R · 06-26-2008, 12:30 PM

Note of caution from Variety's review for those who may be planning to take their children to Hancock:

Quote:

Although valuable to the police, Hancock has a bad name with the public for his destructiveness, impudence and all-around bad attitude; an adjunct to this is his foul language, which treads the very edge of PG-13 permissiveness and will no doubt catch many July 4 weekend kid-herding parents unhappily unaware.

Steve_Tk · 06-26-2008, 01:07 PM

Up until now the previews have been mostly of the comedy of the film. I've noticed the last two days that they have changed this to reflect the darker parts of the film. Up until the most recent trailers I didn't even know Theron was in the film.

Jason_V · 06-27-2008, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve_Tk

Up until the most recent trailers I didn't even know Theron was in the film.

IIRC, that was by design. Columbia/Sony wanted to keep Theron as a "surprise." I think I might have read that in Video Business. Anyway, Jason Bateman is the one to watch. He's the best thing about the movie.

Robert Crawford · 07-01-2008, 07:16 AM

This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "Hancock". Please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.

All HTF member film reviews of "Hancock" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

Crawdaddy

Dave Scarpa · 07-02-2008, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shad R

Just got back from my screening. Let me say this...PG-13!?!Really?!?!How?!?! I won't ruin it, but there is an...image...of a man "stuck", that really made me go WHOA! The language is really bad, the movie has kind of a mean spirit, and the story is very adult in nature. I am guessing a lot of parents with kids will be refunding tickets, thus boosting Wall-E's gross.
Now, the review.
It is a jumbled mess of scenes and ideas. There is alot of wasted talent. Not to say I didn't laugh, I did, but their was no flow and the narrative wanders from place to place. I enjoyed act one...but that second and third act was stretching it. The funniest parts of the movie were in the first 30 minutes, then it makes a wierd turn and starts to get mean spirited. Also, it seems to not know weather it's spoof comedy, funny superhero movie, serious superhero movie with some comedy or an action movie. The last hour or so is just a mess of a movie. And the ending seemed very strange and random. Smith gets off some great lines in the beginning, and Bateman pretty much plays it straight(and is not utilized for his comedic delivery and timing like in Arrested Developement or Juno.) But what a mess! And that shaky camera style does NOT fit a movie like this. It was distracting. You can tell it was supposed to be R rated.
Final Score: B- (almost a C+ if it weren't for some funny moments in the beginning).
Again, this is NOT standard Willie Style PG-13 humor, this is very R-rated in nature, so be warned.

Would'nt doubt it started it's development cycle as R and then was cut dowwn to PG-13 to be a "Kid Friendly" summer film, but what they don't get in Tinsel town is the spirit of the movie should earn the rating along with the language, violence and sex. It's the quest for the almighty PG-13 that destroys many a film.

**HTF Ads**

Quentin · 07-02-2008, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Scarpa

Would'nt doubt it started it's development cycle as R and then was cut dowwn to PG-13 to be a "Kid Friendly" summer film, but what they don't get in Tinsel town is the spirit of the movie should earn the rating along with the language, violence and sex. It's the quest for the almighty PG-13 that destroys many a film.

I've yet to see a movie ruined by making the cut from R to PG13.

HANCOCK has problems that go way beyond ratings. For starters, it's 2 separate movies and neither one of them has a clear cut antagonist.

DavidPla · 07-02-2008, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin

I've yet to see a movie ruined by making the cut from R to PG13.

I agree. If a film works.. it's going to work regardless. If it doesn't... R, PG-13 or G won't change it.
I still don't understand why people think an R Rating suddenly makes a film better?

Patrick Sun · 07-02-2008, 11:52 PM

At least this film answered one question I've had for almost a decade:

Spoiler:

Diallo B · 07-03-2008, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidPla

I agree. If a film works.. it's going to work regardless. If it doesn't... R, PG-13 or G won't change it.
I still don't understand why people think an R Rating suddenly makes a film better?

i feel that the cash grab to garner a larger audience hurts many films that end up being pg-13. true a good film is a good film BUT the 1980's had some good R rated material that had pg-13 been available then would have ruined the movies. i.e. most 1980's action flicks....

lest you forget the pg-13 rating was made in order to increase the potential audience in the first place. thus, enabling potentially more box office receipts....