*** Official HANCOCK Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Malcolm R]

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

 

[Steve_Tk]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Quentin]

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]

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]

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

How Charlize Theron would have done in the role of Supergirl...pretty well, if she had a decent script to work with in such a film.

 

[Diallo B]

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....

 

[DavidPla]

Well, more because people were complaining that PG-Rated movies were a little too intense.

 

[Diallo B]

i understand where you are coming from. but lets be real. we know that without the motivation of potential additional capital that the rating change would never have taken place.

seriously.

 

[Zack Gibbs]

Here's a link to the original script. I stayed far away from this so I'll wait to check it out at home, but I'm betting this script is better than the movie.

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/image...08/tonight.pdf

 

[Quentin]

The original script is NOT better than the movie. In fact, if you read it you will likely wonder how on earth it was ever a 'hot commodity' in the first place. It is hard R, terribly dark, unfunny, gratuitous, and plain boring. It's not a good script at all. But, it does have one original idea. I guess that's all it takes.

And, reading it will hardly ruin the movie for you. They are two very different creatures.

 

[Rocky F]

Thanks for that link Zack, I was actually just about to Google it. I'm at work now, but just glancing through the first few pages, I think Quentin may be right, it's totally different, and certainly doesn't look any better. For the record, I guess I lowered my expectations enough before seeing the movie, because I really enjoyed it. It's not perfect, but I really enjoyed the unique take on the superhero mythology, and I actually liked the plot twist involving Theron.

 

[Qui-Gon John]

Well, the main bad guy, "Red" I think, may fit into it as JosephJD mentions in the Review Thread.

Mary mentions something about "they" always find us, come after us, etc. And the bad guy talks as if he knows Mary and John, saying I'm extinguishing her and this is the end for you. It's been a good run for you but now it's over, etc. Perhaps this character is a bad "immortal" against their "good". But different M.O. Since he lost the first hand and it didn't grow back, maybe he can be hurt and killed, but then comes back in another body and continues his pursuit of Mary and John.

I'm not saying I know, or this is how it is, I'm just making some guesses based on some rather small clues we're given in the movie.

 

[Jari K]

They hear more "foul language" among their friends than in any PG-13-rated film..

So, it this good? Funny?

 

[Qui-Gon John]

Well, total supposition here, but maybe:

The "they" is some kind of entity that moves from person to person and moved into Red as he got closer to both John and Mary.

 

[Shawn_KE]

Movie was very "meh". Bateman is the only real bright spot.

were the guys who came to kill Hancock at the end supposed to be superpowered as well? They took a beating, well the henchmen at least

What a forgettable movie.

 

[Nick P]

Did anyone catch this? When Mary and John were fighting in the street and people were running for cover there was someone or something running with them that appeared to be 10-12 foot tall, slim build, and was hunched over as it/he/she ran for cover. What the hell was that? The only thing I could think of was one of those stilt-walkers like you see at a carnival but I didn't see one earlier in the movie.

 

[Tim Glover]

I noticed that too! Seriously, good catch and like you, wondered what the heck that was?!