spiffre.eu

Rewriting Hancock

on November 6, 2009 | Writing | ,

So I finally watched Hancock.

Following my newfound enthusiasm for alternate superheroes, I came around and watched it (among other things). The verdict is that it was kinda nice for the first two thirds, but obviously went downhill on the last part. So, what would I have done different?

I remember this pivotal scene where Hancock tries to kiss Mary Embrey (the wife of the PR consultant that helped him); she steps away from him, triggering a dispute of epic proportion. But why does she rebuff him? Because they were married and their kind lives and dies in pair? Please, no. Because she’s his mother? Now, that would work. That’s actually what I expected (wanted), partly because I read disgust and distance more than fear in Charlize Theron’s performance.

Now, why is that better? a) because it’s less conventional: Hollywood has trained us to see a couple in every on-screen pair of attractive actors. b) because it makes just as much sense, if not more: The whole ‘we die when we’re together’ bit doesn’t make much sense, and smells horribly like an artificial artifact, solely designed to bring Hancock into exile. Hancock could just leave because he can’t stand being in love with his mother (and I wouldn’t blame him). Of course, we’d need to rewrite their interaction a bit to squeeze more passion out of Hancock, but it would (additionally) shine some light on the predicament of people living that long.

Now, what is the downside of having Hancock and Mary as a mother and son instead of a husband and wife? The only impact I see is that we’ll miss the explanation of their kind’s disappearance. Except I honestly don’t care, at least not in a first chapter. As a bonus, their separation would be more of a human-rooted reaction, instead of being a non-sense response to an alien condition the viewer cannot empathize with.

Finally, and because I love me some drama, I’d also alter the following (although it’s purely a matter of personal taste):

  • What are the odds that Ray’s wife just so happens to be related to Hancock? That kind of coincidence is fine for a comedy, but doesn’t work well in a drama. So Mary Embrey probably would have initiated this, maybe simply because she missed her son.
  • Ray’s public relation career makes him a prime candidate for some shady intentions. He’d have to have some ulterior motives, once he realizes he can manipulate Hancock. This would generate conflicts with his wife Mary further down the road.
  • Finally, I’m missing a couple of scenes showing the reaction of the LA/NYC population following Hancock’s departure/arrival at the end of the movie. A superhero, even a controversial one like Hancock, leaving a city for another, well, that really must create some ruckus, one way or another. Hell, he’s the only official superhero!

Oh, and because some coincidences are just too hard to swallow, I really can’t believe that the fight between Hancock and Mary leads them right below her unsuspecting husband’s window; let’s just have him discover the truth via the news, okay? He wouldn’t be the first celebrity spouse to get the surprise, after all.

Anyway, I think this version of Hancock would have been better (meaning I would have liked it more), but I can only admit that a drunkard superhero was a damn good idea in the first place.


3 Comments for this entry

  • rxra

    Any recommended book/comics/movie with “alternate superheroes” ?

    [Reply]

    Spiffre Reply:

    Well, apart from the ubiquitous Watchmen, not so much. I love Hellblazer, but he’s more into magic than superpowers. Well, when you think about it, he’s more a wise-ass than a magician anyway :p

    [Reply]

  • Juan

    The part that wasn’t explained was the ridiculous weather powers. I understand imortality, flight, strength and impervious to harm but adding weather control?

    I actually liked the pairing, you usually find heroes are solo acts, with messed up relationships with normal humans, but can you image the monumental fight that would start from leaving the toilet seat up?

    Near the end, she tells Hancock that he was built to be the hero, to save people, that begs the question: what was she built to do?

    [Reply]

    Spiffre Reply:

    haha, I hear you about the toilet seat up, but a mother/son relationship can hold just as much surprise, I think. As for what she’s been built to do, well, we’ll see that in Hancock 2, I guess. The 2 writers working on that project also spent some time on The Shield, so I’m hoping for some really good stuff…

    [Reply]

  • Juan

    For Alternate superheroes, May I suggest The Darkness, and Pitt, The Darkness is just awesome. Phathom but I only saw one of the paperbacks.

    Those are probably more anti hero than alternative hero but the terms are losely defined in my head.

    [Reply]

    Spiffre Reply:

    Oh, I see, the darkness is the comics that inspired the game; I kinda liked the premises of the game, but didn’t go very far…

    Can’t say I see a difference between anti- and alternative-hero either, Juan :p

    Emmy recommended The Sandman to me, what do you think? – or was it you?

    [Reply]

Leave a Reply