Paul Blart- Birthday Ruiner

It being a Sunday and having gone out the night before, the roommates and I opted to go to the Harris Teeter Redbox to rent a movie (for $1 I might add). When we got to the front, a line had formed and so after once through "Comedies" I said we should get Paul Blart: Mall Cop. Regular readers know that I'll give almost any movie a fair chance. I like Kevin James: King of Queens and what stand up of his I have seen. Bucking the critics, Paul Blart was a smash success at the box office, I figured, why not?

I'll tell you why not: people are idiots. It is terrible. It is completely predictable and not funny. When the bad guys take over the mall (am I ruining anything? no- this movie sucks) I thought I had fallen asleep and woke up to Home Alone 4: Kevin Really Let Himself Go. No redeeming quality to watching this movie.

Inappropriate pun

Hancock. Right off the bat, with the title, things aren't looking good. But, I've watched many Will Smith blockbusters and consider them a part of my formative years (ID4, Bad Boys, Men in Black, Ali, I Robot, etc.) and am a HUGE fan of Fresh Prince. Plus, I like superhero TV (maybe not any more) and movies so I had to give this one a looksy.

Rating: Its not bad, but its not good. 

If you're watching the movie, you're probably prepared for a blockbuster and so aren't looking for any meaning out of your experience. You don't expect character development, significant statements on life/the world, and you don't really care if there is logical consistency (See Spoiler Section Note 2). Also, you expect a small degree of homophobic, racist, and sexist remarks and portrayals that demonstrate "mainstream" views or "everyman-ness" (gender bias intended). This movie had some (especially up front), but didn't beat you over the head with machoness and only had a taste of homophobia.

I like the flawed superhero aspect (super people can have emotions and personal shortcomings too!). Also, the financial toll that he wreaked on the city was an amusing touch of realism. Everyone in the movie played their parts well, but no one made their career on this movie.

At the same time, I was not entertained. The effects are okay, but it seems like they implied more than they actually show. They talk about the messed up stuff (destroyed buildings, trains, etc.) and flash some digital images (not bad quality, but obvious) of destruction here and there to paint the picture but, as long as you're taking me there, bring it. See Spoiler Section Note 1.

Another crucial aspect that was missing was any sort of interesting aspect to the story. Jason Bateman (I don't know if his character's name is ever said, its certainly not important) is trying to reform Hancock- this isn't giving away anything. The natural story line is for the superhero to try and reform and mess up a bunch of times on his path towards goodness- hilarity ensues. Instead, the answer is for him to go to prison. Not funny or interesting. There is an unforeseen twist that comes about 5/8 of the way into the movie, but it completely changes the movie into a weird sort of romance thing. The climactic action is fairly obvious although the villain does not enter into the equation until 20 minutes left into the movie. Probably not giving too much away by saying that there is room for a sequel here (although, to be fair, even if the end had not been favorable to a sequel the $62 million opening weekend and $227 million gross probably is favorable for a sequel) but please no.

Best Part of the Movie: Charlize Theron (her, her character, and um...her)

Biggest pet peeve: no good one-liners. 

Biggest let down: No allusions to Jason Bateman and Charlize Theron's previous collaboration on Arrested Development. (At least that I could see... I wasn't going to watch it again to find them).

Best thing to do if you're not going to really watch the movie: Scour the internet for updates on the possible Vince Carter trade to Houston.

(Warning: spoilers below)

----------------

Spoiler section- for further commentary on things that give away information.

1. The superhero fight scene could have been a lot better. It was a lot of close up shots of them wrestling, and it seems like the hallmark of superhero fighting is creative use of your surroundings, which that scene didn't really have.

2. Logical Consistency- So, if they are weaker when they're around each other- why didn't Hancock die when Charlize Theron threw him through the house? He- and a fridge- went through a wall into several cars and into the street- what's up with that? Moreover, how come they didn't kill each other when they were fighting? Even if the argument is that they had to have strong feelings of love for them to become weak, why didn't Charlize die? She didn't lose her memory and still loved him.