THE OBENSON REPORT

Covering Cinema From All Across The African Diaspora
Showing posts with label summer blockbusters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label summer blockbusters. Show all posts

Alicia Keys As Agent 355

Well, maybe... maybe not. But the producer of the adaptation wants her in the role, and given how meaty a role it is, it'll be hard for her to say no, if offered.

Yet another graphic novel adaptation is in the works, which certainly shouldn't be a surprise to any of you anymore. This time it's another critically acclaimed fanboy/fangirl classic titled, Y: The Last Man. In the comic book series, Yorick Brown, a young amateur escape artist, and his monkey, Ampersand, suddenly become the last two men on earth after something mysterious wipes out every mammal on the planet possessing a Y chromosome - including embryos, fertilized eggs, and even sperm. Society is plunged into chaos as infrastructures collapse and the surviving women everywhere try to cope with the loss of the men. Yorick goes on a mission to find his girlfriend Beth, who was on vacation in Australia, and we go along with him on that expedition, accompanied by his body guard, Agent 355, the role Alicia Keys would play
, who works for a secretive US government agency.

The character is listed 2nd in the list of credits, indicative of how substantial the role is. I haven't read the graphic novel, although I plan to, but every rendition I've seen of Agent 355 presents her as a black woman. Yorick is, naturally, a white man, who will be played by the current young "it" guy, Shia Labeouf, whose name seems to show up attached to every new project I read about.

From the little I've read about the character, I'm not so sure Alicia is right for the role. Agent 355 is pretty much a bad-ass chick! She kicks ass, confidently handling a variety of weapons. The closest Keys has come to a character like that in her fledgling acting career, was as Georgia Sykes in Smokin' Aces (2006), a film I didn't care for, although I don't recall her performance much. I'd rather see an ACTRESS in the role, like maybe Taraji P Henson, whom I think would be much more convincing. Or how about going with an unknown? Given the film's 2010 expected release date, I wouldn't be surprised to see Zoe Saldana thrown into the mix since her turn as Uhura in 2009's Star Trek movie might have increased awareness of her by the time Y: The Last Man comes around.

As long as it's not a white actress in blackface...


SOURCE

The Psychology Of The Dark Knight

In the spirit of the times, the History Channel aired an interesting 1-hour program last night titled Batman Unmasked: The Psychology of the Dark Knight, which I caught the second half of, unfortunately. The show gets underneath not just the armor of Batman, the caped crusader, but also that of his alter ego, Bruce Wayne, examining why Batman is who he is, closely exploring his motivations - how a boy scarred by tragedy becomes a symbol of hope to others. The few segments I saw, while not as thorough as I'd have preferred, intrigued me, and I'd recommend watching the program if you're a fan of the superhero.

If you missed it, or just don't have cable TV, and would like to see it, the entire thing is available on YouTube, in 5 parts.

Here are the first 10 minutes:


Find the rest at YouTube.

The Time Has Come...

Exactly 24 hours from now, you know where I'll be (insert hysterical Joker laughter here)! Give how quickly screenings have been selling out over the last 2 weeks, I was surprised I was able to get into one on opening day!

According to Deadline Hollywood Daily: ... close to 4,000 shows have been sold out! Even the number of locations in North America where the comic book caper will be playing -- 4,366 -- is an Industry record. 1,700 of the sell-outs are for showtimes between 12:01 AM and 8:00AM Friday. There are sold-out shows through the weekend from Washington D.C. to Puyallup, Washington, and in towns like Bozeman, Montana and Fitchburg, Wisconsin. 6:00AM shows are scheduled in big cities and small, from San Diego to Hazelwood, Missouri, and Tigard, Oregon, etc. Fandango COO Rick Butler says: “Friday is pacing to be our biggest ticket-selling day in company history. It’s very possible that we’ll break our hourly ticketing record by tomorrow morning.” Currently, Dark Knight represents 94% of ticket sales on Fandango.com, the nation’s leading movie ticketing destination.

It's madness!

Leaked Terminator 4: Salvation Teaser Trailer (Christian Bale)

This probably won't last long, because it's a leaked trailer, which I'm sure Warner Bros won't like, and will have it pulled once they find out it exists! Rumor is that the trailer is supposed to play before The Dark Knight opening this weekend, which makes sense since both movies star Christian Bale. The movie doesn't come out until a year from now, by the way, but they're already beating the drums...

Watch it while you still can. This tape will self-destruct in 5, 4, 3, 2, ...

UPDATE 5:54PM: As expected, the video was pulled from YouTube! BUT, if you didn't catch it, it's now over at Yahoo's movie page here: http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810025211/trailer. They may have had exclusive rights or something...

Cheadle's 'Traitor' Gets Rating

I just learned that the MPAA slapped a PG-13 rating on Don Cheadles's upcoming espionage thriller, Traitor, which I've written about previously on this blog.

I don't know if I like that. Based on all I've seen and read thus far, I was hoping for a "mature" film for an adult audience, not some watered down, softened up summer movie, made to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. I know, I know, it comes down to the proverbial bottomline - profit!

But knowing that it's going be a PG-13 movie (instead of a hard R) makes me a little less enthusiastic about seeing it.

Of course, I'll still see it, but I'd be lying if I said my already uncertain expectations haven't been lowered.

Traitor hits theatres August 27th.

Incase you need a reminder... here's the trailer:

Say It Ain't So - One Critic Actually Doesn't Like 'The Dark Knight?'

David Edelstein, the influential film critic for New York Magazine is the first soul brave enough to actually say anything negative about the next Batman installment, The Dark Knight! It's been all champagne and caviar buzz over the last several weeks, which you'd know if you've been reading this blog.

Here are some of his thoughts:

-
The novelty wears off and the lack of imagination, visual and otherwise, turns into a drag. The Dark Knight is noisy, jumbled, and sadistic. Even its most wondrous vision—Batman’s plunges from skyscrapers, bat-wings snapping open as he glides through the night like a human kite—can’t keep the movie airborne. There’s an anvil attached to that cape.

-
The tumult is spectacularly incoherent. Nolan appears to have no clue how to stage or shoot action. He got away with the chopped-up fights in Batman Begins because his hero was a barely glimpsed ninja, coming at villains from all angles in stroboscopic flashes. There are more variables here, which means more opportunities to say “What the f--- just happened?” I defy you to make spatial sense of the early scene in which Batman battles faux Batmen, gangsters, and the Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy in a cameo that comes to nothing).

Of course, keep in mind this is the same dude who liked
You Don't Mess With The Zohan!

Read the rest of his review here: EDELSTEIN ON DARK KNIGHT

'The Dark Knight' SPOILER IMAGES!

*****SPOILER ALERT *****

You've been warned!

Proceed at your own risk!

Still here??

You Sure??

Ok!

Here ya go --

With all the anticipation building up for next week's theatrical release of The Dark Knight, it's no surprise when fanboys and girls who've been lucky enough to see early screenings of the film, release spoiler information to the rest of us, like the fellow below who snuck out of a press screening with screenshots he captured with his cellphone camera! 21st century technology is a wonderful thing isn't it?

The images reveal Heath Ledger in a nurse's uniform, apparently fleeing some kind of an explosion, and *GASP* Aaron Eckhart in full Two-Face glory (one of the big surprises that none of the trailers nor other marketing materials for the film reveal). Warner Bros ain't gonna like this, so don't be surprised if the pictures come down sooner than later. Get'em while they're hot, if you must.


Click each one for an enlarged view:



SOURCE: ANIMAL NEW YORK DARK NIGHT SPOILER PICS

Due to Demand, Many Theaters Screening 'Dark Knight' at 3 AM & 6 AM

Damn! I'm usually just getting up at 6AM. WTF? Are fanboys and girls really that rabid about the film that they'd get up that early (even earlier to get to the theatre by 6) in the morning to go see The Dark Knight on a IMAX screen? I guess so!

I have heard that the IMAX renditions of the film are superior and definitely worthwhile, so I'm hoping I can watch it that way.

I haven't bought my ticket yet, but given how quickly these screenings are selling out, I may have to wait until the 3rd week of the film's release to see the damn thing!

From the
New York Times:

- In a frenzy, fans have bought so many late-night tickets for the July 18 opening of the next Batman movie that theaters in places like San Diego, Chicago, and even Eagan, Minn., are scheduling 6 a.m. screenings for those who can’t get in at midnight or 3 in the morning!

Madness... simply madness... the Joker would most certainly approve! I can hear him laughing hysterically already!

Hancock is already forgotten... after all that hype.

The rest here: NY TIMES - DARK KNIGHT

Script Review, 'Tonight, He Comes' AKA 'Hancock'

OK! Following up with what I said in THIS POST, I just finished reading the original 226-page script for Tonight, He Comes, the screenplay that the film Hancock is based on, written by Vincent Ngo. You can get a copy of the script here: TONIGHT, HE COMES.

I should first point out that this draft was written in 1996, 12 years ago! So, it's a project that's been floating around for quite awhile. During that time period, 5 different directors have been attached to it (some big names actually, like Michael Mann and Tony Scott), and almost as many writers; although Will Smith attached himself to star in the film in 2005. So, it went through several rewrites by different writers, which, history I think will show, is often to the script's detriment.

This case does nothing to end that trend.

It’s far from a perfect script; but I must say that what I read appealed to me much moreso than the film that opened last week.

I say the script is far from perfect because it has its share of flaws – flaws that are ironically similar to those that many of us found in the finished film.

Yes, there are a few similarities between script and film, but I was surprised at how really different the combined effect of the words on the page were to what I saw on screen.

The tone and mood of the script contradict what we experience in the film, but I think it works. Hancock is a dark, brooding, tormented soul – nothing humorous about this fella. Despite his vices – he smokes and drinks heavily, spending nights in shitty dives, drowning his ills in alcohol and cigarettes, while picking up prostitutes - he has taken it upon himself to be humanity’s savior. There are moments when he flies into action, and performs superheroic acts like foiling a bank robbery attempt. But, surprisingly, those moments are very few. There’s very little of the usual “Superhero” mechanics you’d expect in a superhero story, which, I’m sure, irked the studio execs who likely preferred a little (or much) more opportunities for spectacle. After all, it is a superhero movie, right?

Not quite.

The script is as much about superheroes, as E.T. was about alien invasions. Each grandiose idea attracts you to the story, but as you read/watch, you realize that there’s a lot more going on than originally advertised.

As I already stated, Hancock is a dark, brooding, tormented soul. I’d even add mercurial to the mix. Unlike the film, he’s the ONLY one of his kind (if you’ve seen the film, or read the spoilers, you know what I’m referring to). And he’s taken it upon himself to maintain peace and order on earth (or specifically, New York, since that’s where the entire story takes place). However, his choice has become his burden. He realizes he has a “gift” (although we never really learn where he came from, or how he got his powers), and, as the saying goes, to whom much is given, much is expected, a credo that he seems to live by.

He’s certainly no Superman - the pure, practically perfect superhero - Jesus Christ in leotards and a red cape, if you will – far from it. But he believes in something – truth, justice, altruism – despite his many vices, which are exploited repeatedly within the 226-page script.


Perfect he is not.

The only coda he seems to live by, which is voiced many times over by several different characters in the script, is, “I gotta do what I gotta do.” In essence, do what you must with what you’ve got, to get what you want. Or even possibly - make the most out of the cards that life has dealt you. No complaining! No regrets!

What Hancock ultimately wants is to be free of his burden. There are a handful of dream sequences in which he’s drowning in the cries and tears of the "simple" men and women, wanting to be saved from whatever troubles ail them, but he can’t silence the noises – something akin to Deanna Troi in the Star Trek: The Next Generation television show, the telepath who’s able to sense and feel the emotions buried within others. So, when others feel pain, their sadness becomes her sadness, and there isn’t much she can do to stop it, even though sometimes she’d like to. But it’s her burden to bear… it’s her “gift”… she's "gotta do what she’s gotta do.”

Hancock wants to be saved, a request he places on Mary Longfellow, the wife of Horus Longfellow (a security guard at a local mall and all-around wimp), and mother of Aaron Longfellow (an 8-year old replica of his father, and frequent target of school bullies) – in the filmed version, these 3 characters are instead represented by the Embreys: Charlize Theron (house wife Mary), Jason Bateman (Ray, Public relations pro) and the kid who plays their son (also a target for bullies).

The Longfellows are clearly a couple of notches lower on the socio-economic ladder, relative to the middle to upper middle class Embreys. Horus almost became a “real” cop, but failed out of police academy. So he becomes the next best thing, a security guard – one lacking big enough testicles to stand up to his bully next door neighbor, who regularly steals his daily morning paper, to the dismay of Horus and Mary.

Horus is rather pathetic, and his son, Aaron, hates that his father is without a spine. Aaron himself is no tough guy either, taking after his father, allowing 3 school bullies to make his life quite miserable as they find new ways of tormenting him, usually ending in a group beating.

Mary is simply wife and mother, providing man and boy with as much emotional support as they need to survive one day after another. She is the rock that keeps the household stable – as stable as it can be in its current state, anyway.

As expected, their rather mundane lives change when their paths cross with that of Hancock’s. Whether it’s for the better or worse isn’t entirely certain to me, even after reading the script through to the end.

A common question that script readers ask screenwriters is, “what is your script REALLY about,” hinting at the fact that at the heart of every story, no matter the packaging, is some basic idea or message that guides the plot from “FADE IN” to the “FADE OUT.”

At its core, Tonight, He Comes wants to deconstruct traditional definitions of masculinity – asking age old questions like, “what does it mean to be a man?” But it doesn't quite succeed, as this theme isn't necessarily carried throughout the script, making it feel inconsistent, much like the film.

Is Hancock the ideal man? We see him, all-powerful, indestructible and confident, which breeds a certain kind of persona that women swoon over, as they throw themselves at him, even if it’s just for a night of physical pleasure, which we see happen at least twice. Yet, despite all of those “perks” as some would call them, inside, he longs to be a simple man, living a simple life, free of his “burden.”

Clearly Horus isn’t the ideal man – certainly the script doesn’t think so. Hence, while Hancock essentially longs for Horus’s kind of life, Horus wishes he had Hancock’s abilities. So, who’s really better off here? Who's the real man? Trading places wouldn’t solve their individual problems entirely, but it’s clear that both wouldn’t mind walking in the other’s shoes, even for a day. The conundrum created by this dynamic is actually quite fascinating I think, but unfortunately isn’t fully explored in the script. That alone – a besieged superhero and his desire to be human, intersecting with a wimpy human and his desire to be a superhero – could have been developed into something substantial, but the writer ignored that premise mostly, unfortunately.

What we instead get are 4 different stories that aren’t fully realized, much like the film. At the end of my reading, I wasn’t sure whose story was being told in the script. Each character got just about equal face time, but none of their individual stories develops into anything particularly interesting.

Like the movie, I was intrigued during the first half – the overall Dark Knight tone of it kept me interested. I remember imagining the city and sites as the writer described them in the script, and my mind’s eye frequently reverting to Gotham, right out of the last Batman movie - seedy, unwelcoming, Hades on earth. I loved that. It worked for me, especially given Hancock’s M.O. as I described above. For those first 60 pages, Hancock (the character) was interesting to me. I wanted to get to know him a little longer. His mercurial nature kept me wondering what was going to happen with him next.

The Longfellows in their individual roles were familiar; but their normality provided a useful contrast to Hancock’s troubled superheroics.

Also like the movie, the script loses its way in the second half. It becomes “regular,” relying on old favorites to push the story forward, which annoyed me a bit actually. It’s perplexing when a writer/filmmaker starts off with refreshing promise, building up expectations of a strong, rewarding finish, but then throws it all away in the end. The writer introduces some really interesting ideas early on that could have been explored further, but at the finish, he favors convention over invention.

Both Horus and Aaron (thanks in part to Hancock’s intrusion in their lives), finally decide to fight back against their “oppressors,” and I guess we’re supposed to cheer for them, in proverbial happy ending fashion, as each apparently becomes a man, displaying some testicular fortitude. However, Hancock is left still carrying his burden, unable to see his wish realized at the hands of Mary. So, Hancock essentially becomes the catalyst that Horus and Aaron needed to change, with Mary acting as not much more than a decoy; Horus, in a primordial way, fulfills his wish. He becomes a superhero of sorts - at least to his son.

As I said earlier, I wasn’t quite sure whose story was central. There doesn’t have to be some singular story, but having several that are half-cocked isn’t the way to go either.

As I read, I could see why this version of the script didn’t go into production. At 226 pages, it meanders too often, and carries with it other problems that I think could have been fixed in a second or third draft, while still maintaining the mood and ideas intact, creating what may have been a really strong finished product! I can see why a filmmaker like Michael Mann was intially drawn to it - just consider quietly intense films like Heat, The Insider, and Collateral, films he directed, and in 2 cases, wrote the screenplays for. Tonight, He Comes, even in its 1996 form, is right up his alley. Although, that version wouldn’t have seen the light of day. For a summer superhero movie, it’ll have been considered too profound – too philosophical/not enough action – essentially a superhero movie that’s missing one key ingredient: the superhero being superheroic. The comedic tone of Will Smith’s Hancock is likely closer to what the studio execs preferred, which is ultimately what we got, unfortunately. Although I'd like to think that a happy medium exists somewhere between both extremes.

However, in closing, if I had to choose between Hancock in 2008 and Tonight, He Comes in 1996, without hesitation, I'd choose Vincent Ngo's original script! Despite being 12 years old, it's a much more superior and ambitious package than what Sony has given us.


I hear that there might be a sequel to Hancock, if it performs well financially - especially after this opening weekend. Tomorrow's numbers will tell...

'Hancock' And Its "Iffy Racial Subtexts"


Ok... I know... I'm overloading you with all my Hancock posts. What can I say, it's the topic du jour, and stars the biggest box office draw of this century, who, by the way, happens to be black!

Don't worry, the noise will eventually fade out. But based on the outrageously high number of hits that this blog has received in the last 2 weeks, since I posted the spoiler review - 90% of them from Google searches for the film or various amalgamations of terms and phrases including the film's title - it's clear that Hancock mania has taking over the world, and probably won't start to die out until The Dark Knight's release date arrives!

I found this conversation between two WIRED Magazine writers, discussing the film and its merits. What caught my eye instantly was this sentence: "... this movie could be read as a white power fantasy about the successful containment of black masculinity."

Of course I had to read on, so I did. And you can too, by simply clicking here -> WIRED On Hancock.

Trailer - 'Meet Dave' (Eddie Murphy, Gabrielle Union)

I didn't realize this had been circulating around the blogosphere for some time already. I hadn't seen it until today, so I'm posting it for those who haven't seen it either.

The film is called Meet Dave (formerly known as Starship Dave). The plot: In busy New York's Central Park a massive fireball crash lands, with a man emerging unscathed. He's Dave (Eddie Murphy), a human-shaped spaceship controlled by 100 little aliens. Its captain (also played by Murphy) pilots the Dave Spaceship along with his crew from inside its head. The aliens are seeking a way to save their planet, however complications arise when Dave falls in love... with a white woman (cue dramatic crescendo here).


The film opens July 11th. Will I see it? Umm... No!! I think this one's for the little kiddies.

Here's the trailer for the $100 Million film, starring the no-longer-retiring Eddie Murphy and Gabrielle Union. Given the budget, might this be another Pluto Nash?:

Original 'Hancock' Screenplay!

You can read my thorough analysis of the script here: TONIGHT, HE COMES SCRIPT REVIEW. I actually liked the script more than I did the movie.

Thanks to Sergio for the heads up on this!

What we've got here is the original 126-page script for Hancock, initially titled, Tonight, He Comes.

The film in its release form is roughly 90 minutes long. The original Vincent Ngo-written script is 126 pages. For those of you who went to film school, or know a few things about the relationship between the written word and the visual image, you'd immediately notice the discrepancy here! In short, one industry standard page of a screenplay is equivalent to 1 minute of screen time. Obviously that formular isn't entirely exact, but if you compared most completed films with their screenplays, you'd notice that, for example, a 90-page screenplay will almost always produce a 90-minute film, or thereabouts.

In Hancock's case, we've got a 126-page screenplay, but ended up with a 90-minute film, which immediately indicates that a solid 30+ minutes was gutted somewhere in the production process, and I am certainly interested in knowing what that 30-minutes contained!

Skimming the pages of the script, I immediately noticed several differences from the film I saw - notably the use of profanity. As we already know, Sony wanted to deliver a PG13-rated movie, not an R-rated rump, hence all the reshooting we heard about (You can read my post on that HERE, in which director Peter Berg was quoted as saying about a previous incarnation of the film, "Hancock has remained surprisingly sexual, violent and true in spirit to an original script that was viewed as brilliant but unmakable.").

This should be an interesting read. I plan on going through the entire script this weekend, and I'll post my thoughts on it afterwards, making comparisons between what was written and what was filmed.

Courtesy of Hollywood Elsewhere, here's a link to the PDF script (get it while it's hot): TONIGHT, HE COMES.

Watch The First 5 Minutes Of 'The Dark Knight'!

This footage was apparently shown in December before certain Imax screenings of I Am Legend and hasn't been seen since. It just resurfaced. It features a set of sinister men in clown masks who attempt to pull off an outrageous bank heist while snarling to themselves about a new criminal who's terrorising Gotham City: a make-up wearing weirdo who goes by the name of The Joker.

The quality and sound are poor here, but it's still well worth a look. And do it now, because the last time this footage hit the web, it was gone almost as soon as it was made available!

9 Ways Hancock Could Have Been A Better Movie

Found this over at io9.com. I couldn't have said it all any better myself.

Read on...

9 Ways Hancock Could Have Been A Pretty Good Movie (or ways Hancock could have sucked considerably less)

Here's number 9 on the list:


#9 - Decide what kind of movie you're making: And here's really the crux of what went wrong with Hancock. Is it a crazy outrageous comedy about a shitty superhero? Then fucking go for it, and show us how crazy you can get. Is it an understated Jason Bateman comedy about a P.R. exec who tries to work with a superhero to improve his image? That actually could have been a great film, if the whole movie was about that. Is it an exploration of why Hancock is such a dick? Or is it a tragic love story of two immortal and nice-looking people who can never be together? (If so, then no thanks.) If Hancock had picked one movie to be, it might have managed to be pretty okay. Instead, it's a mash-up of five really bad movies.

See the remaining 8 on the list HERE.

First Official Batman 'Dark Knight' Review

Peter Travers over at Rolling Stone Magazine has seen The Dark Knight and throws in his $.02 about the upcoming sequel to Batman Begins, aka, The Dark Knight, yes, ladies and gents, it's a stunner - not that I had any doubts. I don't think any of the usual introductions are necessary here; I've already expressed a strong desire to see it; So I won't waste your time with a rehash of what I already said here. Instead, just dig right in and share in the reviewer's thrill:

Heads up: a thunderbolt is about to rip into the blanket of bland we call summer movies. The Dark Knight, director Christopher Nolan's absolute stunner of a follow-up to 2005's Batman Begins, is a potent provocation decked out as a comic-book movie. Feverish action? Check. Dazzling spectacle? Check. Devilish fun? Check. But Nolan is just warming up. There's something raw and elemental at work in this artfully imagined universe. Striking out from his Batman origin story, Nolan cuts through to a deeper dimension. Huh? Wha? How can a conflicted guy in a bat suit and a villain with a cracked, painted-on clown smile speak to the essentials of the human condition? Just hang on for a shock to the system. The Dark Knight creates a place where good and evil — expected to do battle — decide instead to get it on and dance. "I don't want to kill you," Heath Ledger's psycho Joker tells Christian Bale's stalwart Batman. "You complete me." Don't buy the tease. He means it.

If there's a movement to get him the first posthumous Oscar since Peter Finch won for 1976's Network, sign me up. Ledger's Joker has no gray areas — he's all rampaging id.

It's full of surprises you don't see coming. And just try to get it out of your dreams.

WHOA! Just try to get it out of your dreams? Also, I see the chant for a posthumous Oscar for Heath Ledger already has a chorus section... this isn't the first time I'm hearing it.

Read the entire review HERE. By the way, it opens 2 weeks after Hancock.

Early Batman 'The Dark Night' Review

This is one film I'm looking forward to seeing this summer - probably more than any other summer blockbuster offerings. Tim Burton hooked me in 1989; Joel Schumacher killed whatever hopes I had for the future of the franchise in 1995 & 1997; and, thankfully, now Christopher Nolan has renewed my interest.

One thing that has always attracted me to this particular super hero is that, unlike many others, he's human - sans any super-human abilities like say, Super Man, Spider Man, Hulk, Fantastic Four, etc. He didn't get bitten by a radioactive spider, nor was he born on some foreign superior planet. He's a vulnerable earthling - albeit a wealthy one - who uses man-made technology, and his own physical agility to challenge the rampant villainy in his native Gotham city. So, maybe in that regard, he really isn't a super hero in the comic-book sense, but rather a masked vigilante of sorts, whose aim is to rid his city of the criminal element destroying it - not-so unlike maybe Dirty Harry, or Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver, or almost every character Charles Bronson ever portrayed. He bleeds like I do, and he can die in the same ways that I can, yet he is unrelenting in his pursuits. That makes him all the more intriguing a character - to me anyway.

So, it brought me great joy to read the first full review of the film that I've seen anywhere (the film doesn't open until the middle of July) to find out that it does indeed satisfy all the hype that's been following it since the announcement of the sequel almost 3 years ago - at least, according to this reviewer. I'm sure there'll be some dissenters, but they won't deter me from purchasing my $12 ticket on that glorious day when the film opens in theatres in my wonderful version of Gotham, also known as New York City!

Here's are a couple of snippets from the
AICN review included below:

“The film feels more like a crime drama in a grand city scape than a typical comic book movie. It feels like Heat except Batman is Al Pacino and The Joker is Robert De Niro and just like in that film we have a great scene between Heath Ledger and Christian Bale across a table. There is also an element of a Greek Tragedy.. There is a vast sense of morality at play within the film.”

" Heath Ledgers performance of the joker is truly one for the books. A man of no remorse or morals who simply wants to see things burn... He is far from a caricature and has depth. The Joker is almost more of a terrorist than criminal. He is not motivated bymoney. He wants to see people suffer... Best supporting Oscar anyone?"

You can read the entire review HERE.

Official Variety Magazine 'Hancock' Review!

This came in a little earlier than expected. I guess we can call it the first "official" review of Hancock.

Thanks to Sergio for the email heads-up!

Based on what the reviewer states below, the blog entry I posted about the film last week - the one with the spoilers - isn't too far off in accuracy and perspective. Also, this review agrees with the overwhelmingly negative sentiment amongst those who've already seen the film in some form.

Despite all of that, I still think the film will do well - or at the very least, it'll have a strong opening weekend. What it does after that depends greatly on word of mouth, because it will face some stiff competition in the weeks after its release from the likes of the next Batman movie and a few other notables. So, its opening weekend will be crucial.

Will it make its budget back? Probably! At an incredible $150 Million, it'll be a tall order, even for Will Smith. With marketing costs included, that number will likely be closer to $200 Million. But one thing Will has going for him is his popularity in foreign markets. So, even if the film flops in the States, it could do very well internationally.

Here's Variety's review by Todd McCarthy:

An intriguing high concept is undermined by low-grade dramaturgy in “Hancock.” This misguided attempt to wring a novel twist on the superhero genre has a certain whiff of “The Last Action Hero” about it, with Will Smith playing an indestructible crime-buster in a pointedly real-world context. Although it will inevitably open very large, this odd and perplexing aspiring tentpole will provide a real test of Smith’s box office invincibility.

The central idea of Vy Vincent Ngo and Vince Gilligan’s script -- of Smith’s John Hancock being an ornery, unwilling hero who escapes from his ordained role in life via booze and general cantankerousness -- is amusing and plausible enough to sustain the first section of the film. What the writers and director Peter Berg do with the concept in the end, however, is nowhere near sufficiently thought out, and narrative illogic and missed opportunities plague the film increasingly as it cartwheels through its surprisingly brief running time.

When the world-famous Hancock reluctantly swings into action -- he can fly at supersonic speed, lift any weight and is impervious to all weapons -- his drunken recklessness invariably causes more damage than it’s worth.

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.

As much in need of rehab as this week’s tabloid celebrity, the raggedly attired Hancock finds an eager savior in PR whiz Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman). Rescued from certain death by the rasty hero, Ray returns the favor by inviting him to dinner with wife Mary (Charlize Theron) and son Aaron (Jae Head) and announcing he’s going to remake Hancock’s image.

The strongman’s first step will be to submit to rehab and anger-management training, along with some prison time (although Hancock resists wearing an actual superhero outfit because it’s too “homo”). What he shortly does to two tough-talking inmates in the pen crudely literalizes the taunt about sticking your head where the sun don’t shine. Such vulgar goofiness is one thing in an Adam Sandler film, but doesn’t sit well in the rough-and-ready realism of Berg’s raw visuals, which grievously misapply hand-held jitteriness to material that demands more precise stylization.

The genre satire and numerous Will Smith moments, with the star throwing off the attitude-laden quips and looks audiences expect from him, carry the first half without too much trouble, in anticipation of where the film will go from there. Where it goes, unfortunately, is right down the tubes!

Read it all HERE.

'Hancock' Reviews - Twist Revealed!


Warning: LOTS OF SPOILERS AHEAD, so proceed at your own risk.

Still here?


You sure?

Ok, you've been warned!

I just read a few reviews from a number of people who have seen test screenings of possibly the biggest movie this summer with the world's biggest star in Will Smith, Hancock, and the vast majority are negative. Some overwhelmingly so! You can read my spoiler-free review HERE, otherwise keep reading for more of the juicy stuff!

There's a major plot twist that happens about midway through the film, which you'll either hate, or simply go with. It's shifts the tone of the film considerably; but apparently, without it, the film would simply be traveling in circles. Not good!

The trailers are certainly misleading, because this is less an action movie and actually more of a love story - a love story between Will Smith's character (Hancock) and Charlize Theron's, with the super-hero bits operating more as background material.

The film really should have gone with the R-rated version, and included a lot more of the "mature" content than was apparently cut out of the film to ensure a PG13 rating to reel in the younger demographic.
I guess that explains the re-shoots (SEE my Hancock In Ratings Trouble? post from last month for more on that).

Ok, so here's the big Hancock twist revealed halfway through the film:

At this point, I think we all know what the one-sentence synopsis of the films is - a hard-living superhero (Will Smith) who has fallen out of favor with the public, falls for the wife (Charlize Theron) of the public relations professional (Jason Bateman) who's trying to repair the superhero's image.


The midway twist? Charlize's character is a superhero too!! But no one knows this - not Hancock, and not even her husband, Jason Bateman. She reveals her powers in a scene when she and Hancock are alone, and he tries to kiss her, when she suddenly picks him and throws him out the window of her house, sending him flying several hundred feet, before finally slamming into a car's windshield.

Wait, there's more!

Charlize's character later reveals that she and Hancock (Will) are descendants of Gods. She also reveals that they were once husband and wife! We also find out that they are each others respective kryptonites. The more time they spend together, the weaker and more mortal they become, so they need to stay apart. Apparently, she was at the movies with (Hancock) 80 years ago. They were on the road to mortality when Hancock saw a man getting mugged. Hancock intervened and got knocked in the head causing him to loose his memory, and Charlize's character decided to disappear from his life because the world needs one hero -- Hancock!


That's it - the end :o)

You can read one entire spoiler-filled review HERE at AICN. It pretty much runs through the entire film, so, again, read at your own peril. I should point out that it is a month old review, and this was from a test screening, meaning, some things could change before the film opens on July 1st, in 11 days. However, I don't think a major plotline like the "Charlize Theron as superheroine" bit will change.


Ya know, as I watched the trailers, before reading these reviews, I did wonder what the film was really about. The trailers and clips show him performing various super-heroic things, but not much more. I always knew that there was a love story in there, and I did also wonder why none of it is played up in any of the trailers. But I realized that the studio releasing it (Sony I believe) wants to make it seem as accessible as possible to as wide an audience as possible, so, it makes sense to silence that part of the story, and instead play up the action sequences. That's just the nature of the game, I suppose.


So, over all, nothing terribly special! I'd catch a matinee or wait for the DVD!

Why So Serious?

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm REALLY looking forward to seeing this: