Tweet

For the past couple years, with Will Smith being the most bankable, relateable and profitable celebrity at the box office, people have been wondering if he’s bulletproof. This question will be answered in several ways with his latest film, Hancock.

While Will Smith isn’t literally bulletproof, his title character in Hancock is. He plays an alcoholic jerk of a superhero who does more damage in L.A. than good for the people. And even though he’s a foul-mouthed, anti-role model, he is still compelled to do good deeds. The problem is that the people in Los Angeles (and in particular, the mayor and the chief of police) aren’t that thrilled with the expensive damage he does to the city while fighting crime.

Soon, Hancock stumbles across a good-hearted P.R. flunky (Jason Bateman) who makes it his mission to get the people of L.A. to accept their slovenly superhero. After convincing Hancock to let himself be incarcerated, he gives him a make-over to make him more likable and family friendly.

If you know anything about the production of this movie, the script went through a very similar revision. There was an essence of something the studio liked, but they demanded changes from the core structure. What used to be an R-rated flick about an asshole who is a reluctant superhero, we get a makeover of the character.

Does this work? In some ways it does. I’ll admit that Will Smith is very likeable on screen and also very relateable. He’s the best everyman out there we have now that Tom Hanks is getting a little old for the younger crowd.

However, all the script meddling really shows in this movie. It’s clear that there was no clear vision. At times, Hancock tries to be a major blockbuster superhero movie. At other times, it tries to be a comedy. It also tries to be an edgy, gritty film, which never works in the family-friendly format. If the film had picked a focus, it might have actually been palatable.

Unfortunately, we are left with a patchwork film. Will Smith will bring his audience to this film, which is considerable. But the true sense of whether this movie will have staying power is when they decide to make a sequel and the Fresh Prince doesn’t step into the lead role. Take Will Smith out of the equation, and you’ll end up with an alcoholic Chris Tucker in a supersuit. (Trust me… that’s probably just a couple years away.)

This is not to say that Hancock does not have it’s moments. There are some action sequences that are quite good. However, just as the movie starts to ramp up into a decent flick, the audience is blindsided by lazy writing, out-of-place humor moments, ridiculous characters and no real villain to hang the shaky plot on.

While I’ve never been a fan of director Peter Berg, I don’t fault him completely. The script is horribly flawed, which is the primary reason Hancock becomes a train wreck. But Berg does no favors to this film. If Brian DePalma will forever be known as the Alfred Hitchcock wannabe, then Berg will be known as the Michael Bay wannabe. his shaky mix of action, comedy and a pounding soundtrack never quite gels.

I imagine that Hancock will prevail almost entirely on the back of Smith. And a couple years from now, we’ll look back on this film and realize that it was never any good to begin with. It’s happened before, you know. After all, have you watched Men in Black lately? In retrospect a decade later, it really was a pile of crap.

Seeing how Hancock plays out should answer the larger question of whether the top box office draw is bulletproof. There are those who think he’s incapable of making a bomb (which, incidentally hasn’t happened since Wild Wild West). But then again, these people said the same thing about Tom Cruise five years ago… and look at him today.

What’s more important for Smith is what he does post-Hancock. A few more films like these, and this will be remembered as the beginning of the end of his blockbuster career.

THE UPSIDE: There are some decent action moments.

THE DOWNSIDE: After all the studio meddling with the script, it’s like Humpty Dumpty… all the king’s horses and all the king’s men couldn’t put it back together.

ON THE SIDE: I was left with a question… if Hancock is invincible, impervious to pain and poison, then why does alcohol affect him?