<Harry Brown> <Blade Runner> <The Dark Knight> <Paranormal Activity> <X-Men Origins: Wolverine> <Gamer> <Jennifer's Body> <2012>
Hancock
Cert: 12. Cast: Will Smith, Charlize Theron, Jason Bateman, Eddie Marsan. Director: Peter Berg
The 21st century has not been short on films which twist established paradigms within popular genres. This time it’s an alcoholic superhero with a disregard for authority and common etiquette. Hancock (Will smith) is a flying, apparently indestructible (not to mention invulnerable) super “hero”. He regularly saves the lives of the inhabitants of Los Angelis, from a range of threats common to all those in need of rescuing.
Everyone has seen Superman, Spiderman and insert-super-hero-gimmick-here-man effortlessly save lives and disrupt criminal activity leaving behind a generally appreciative public. What they do not expect to see, however, is a super human crime-stopper/life-saver who leaves a path of destruction which costs the public a lot of money while remaining unapologetic.
The entertainment value of this concept alone is very high and is certainly realised on screen. The unconventional context spawns a plotline with subject matter that should be considered, well, unconventional. At least within the context of superhero movies, most of which began life as a comic book forty or fifty years ago before undergoing countless adaptations and technological facelifts (the ratio of action footage inexorably shifting in the favour of CGI).
The lives of our antihero Hancock and Ray Embery (Jason Bateman), who works in PR while living the American dream in your average suburban paradise, become intertwined after Hancock saves him from being run over by a freight train. Ray then decides to act as Hancock’s PR manager – and there you have it, an original direction for this unconventional idea to move in.
This sort of plotline seems predictable though – yet the audience is not to expect the formulaic plot format chosen from a list of formulaic plot formats they might out of a Hollywood movie. The plot takes a totally different direction in the second half of the film. While this certainly causes the audience’s interest to peak, and allows the plot to exercise some considerably intelligence, it does feel as though two different films have been sewn to the back of one another. This is not nearly as damaging as one might think, but it still seems as though the film required a more cautious approach to handling the plot.
So, unfortunately, there is a pretty major aspect of this film leaning towards the “cons” column, but that may be forgiven as directorial and performance efforts definitely hit the mark. The characters are portrayed with a universal credibility, Smith becoming, rather than merely portraying, Hancock (some trademark mannerisms do make it onto the screen though, but they are not detrimental to the performance), with Jason Bateman and Charlize Theron portraying Ray and Mary (Ray’s wife) Embrey to great effect.
Directorial style is also without a doubt a major strength in this film. Deliberately shaky camera movement aids the conveyance of tension at different points throughout. Shots are composed well, the settings saying as much about the characters that occupy them as the characters themselves do. Also, important objects are given attention at strategically chosen points, falling suitably short of painful blatancy.
Director Peter Berg handled this film very well. A strong concept is well conveyed, and even the apparent flaws do not bring this film down to a level below being very good. In general, a success, and certainly worth seeing.