by Todd Pheifer

Created on: December 05, 2008

I think what hampers action movies today is that they garner incredibly high expectations from audiences and movie critics, even before they hit the big screen. This is particularly true for the "summer blockbuster" which are supposed to be the ultimate in high-octane adrenaline-based entertainment. Of course, the studios don't help themselves when they tease movie audiences with smoothly-crafted gripping trailers which are designed to envoke a bevy of water-cooler discussion. When the movie is actually good, the audience feels satisfied with the trailer but when the movie "tanks", the average moviegoer feels they were duped by the best carefully-sequenced clips.

All of this is to say that I liked the movie "Hancock." Though critics did not exactly give it "two-thumbs up", it was an enjoyable picture and an entertaining romp. It is one of the shorter movies that you will see this year. While many action films push two hours, this movie wraps things up in a quick 92 minutes. The plot definitely moves quickly, but the watcher is left feeling like they could have taken their time a bit. Here are a few specific thoughts on the Will Smith movie, "Hancock."

The plot

What probably drew people to Hancock is the uniqueness of the plot. It explores the psyche of an unlikely superhero who doesn't exactly fit the standard mold of selfless savior. Rather, the well-intentioned Hancock is a drunk who does some "good" but is a bit careless with his powers, and a bit apathetic about his surrounding environment. As mentioned, the plot does move quickly, but there are some major plot clarifications jammed into a very short period of time. The moviemakers probably could have expanded on the key plot points with some additional details and retrospectives. Still, the movie isn't hard to follow and there is enough continuity that the watcher isn't scratching their heads and wonderful about plot sequence.

The action

In the age of computer technology, it is hard to innovate action scenes. The action sequences are good, though they aren't anything that hasn't been done in the last few years. It is ironically amusing that part of the film deals with the actual cost incurred by superhero damage. Therefore, the action sequences are probably put in a better context because the moviegoer has been set up to view action sequences from the standpoint of cost and cleanup.

Resolution

The challenge with the action movie is convincing the audience that they should treat it as more than a two-hour comic book. I'm guessing critics probably did not like the movie because we as the audience are supposed to care about the characters in the climactic final scenes. This shifts the film from action-flick to serious drama. The presence of humor elements also suggests to the audience that they can laugh while they are being "touched" and "wowed". This is not unusual for Will Smith, who was in a similar situation with "Independence Day", where the filmmakers tried to make us laugh, cry, and be amazed.

Overall, Hancock is definitively not the best movie of the year or even the best movie of the summer. With "Iron Man", "Prince Caspian" and the "Dark Knight", it had some stiff competition. Still, it is an enjoyable film and definitely worth a rental. As is typical, the makers of the film have set us up for the possibility of a sequel. Based on the first film, a sequel might be worth a look as well.

Learn more about this author, Todd Pheifer.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.