Hancock and Yes Man

Yes. Yes. YES. Happy new year to all. Cheers to a new chapter.

I’ve got a little catching up to do. Maybe I should try to stay on top of things.

[THE FOLLOWING MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS] Last night I saw Hancock. I know, a bit late in the game, but whatever. Here’s my take: First act good, second act sucky, third act good. I liked the story and the concept, but it got really stupid when you find out about Charlize Theron being a superhero. Everything leading up to it was nice and smooth. I liked the different take on superheroes and how real the story made them. I’m not talking about how they could be transposed off the screen and into real life, but that their actions actually had reactions. This was kind of taken away in the second act, making it crappy.

Theron’s character’s transition from stay-at-home mom/wife to god-like superhero was bumpy, too. One second she’s throwing Hancock through a wall, the next she has a tone of stupid superficiality that wasn’t apparent in previous scenes. Her stealing Hancock’s line also adds to the second act’s lameness. I’m also unsure how much I liked her scenes with black eye liner or whatever it is, although it does add to her hotness. The third act combined her mom/wife and superhero roles, subtracting the harshness of the black eye shadow and adding back in the maternal softness.

Will Smith is just pretty good in Hancock. He hardly overplays his character and I like that. I think he got that all out in Fresh Prince, which is good because I like his serious stuff {see I Am Legend}. There were a few too many unnecessary verge-of-tears scenes, though, and some of them seemed out of place. One or two of his lines were a little stupid, but I blame the writers.

I like Jason Bateman. He’s funny and his delivery is spot on and he makes an otherwise uninteresting character much more fun. That’s about all I have to say about him in Hancock.

Most of it looked like the film crew for The Office did most of the camera work. The action sequences are visually impressive, but the CGI is a little iffy sometimes.

Hancock shows how everyone can lose direction sometimes, even screenwriters, but that everyone has the ability to find that direction.

Worth a viewing.


Quick review of Yes Man. I saw it a week ago, so here goes.

Yes Man is simple and lighthearted, just the kind of viewing I need at Christmas.
I’m not a huge fan of Jim Carrey, but I still like him. He’s predictable, but still funny, and he proves this yet again in Yes Man. His delivery is still great but what sets his acting in Yes Man apart from other Carrey movies are the long jokes. There are scenes with Allison where he’ll start a borderline joke/not joke and carries it until it ends up being funny (Jim Carry? Yeah, mega-lame pun…). What I like most about these jokes that carry on is the reaction from her. Zooey Deschanel’s reactions are more like how a real person would react in such situations: wondering whether he’s joking or kind of serious or retarded.

I found the characters and plot in Yes Man likeable but not too deep, which I have no problems with since Yes Man is, again, simple and lighthearted. I do like that it showed how absurd some “programs” can be, even when not taken to the extreme.

There are a few scenes that bother me. One in particular (and the only one I can really remember) is when they’re at the airport about to go to L.A. (I think) and Carl/Carrey is worried for no apparent reason. Either this isn’t fully explained or I missed something. Is he worried about getting too close to Allison, is he running out of money, what’s the deal? And where does he get all this money anyways? Do bank employees make serious coin? If so, I should probably think about changing career paths…again.

Yes Man is a great, simple movie that plays much like an updated Liar Liar. It is worth a viewing, whether in theatres or at home. Solid.


Before I wrap this up, something caught my attention in both of these movies: the word "fuck." I must say, I was a little surprised to hear it in both of these. Both movies only used it once, and neither of the situations seemed to call for it. Plus, both movies are family oriented. And Hancock is a superhero movie so, naturally, kids are going to want to see it. I grew up and still live in the Midwest and most parents cringe at any language harsher than the word “poop.” Not that I care, because I don’t, but won’t parents be a little more cautious about taking their kids to a movie where the main character, someone you’re supposed to like, drops an F bomb? And couldn’t such a reaction, possibly caused by other Bible belt parents seeing the movie and passing the word around, hurt a movie’s turnout? I don’t really pay attention to movie ratings anymore, but I think both Yes Man and Hancock are PG-13. I don’t remember any PG-13 movies using “fuck” when I was younger. Maybe it’s just a sign of times achangin’. Or my memory failing.

M