There are typically two measures by which we can quantify the success of any given film, these being the reception of “critics”
to the film and the box office takings. The one, in very general terms, serves to identify films with
something different and interesting about them and the latter tends, in very general terms, to back more mainstream offerings. Make no mistake that it is the objective of any film to hit both of these measures, and any film that hits neither is generally consigned to that large skip full of films that just weren't worth the effort of making. Bearing this very generic rule of thumb, let's consider Hancock a moment.
John Hancock is, in the broadest sense imaginable, a super-hero. Bullet-proof, strong, capable of flight, he is a Superman for the real world. He is also a foul-mouthed, angry tramp with a drinking problem whose every act seems to inevitably lead to the destruction of property and the endangerment of innocent civilians. What he needs is a detox and a major PR campaign, and that's exactly what Ray Embrey suggests when he is saved by the unlikely hero. As Hancock reconnects with humanity, he is forced to confront the questions that made him turn to drink and antisocial behaviour in the first place including questions of where he came from and why he is the only one of his kind.
This is a film that fits into the last category in my initial four-way split of successfulness. It didn't bomb at the box office but its takings were not astounding and critical reception for the film was tepid at best. I personally do not think this is at all justified and I think part of the reason this film failed to hit the mark is that at first glance Hancock is trying to be far too many things at once. Combining comic-book action with an anti-hero like Hancock and adding a dose of comedy and romance to the fray is a unique and ambitious idea to be sure. It is easy to watch Hancock and wonder whether you'd get something similar if a mad scientist surgically grafted Anger Management, Superman Returns and Hitch together.
But this is a lie. If you grafted those three films together it simply would not flow, they are three distinct genres with differing themes. The truth is that while Hancock is like nothing we've seen before, and while it's difficult to know where it fits, the constituent parts hold together extremely well even on a re-watch. Will Smith is at his best in a film like this where the character of John Hancock is critical to the overall cohesion of the film and he is, as you would expect, ably supported by Charlize Theron.
There are flaws, and though small they are critical. The lack of any obvious “arch-villain” will prove disorientating to fans of the comic-book genre and the lack of a clear-cut happy ending will baffle hard-core chick-flick fans so that this film was always in clear danger of alienating one half or other of its core audience. The truth is that I suspect this film wasn't made with either category of film in mind, more that it was made for those of us that simply love films in all their many guises, serious or stupid, romantic or dark, happy or sad. It's not two genres bolted together, it's just a film.
And that's good, REALLY good. I shouldn't have to launch a PR campaign at you all, this is a great film and just because the man at the video store isn't sure where it should go doesn't mean you have to disregard it. I think if Hancock failed to hit the mark it is simple because, like its namesake, it is different, one of a kind. It's daring to do something different and has been left out in the cold, a fallen angel wondering what it did wrong to warrant such apathy. Half of my favourite films are in that in-between state, impossible to categorise but nevertheless brilliant cinematic offerings. How would you categorise Fight Club? Pan's Labyrinth? Franklyn?
I'm not saying that Hancock is deserving of similar acclaim, nor am I suggesting it is going to be smash hit for everyone. It lacks the shining brilliance of the other films I have mentioned, but everything is there, there is everything to like about it. Solid acting, great effects, heart-warming plot and some deep characterisation of which Will Smith makes easy work. If you can't feel something for Hancock screams apologies for crimes he can't even remember committing or if you genuinely see the twist coming I really have to ask what is the matter with you. If you love comic book movies and only comic book movies, avoid this film. If you can't watch anything that isn't a chick-flick, no this film will not rock your world. The rest of you, please, I'm begging, give this film a chance. Worst case scenario, you can tell me I'm wrong with impunity.