I saw Hancock Friday night and this is my first chance to write about it. (Note: I am currently moving a ton of stuff, having to buy stuff and my car's battery just died)
More behind the cut but anyone with geek cred on the line needs to go.
Three movies for the price of one. The premise of the beginning, a surly, drunken Superman who is an asshat, was the first movie. Very nice. The prison stuff was good, the fingernail murals, Jason Bateman (this will be commended in all aspects), the head-up-the-ass.
The second part, the humorous bridge in the middle where Charlize Theron does her reveal, was great too, if brief. Totally unseen. You could tell that she was connected to him from the beginning, especially when she smirks at him about the warrants for arrest, but nothing remotely like what happened.
The final part, the dramatic part, was great as well, if only because it was a great finish and used a great mythology to tie everything together. That's right; I found the mythology compelling and worthy of praise. Short, to the point, but allowing for as much depth as the storyteller wants to add.
Now, Jason Bateman rocks throughout. He is the second (third) coming of Zeppo Marx(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeppo_Marx), history's first great straightman. Yeah, that's right. He kicked Stan up and back, same with Costello. See, duos can't have a straightman the same way that ensembles or trios have straightmen. As the Blue Man Group explained so well, "three is the lowest number where one person can be an outsider." And in comedy, the straightman is the outsider. Jason Bateman doesn't have any funny lines, necessarily, but he makes Will Smith that much more funny...same with Smith and Theron in some scenes.