What is Digg?96 Comments
- icemorebutts, on 07/02/2008, -9/+39That's funny, I liked it. Go ahead and digg me down for enjoying something I knew would be mindlessly entertaining (and was).
- jasmus, on 07/02/2008, -5/+28The movie this reviewer wants to see, would run about 15 hours by the sounds of it. I haven't seen it, but I'm getting sick of being almost force fed the notion that every movie has to mean something, and be perfect. Can't it just be entertaining for 90min?
- saxreturns, on 07/02/2008, -5/+26There's nothing I hate more than when people try to make three films at once and fail at all of them. It seems to be pretty prevalent in Hollywood today. Sure, the action/adventure genre has always had a sidekick and a love interest, but people are trying WAY too hard to cram more meaning into each aspect of a film and ending up with no meaning whatsoever.
I'm glad I've read this review, because I was pretty close to actually going to see this one. Thanks for saving me valuable time and money! - JaggedHairball, on 07/02/2008, -7/+20This movie was annoying as hell. This guy's review nails it in every way.
The only redeeming part of this was Jason Bateman's role.
please don't waste your money on this movie... - Gregsaw, on 07/02/2008, -1/+14More Jason Bateman
- rectagon, on 07/02/2008, -1/+11"Put the dirty stuff back in". You've got to be kidding. How about being really funny without going cheap. Oh, right, that's too hard nowadays.
- ChrisXPPro, on 07/02/2008, -12/+22If Will Smith Wasnt Scientology It Would Be Better.
- oughterator, on 07/02/2008, -4/+13I thought this movie was great! A supervillain would have pretty much ruined it
- LordFate, on 07/02/2008, -1/+10Will Smith's drunk-and-disorderly superhero movie, Hancock, hits theaters today, a full three days early. You can't help but wonder if Warner Bros. is trying to get the movie out there before all the bad buzz, and horrendous reviews, take effect. The sad thing is, there are a bunch of ways that Hancock could have turned into a pretty decent film. ///Our review, with spoilers and a list of where Hancock went wrong, below.////
Miss that last part? - indiepenguins, on 07/02/2008, -5/+13#10 - If Will Smith wasn't a Scientologist.
- demonicume, on 07/02/2008, -1/+8"He could be stopping the genocide in Darfur. " *****. can a movie just be fun without some lame political pandering? jesus christ. its a movie. i remember reading reviews like this for the lion king. you ***** ruin everything.
give a movie a chance - Fozefy, on 07/02/2008, -2/+9Having a superhero where his powers aren't explained very well is just dumb. Also, in the ending where him and the girl are losing and gaining their powers over and over again is just stupid. The audience has no idea how much of there powers they have left or exactly why they have them again. Having a super hero lose there powers can be a very good plot device, but keep it to something simple that the audience can follow...say superman and kryptoninte.
- gryphon50, on 07/02/2008, -1/+7and he hands out Scientology cards to everyone on his movie sets so they can go to the nearest center and get evaluated. Not trying to influence anyone or anything.
- Barackalypse, on 07/02/2008, -0/+6Way 1: If it were written about John Hancock rising from the dead and exacting brutal justice on Congress and the executive branch for their sins against the Constitution. *
*yes, I know John signed the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. - f4nt0m4s, on 07/02/2008, -2/+8I'll still probably end up going to see it...at least Will Smith seems to be enjoying his career, even if he makes some poor movie choices, he always seems to be having a good time in his films.
- superkendall, on 07/02/2008, -4/+9The tomato comes through again with an accurate assessment - 36%.
- Drahkar, on 07/02/2008, -2/+7That's how I see it. Most film critics have their asses puckered so tight that a good movie wouldn't have a chance against their reviews unless it paid them for it.
These days critics make a living off talking bad about a movie. I never listen tot hem anymore. - chadwalters23, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5Man, the bar is set so high for next summer's blockbusters. The MPAA has no more room to bitch about studios losing money on pirating and so forth. This summer has proved that quality rules now. Movies can still make ass-tons of money. Movies need to just be f-ing top-notch. No more excuses. This is the summer of Iron Man, Hulk, Dark ***** Knight, and Hellboy 2. Crap just don't cut it no more. Movie-goers will still shell out still for a big night at the movies, regardless of their home theaters and quick turn-around from theater to blu-ray. The movies people go see just better rock their world!!! Sorry Hancock. Sorry Journey to the Center of the Earth. Sorry M Night (you douchebag). There exists a whole new caliber of movie fan out there and public is not going to settle anymore for whatever a studio hobbles together based on demographic expectations.What can they come up with next summer?
- indiepenguins, on 07/02/2008, -2/+7Even thinking it's "interesting" and not a cult is just as bad, if not worse.
- TBITS, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4I really enjoyed it and it was funny. I think people should actually see it before judging it.
- Schweppes7T4, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4yeah... i was starting to think it was just me. i thought the movie was great. its a movie trying to show a realistic view of what it could be like to be a super hero, in modern times. it was a terrifically funny movie, even if the love story part seemed a little thrown in.
- aussiessuck, on 07/02/2008, -1/+5Thinking and scientology go together like barbed wire and KY jelly.
- aceallways, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3After so many boring movies explaining how heroes became heroes I was very relieved to find this doesn't.
- reyoo30309, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3But see that's where people talk about it being two movies wrap into one. The first half is better then average. But once you hit this point... right about where you learn he has amnesia the story and the comedy just drops right down the drain.
- kleinm, on 07/02/2008, -1/+49 Reasons why Hancock *IS* a pretty good movie.
http://digg.com/movies/9_Reasons_Why_Hancock_is_a_ ... - matriculated, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Even from the trailer people could tell this movie was going to be bad.
I guess Ironman 2 can go ahead and make the "alcoholic superhero" story... but do it right. - cnschulz, on 07/02/2008, -1/+4if type better make sense more
NO MORE INTERNET FOR YOU!
learn to write!
COME BACK... ONE YEAR! - burnedtubes, on 07/02/2008, -1/+4Thanks for the heads up. I think I might just watch Wall-E instead.
- reyoo30309, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2It's not even the idea of it being to complicated. It's just the premise that two people who are built to save people, who are also built to be drawn together, some how lose their powers when they are together? Who ever created those two (and the others) was not a very practical engineer.
- jaydoj, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3#1 skip making movie.
- teethandeyes, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3I am in complete agreement with you.
Of course I appreciate profound and deep films.
However I also enjoy being entertained and can digg a movie that is fun, mindless entertainment. - reyoo30309, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Maybe it did not need a supervillian but it did need a better climax.
- symrian, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2I liked it. The soundtrack could have been better, but the movie was cool.
Probably helps that I'm a Charlize Theron fan. - Sithseth, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2I don't know what this reviewer is complaining about really. This movie hasn't promised anybody anything - it's a movie about Hancock, and that's it. Where did people get the notion that this was anything but a movie that show's the birth of a Super Hero? I mean, this movie pretty much follows the same route as the first Spider-man movie did. Almost every complaint the reviewer brought up could have been addressed to any starter superhero movie I can recall.
And, not to mention that this reviewer sounds like an *****. Who ***** cares this much about a movie to write up 9 reasons not to see it? Why not write about 3 things you didn't like about the movie personally, and explain those reasons fully? Also, his arguments are straw men at best, cause he's trying to make the movie sound a lot worse then it actually is.
If you want to see a movie that shows a drunk Super-Man, Hancock isn't it - but if you want to see a movie that shows the creation of a new Superhero, who comes to terms with his past, and his powers, then see Hancock - and if you don't walk into the movie as a pretentious a-hole, you may even laugh a little. - BTime, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2George Lucas thinks like you, though no amount of editing will make Episodes 1-3 appealing.
- inactive, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2I liked the movie, thought it was exactly what I expected to see.
- ICasualty, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2It was even hard for Will Smith to save this movie. There were a few parts I was could have walked out on, but with movie tickets at $9.50+ I just couldnt do it.
Save your money, go see WALL-E or the Incredible Hulk, or just wait for Batman: The Dark Knight. - BTime, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3There's no saving Bagger Vance
- s0nicfreak, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2It really made no sense; he was around Mary a lot, but didn't start to loose his powers from it until he knew about her powers.
Also, there was just WAY to many close ups on Will Smith's ass. - inactive, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1Maybe I am a moron, but I laughed every time he said "call me an *****...".
I thought it was great. - reyoo30309, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1"God, I hate it when people write dumb *****..."
Ah, hypocritical much? - TheSexyGeek, on 07/14/2008, -0/+1Poor movie choices? His movies are raking in cash. How is that a poor choice?
- reyoo30309, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1I have said it and I will say it again. This movie suffers from the notion that you can make everyone happy. By attempting to appeal to the young/old, for those looking for humor, drama, and action.
- FrenchAnarchy, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1What the ***** are you talking about? The movie sucked. Even the ***** Hulk was better.
- jepizacar, on 08/01/2008, -0/+1nice resource....
http://topforex.co.cc
http://skincare.freehostia.com
http://acnecare.890m.com
http://acne.ej.am
http://gofinance.890m.com
http://fastcar.890m.com
http://carbeauty.co.cc
http://gadingan.com
http://gadingan.com/indexsc.php
http://gadingan.wordpress.com
http://23ltd.info
http://jeniya.info - TheSexyGeek, on 07/14/2008, -0/+1It must really suck to lack the ability to enjoy a lighthearted movie like this. But this is what happens when you over hype a movie before you see it. I went in with zero expectations and was pleasantly surprised. It was funny and never got boring. Relieved my stress for the week.
Does a movie have to be a work of literary genius to be considered "good"? It's entertainment. Lots of people found it entertaining. I thought that was the point. - reyoo30309, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1They already have but the called it Handjob.
- sleepwalkers, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1For someone criticizing another person for being small-minded, you seem unable to handle someone disliking a movie that you enjoyed.
- sleepwalkers, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Yes, and the author of this article actually could've fixed Hancock, right?
- inactive, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1Well I knew going in that it was going to attempt some kind of "story" at the end, movies always do. But I found it passable and that was better than I expected. The first half had me laughing till it hurt.
-
Show 51 - 96 of 96 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is