Share Email Print RSS

"I Am Legend" Lite

What is it with recent Will Smith movies and sucky endings?

I thought "I Am Legend" was absolutely brilliant for an hour or so.   Scary, sad, visually stunning.   It could've been the best movie of the year had the finale followed suit.   It wasn't.   The last thirty minutes are jaw-droppingly awful, and they sabotaged the ample goodwill the flick had built up.

Well, "Hancock" has the same problem.   Around the hour mark, the movie takes an amazingly bullheaded turn for the worst that makes the end of "I Am Legend" look like the transcendental conclusion to "Close Encounters of the Third Kind."  

Whoever sanctioned the final act of this superhero action/comedy needs to be taken out of commission, and all signs point to Akiva Goldsman , who penned "I Am Legend" and produced (and did some uncredited rewriting work on) "Hancock."   Will, do yourself a favor.   Stop partnering with the guy responsible for "Batman and Robin."   The results will NEVER be ideal.

The only consolation is that the first hour of "Hancock" is nowhere near as good as "I Am Legend."   The rumor mill on this one was dead-on; the whole thing smacks of failure and missed opportunities.

In this summer of superhero cinema ("Wanted," "Hellboy 2," "The Dark Knight," just to name a few), revisionist tales like "Hancock" should be welcome counter-programming.   John Hancock (Smith) is just as mighty as Superman or The Flash, but he's also borderline homeless, alcoholic, and crudely misanthropic, so much so that the people of Los Angeles start actively campaigning against his "heroic" deeds.   Enter Ray Embrey ( Jason Bateman ), a do-gooder PR exec taking it upon himself to restore Hancock's image.

This is a fascinating concept—how would superpowers fare in the hands of a man who really shouldn't have them, and could they also provide the impetus for positive change?   Unfortunately, this idea deserves better than it receives here.   Forget a serious exploration of the personal perils of superpowers; we get sub-Sandler humor about gays, the French, and the threat of Hancock shoving one guy's head up another's butt.

This last one's a running gag, and no, the inevitable visual payoff isn't as inspired as it should be.

It's too silly, too jokey, too little, and as a result we never feel Hancock's inner struggle.   He's a jerk, yes, but we never feel he's irredeemable, no matter how many shots we get of Smith sitting on rooftops staring pensively into the distance.   Part of that's the sanitized PG-13 nature of the flick.   The original draft of the script was a hard-R, and even director Peter Berg has talked of the many cuts made to the flick to soften Hancock's character, who was initially not that far removed from the villains he fought.

You can tell Berg wanted to make a serious flick.   He shoots "Hancock" like it's "Friday Night Lights 2" —all gritty handheld, artfully done out-of-focus shots, and jittery close-ups.   I'm a fan of his work, but it's laughably obtrusive here; the slapdash nonsense of Hancock drunkenly flying as Ludacris blares on the soundtrack can't support the gravity of Berg's shooting style.   Imagine Paul Greengrass directing an episode of "Sesame Street."   That's only a slightly more egregious clash between form and content.

But more than that, I'm afraid Will Smith's the main reason the movie feels so defanged.   I think Will's a true movie star, one of the most effortlessly charismatic and charming celebrities we've got.   But he just can't play bad.   He just seems too decent, and even when he's drinking heavily and lobbing obscenities at old women and children, we can't buy him as a bad dude.   Someone with more edge (a Don Cheadle , or a Ryan Gosling , for example) would've lent the flick the flick some much needed unpredictability.

What unpredictability the flick has is less-than-welcome.   You've got all these disparate elements—the low comedy of Hancock's hero shtick, Embrey's earnest desire to change the world, and the ridiculous direction—that never gel.   Even worse, if you've seen all the previews, you've seen 90 percent of ALL the action scenes in the flick.   It doesn't even work as an action movie.   "Tonal mess" is more apropos.

And then that twist, and with it, all internal and thematic consistency goes out the window.   Hancock's powers become a plot device for the filmmakers to milk at their greatest convenience.   We get the introduction of two underdeveloped villains with less than twenty minutes of movie to go, leaving the flick gasping at delivering the faintest semblance of satisfying conflict (News flash: it doesn't work!).   Berg tries to tie it all together with a frenzied battle in an L.A. hospital, but the mayhem is too little, too late.  

And Charlize Theron , who spends the first hour of the movie relegated to little more than looking hot and making worry faces at the camera, ends up…well, I don't want to spoil anything, but to paraphrase something Roger Ebert once said about Cate Blanchett , I will say that Theron proves she can do anything in "Hancock," even things she should not do.

Pretty much the only element to escape the movie unscathed is Jason Bateman.   By far, he is the most likeable and sympathetic character on screen, and, in many ways, the most legitimately heroic person too.   On the page, his bleeding heart PR man must've read as insufferably noble, but Bateman's got enough of what the flick needs—edge—to make Ray real and three dimensional and not unduly saintly.   His dry and understated delivery gets him all the best laughs as well.   Hollywood, take note—a former "Teen Wolf" is stealing scenes from the Fresh Prince without breaking a sweat.   If that doesn't net you fame and fortune, then I give up.

There is a great movie to be made from "Hancock's" elements, and I applaud Will Smith for wanting to tweak his image and the nature of the superhero movie.   However, wanting to do so doesn't make it so, and "Hancock" is only left wanting.   It's just too soft, and Smith is miscast.   I wonder how much the nature of the crowd-pleasing, Fourth of July blockbusters impacted the flick, was responsible for cutting out its guts.

Final tally:   Art -- 0, Commerce -- A billion and counting.

Josh Katz is a freelance movie reviewer. He's been a movie fan since birth (much to the chagrin of his friends and family), and his top three favorite flicks are "Goodfellas," "Do the Right Thing," and "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre."