No ‘Hancock 2′ Anytime Soon

Published 4 years ago by

hancock2 No Hancock 2 Anytime Soon

There’s been much talk about a sequel to the 2008 surprise superhero hit, Hancock, with conversation picking up particularly when it comes to the cast of Will Smith, Charlize Theron and Jason Bateman possibly returning to do another. Director Peter Berg said a few months ago that everyone was excited to return, but not long after that Bateman came out and said he hadn’t heard anything about him returning (we’re still not sure if that cluelessness was applicable to Smith and Theron, too).

However, when Berg sounded pretty excited about directing Hancock 2, that was before he landed the Battleship gig, a big-screen adaptation set for release in 2011 with a production start date of Spring 2010. That ties Berg up a lot for what I would guess would be the better part of a year. And that appears to be one of the big reasons why we shouldn’t expect Hancock 2 anytime soon.

Speaking to HitFix, Berg says that Hancock 2 will still happen at some point, just not soon. I’ll let Berg explain:

“There are so many cooks in that particular kitchen that are so busy and Will’s [Smith] kind of taken time off to be with his kids and his kids are now making all kinds of films and there are so many people involved in that from Will to his partner James Lassiter to Akiva [Goldsmith] to Michael Man and myself.”

“To get us all in the same room where we can talk and then agree on anything? You’ll never meet a group of people who will have a harder time agreeing on anything… I think it will happen, we just all have to get in the same room with some consistency.”

When asked about whether Hancock 2 would be his next film AFTER Battleship, Berg said he wants to do Lone Survivor, which tells the tale of, “17 seals that were killed in one gunfight in Afghanistan. One survived.” But what about after that? Well, Berg didn’t say, but hasn’t ruled out a sequel to his action-adventure, The Rundown. He’s not sure why there hasn’t already been plans put in place to do The Rundown 2, but said he’d definitely be up for doing another:

“I love ‘The Rundown.’ I don’t know if the audience was quite ready to accept Dwayne [at the time]. We had a certain amount of resistance… They screwed around with our release date, but the film still performed well.”

“He’d [The Rock would] love it… We always joke ‘When are we gonna do it?’ But sometimes it’s just a question of timing and getting all the stars to line up. There is no reason why we wouldn’t .”

Personally, I’d love to see a sequel to The Rundown, which I think is an under-appreciated film that features Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson and Sean William Scott cooking up some great comedic chemistry. I’d much rather he concentrate on doing another one of that than do Hancock 2, because frankly, I don’t wanna’ see another Hancock. To me, the first installment was a fun-at-times film, but one that didn’t live up to its huge potential, IMHO. And the story was fine for one film, but the possible sequel storyline pitched by Berg awhile back didn’t sound that good to me.

The Rundown Peter Berg directing No Hancock 2 Anytime Soon

Peter Berg directing The Rock on set of ‘The Rundown’

Having said that, just think about this: the studio has already hired two writers for Hancock 2, and so it seems they want to get it into theaters sooner before later. I’ve said it before but I’ll reiterate – could we see Berg departing Hancock 2 and the studio bringing in another director in his place? If they want to get this thing in the can soon, and Berg is busy, it only makes sense that he’d be replaced. It’s not like the reason people went to see the first Hancock was because Berg directed… And he already had to drop out of the Dune remake

Are you looking forward to Hancock 2? Are you annoyed it will be hitting theaters later rather than sooner? Would you be bothered if Berg didn’t come back to direct again, since he appears to be ultra-busy with other projects?

Hancock 2 has a tentative release date of sometime in 2011.

Source: HitFix

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: hancock 2

20 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. I really don’t care if we don’t get another anytime soon. The only thing good about the first film was that we got to see drunk superhero.

  2. Ditto. No need for another one.

  3. Screw Hancock 2 i wanna see the Rundown 2!!!

  4. Unless it’s an origin story, I dont see the need in making one. The only thing that was appealing about Hancock was his mysterious past that obviously had something to do with Eagles and pyramids. The villains in the first one were horrible and unless he will be running into other imortals like himself, what’s the point?

  5. I love The Rundown. Johnson has so much potential to become the next big action star, and it’s just being wasted on cheesy family comedies. Obviously he’s a funny guy, but that doesn’t mean he can’t throw us a bone and do another action flick every once and a while.

  6. The Rundown 2

  7. Best news I have heard all day! Thanks!

  8. This movie was, at best, a one-shot. It was cute, fun and Charlize was hot …. but that’s not necessarily reason for a sequel. The story was completed. Perhaps we’d have more original films to enjoy if Hollywood wasn’t quite so obsessed with reboots and sequels.

  9. @Jason–good observation, but I think gone are the days when the MAJOR studios took a chance on fresh and original material. Indies are crankin it up in 2010

  10. @hank1914

    You’re probably right. Unfortunately, formulaic rehashes don’t hold my interest anymore.
    Well, I am looking forward to The A-Team. :)

  11. Screw RunDown 2..It’s all about Hancock 2.

  12. If your a big studio why not spread the risk. That’s the mind set. Let some smaller company produce it and then skim off the cream…

  13. @The Old man- I agree, but we are seeing too many rehashes and reboots of established franchises because the studios want a SURE THING at the box office, which, when you think about it, is taking a risk too. Look at Land of The Lost…TANKED at the box office and people lost their jobs on that one. Same with Bewitched, Dukes of Hazard, Starsky and Hutch, I-Spy, The Stepford Wives and Miami Vice, which was a critical success, but didnt do diddly at the box office. So instead of doing all that BS, why not take a risk and make smaller, cheaper and well-written films like District 9, Paranomal Activity and Precious?

  14. Hancock was a grade A stinker of the highest order, it took what could have been a fun concept of a drunk and completely useless superhero and tried to create some kind of bizarre mythology around it.

    I went to see it with a group of friends, and they all thought it was great, and I was crazy for hating it.

  15. All About Hancock 2..Lets forget Rundown 2

  16. @hank

    Wow, great list of “going back to the well” movies that did pretty poorly.

    Vic

  17. @Vic 9 times out of 10 it NEVER works! I roll my eyes every time I hear about a TV show remake because I know it’s most likely going to be a turd. For what they waste making a Land of the Lost, they could have made 3 District 9′s, Slumdog Millionaires, and Paranormal Activities. It pisses me off as a screenwriters because there are so many of us out there with FRESH and ORIGINAL ideas and we get looked over to beat the dead horses that are old 70′s and 80′s TV shows and low-brow fart joke films. If I were running the studios I would take a chance on a films with original concepts like Kick Ass, Let The Right One In and The Princess and The Frog(thanks Disney for being forward thinking), before I would sink money into sure-fire steaming piles like Alvin and the Chipmunks the Squeakquel..WTH? And the major studios wonder why they are hemorrhaging money and Lions Gates revenue is SOARING.

  18. THE RUNDOWN was one of those rare gems where you have a well done script with good actors that don;t have huge super egos and no one involved is way over paid. The end result is a film tht doesn’t have to do $100 to break even and thats what more of Hollywood should be about. To often we see studios on a quest for the next DARK KNIGHT or the next TITANIC, something that will bring inso much money that you can burn $10,000 bills to light your $100 cuban cigars. That kind of craziness.

    If studios would focus more on the formula used for making THE RUNDOWN I’m certain they’d see far fewer stinkers and while they might not put out a Billion Dollar Maker (a movie that grosses 1 Billion+ in ticket sales) they will be profitable.

    Its fine to make the Summer Blockbusters like WOLVERINE or 2012 as well as the next Harry Potter (whcih is almost at its financial end due to no more books to make into movies) but make those the exceptions and not the norm.

    Remember when you’d wait all year for that big Summer release, where each major studio had just 1 major film slated for realease and more often then not you walked away at least satisified if not tickeld pink? Now its a crapshot as to whether something being pushed will be crap or gold.

    IMHO HANCOCK was a let down because it tried to create a FRANKENSTIEN like movie were you put together several sucessful story angels and or genres in an attempt to make a super story but all you got in the end was a disconnected mess with several individually great scenes that together were far less then the sum of their individual parts.

  19. I liked both Hancock and The Rundown, but I wish I didn’t take my children to see Hancock (not a kid movie). But of the 2, The Rundown was my favorite.

  20. PROMISE!!! ?????
    ^
    Even Michael Bluth couldn’t save this pile of crap,,,
    ;-)

Be Social, Follow Us!!