Hancock!!!!!!
- Thread starter percept
- Start date
It's supposed to come out on July 2ed, but I see the trailers to it and maybe it's just my cynicism but it's a turn off. It might be good (See what the reviews are) but I'm not jumping up and down to see it. I also think it has to do with the comic book (If this is another comic book character) burnout. So many of these types of movies coming out this summer that it almost makes me wish we got a true bonafide science fiction film that doesn't have to do with superheroes.
it's not a comic-book character. it's an original story using a superhero, like "My Super-Ex Girlfriend"
Except without the domestic abuse, hopefully.
From what I've seen and read, this is more of a dark satire of superhero fiction -- what if someone with Superman's power were a screwed-up, irresponsible, uncaring alcoholic rather than a clean-cut idealist? Which is a scary concept when you think about it. Apparently the film is even darker and more adult than the ad campaign suggests; it needed to tone down a number of elements of the story to avoid an R rating. (Which seems like a shame; if they wanted to make a movie that was a dark, subversive alternative to the usual superhero fare, they shouldn't have had to tone it down so the studios could market it as more of the same.)
OK, you lost me on that one.
From the Wikipedia description of the plot, the "Super Ex-Girlfriend", out of jealousy, publicly embarrasses the male lead, destroys his car, causes him to lose his job and then throws a Shark through his window.
Yeah, sure, this is all supposed to be humourous, but it's still saying it's okay to use violence to make someone get back together with you.
From the Wikipedia description of the plot, the "Super Ex-Girlfriend", out of jealousy, publicly embarrasses the male lead, destroys his car, causes him to lose his job and then throws a Shark through his window.
Yeah, sure, this is all supposed to be humourous, but it's still saying it's okay to use violence to make someone get back together with you.
Haven't you realized by now that domestic violence against men is funny and OK and domestic violence against women is evil and wrong?
Last edited:
Haven't you realized by now that domestic violence against men if funny and OK and domestic violence against women is evil and wrong?
Well of course it is, we have thousands of hours of TV movies to tell us that!
It's called the Lifetime Network.Haven't you realized by now that domestic violence against men if funny and OK and domestic violence against women is evil and wrong?
Well of course it is, we have thousands of hours of TV movies to tell us that!
Err, no, it isn't saying it's okay to do that. It's saying that G-Girl is a dangerous, neurotic wack-job because she does that. Comedy isn't about role models, it's about human flaws, follies, and failures. Generally it doesn't endorse its characters' behavior, it mocks it.
This is what Dan Quayle failed to understand when he condemned Murphy Brown for "glorifying single motherhood." Murphy was a mean, neurotic, foul-tempered, emotionally dysfunctional character, anything but a role model held up as an example to be emulated. Comedy isn't about glorifying anything; it's about deflating and deconstructing everything. For instance, in the case of My Super Ex-Girlfriend, deconstructing the myth of a superpowered person who's a paragon of virtue, and recognizing the reality that power corrupts, that many people would abuse superpowers in very petty and personal ways. That if some random cosmic accident gave someone incredible power, the odds are against that person being perfectly balanced and noble and ethical in every way.
(Which is not to say it's a good movie. It has a good idea, but the execution is mediocre at best.)
Hancock looks like a less goofy, more gritty take on the same premise, that superhuman power in irresponsible hands can be very dangerous. I hope it turns out better than Super Ex-Girlfriend did.
What??? You think he's the one responsible for that? He doesn't make the movies singlehandedly. He gets star vehicles built around him because he's a proven box-office success and the studio executives recognize it's in their best interests to make movies that give the audience a lot of him. And he's not even remotely the only one. There have been countless earlier movie stars that were just as popular and just as central to their films.
Besides, you haven't seen the film yet, so how do you know it's "solely about him"? All you know is that the trailer focuses on him, but of course trailers are meant as advertising and are thus designed to emphasize the aspects of the film that will presumably the biggest draws. As a result, they are quite often misleading about the content and emphasis of a film.
X2. Someone is living OUTSIDE of reality.
Will Smith is in the list of Top 5 most bankable stars in Hollywood.
From early reviews, I have heard that Jason Bateman's character is just as prominent as Will Smith's. It actually sounds like a pretty good movie, overall. A subversive take on the superhero concept is something we don't see enough of.
I'd imagine that Oscar winner Charlize Theron probably has a fairly substantial part too.
I'm just saying, most movies I've seen starring Will Smith are only about Will Smith's character.
X2. Someone is living OUTSIDE of reality.
Will Smith is in the list of Top 5 most bankable stars in Hollywood.
I also know that I don't like him. No matter how many different characters he plays, he just seems like Will Smith to me.
