Hancock Rebuttal - Spoiler Alert!
After reading Thraxxus review of Hankock, a movie that caused him to basically write off all critics as hacks, I was curious enough to check it out. Like him, I was amazed at critics’ commentaries. Not the concensus that the movie sucked, which was not 100%, but the consensus that Hancock goes off the rails about halfway through. Let me assure you now - it doesn’t just go off the rails, it takes out a busload of nuns and then plummets off a cliff.
First, let me take you back to a happier time and place. The beginning of the movie, when we meet Will Smith’s character. Was he unlikable? Sure. I could relate to the fact that every two minutes someone called him an asshole. Certainly this was the biggest prick Mr. Smith has ever played, and so far so good. Then Hancock meets Jason Bateman, who is a PR Man with a heart of gold (about as rare as an arctic fox). Admittedly, Jason Bateman is one of my favorite actors so they had me from the start. The fact that he wants to rehab Hancock’s image and set him straight is very believable, and fairly original for this genre. Side note: I am totally convinced that Bateman is totally drunk for every role. If you have seen Dodgeball, or the DVD extras for Juno, you know exactly what I am talking about. Nonetheless, the acting overall was excellent. After last seeing Charlize Theron in Monster, it was nice to see her back to her ravishing self (including her eyebrows). So, up to this point I have described how “this film was about an anti hero persona coming to grips with the world around him and trying to be accepted into it”, as Thraxxus describes it very accurately.
Well, then the entire movie goes wrong - this is not an exaggeration. Five minutes of backstory is insufficient for the shit that was about to go down. Why is Charlize and Smith’s characters fighting? Sure, they had history, but I never saw it and therefore I did not care a whit. I agree with Thraxxus that Charlize Theron did the best job possible to make this twist work, but she was swimming upstream. As for the “villain”, he was just merely there as a convenient plot pusher. Finally, mercifully, the hospital scene was a huge slice of stinky cheese. Oh, hello Bateman - you are still here? Make yourself useful. Then, the movie wrapped up into a nice, audience-pleasing bow. I hate to quote a snotty critic, but the movie “rewrote its own internal logic in order to pander to its audience”. BARF.
So here’s what I’m saying - there are warning signs, besides just critic response, when choosing what movies to watch. The only reason this movie got made is because Will Smith was attached, and that sets off an alarm by itself. Hancock was in development in one way or another for almost twelve years. Numerous directors were attached, including Michael Mann, while the script went through many rewrites. You could almost hear the gears grinding in the movie, and it struggled because of it.
In the Words of Mr. Big, I’m Addicted to that Rush
I fully intended on writing an article on how I got kicked out of a Oakland Athletics game last week as a participant in a friend’s bachelor party. Let’s just say the stereotype of the fuck-up future brother-in-law (relentlessly propagated by sitcoms over the years) is 100% accurate. Furthermore, alcohol was involved - but I guess that goes without saying. The groom in question, major-league shnockered at the time, is one of the six readers of this blog and is a modest man. Also, non-violently getting ejected from a sporting event is actually not as exciting as you might think. I’ll leave it at that.
Instead, I will direct my attention to one of my favorite (and much more popular) fucksticks, Mr. Rush Limbaugh. Maybe you read about his kick-ass new contract for (ahem) $38 million a year for the next eight effing years. Also, we can’t overlook his claim of a 9-figure signing bonus. That’s >$100 million, in case you were rubbing your eyes in amazement at the first figure and missed the second. Let’s crunch the numbers, assuming no vacation:
More money than a small, starving third-world country in order to basically lie through his teeth part-time.
This is not unheard of money - Howard Stern is getting paid more overall, $400 million vs. $500 million, and that shallow hack doesn’t deserve it either. But at least he is “entertainment”, and is promoted as such. Oh wait he has a “controversial” position on free speech - he is pro. Way to go out on a limb, Howard. Next you’ll tell us you’re against nun-beatings. The bottom line is, you can’t take him seriously. He’s like the horniest clown ever. On the other hand, there are millions of gullible listeners that hang on Rush’s every word. When he says Michael J. Fox is faking his Parkinson’s Disease symptoms, they may laugh nervously but then wonder if it’s true. When he says Republicans should vote for Hillary to drag out the primaries, this isn’t just Howard Stern telling two lesbians to french kiss. This is a extremely influential political figure commanding his 14 million viewers to cornhole America. Here is more great Rush insight. The only influence Howard Stern has is the ability to maybe give someone a boner. If Limbaugh has that influence over you, then welcome to CrazyTown you sick twist. If you are a woman, then I applaud your pathetically low standards. Please email me with your contact info.
The recent trend is to point fingers at bloggers and their debatable “disregard for truth and ethics”, but at least they aren’t getting paid hundreds of millions of dollars to tell their readers that the NAACP should have “riot rehearsals”. Maybe a more important point should be raised regarding the media known as radio. If Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern are the cornerstones of the industry, that may be a primary reason for its slow demise.
