We first heard rumblings last year of a sequel to the Will Smith non-comic book superhero film, Hancock. At first it was just word that a sequel was in the works (presumably in the very early idea stages), with no real details on if the film’s star(s) or the director, Peter Berg, would be coming back to do another.
However, fast-forward almost a year and we have some more info from Berg himself, courtesy of SciFiWire, about a possible Hancock 2. It’s not info on him or Will Smith officially signing on for a sequel (or anything of that sort), rather what Berg has in mind in terms of a possible plot for a sequel.
[Warning: the following contains SPOILERS about the first Hancock and could be considered spoilerific with regards to the sequel].
|
|
Towards the end of the first Hancock, it was revealed that Smith’s superhero character is actually an immortal god, who only becomes vulnerable when his companion god (Charlize Theron’s character) is in his presence. Berg has said that, “There might be another god out there… Might be another one.” He also stated that the sequel would continue with the story of Jason Bateman’s character, as he starts his charity campaign.
Oh goody…
[END OF SPOILERS]
However, even with Berg and Smith’s interest in doing Hancock 2 – and clearly with the $624 million worldwide box office success, Columbia Pictures will want another – Berg reveals that it’s unlikely to happen anytime soon:
“They like to fast-track it, but Will’s busy, I’m pretty busy… We’re excited to do one, but we want the script to be right and the movie to be right. We don’t feel a burning imperative to go right back into it.”
Hancock was a strange movie in that it was highly successful despite being an original creation. It was rare to see a superhero movie that wasn’t based on an already established character, and it took features and conventions we’ve come to know and love about comic book stories and went in some fresh directions with them. The film was entertaining overall, even if the ending of the movie took an off-kilter turn, with a particularly poor and ineffective villain appearing almost out of nowhere.
Will Smith is Hancock
Is there enough in the Hancock mythology to do a sequel? I thought it was covered pretty well in the first movie – from a story point of view, I personally don’t see the point of doing another. And from the description Berg has given for a possible plot, the sequel doesn’t sound all that great. IMO, in this case it’s better to leave well enough alone.
However, from a business point of view it’s absolutely a good idea and pretty inevitable. Even if the budget was a hefty $150 million for Hancock, the film more than quadrupled that at the box office. I’d say a sequel is pretty much guaranteed profit for the studio.
What do you think about a Hancock sequel? What are your thoughts on the potential plot Berg has suggested?
Hancock 2 is currently in the idea stages and doesn’t have a release date yet.
Sources: SciFiWire and MTV Splash Page
Loading ...
15 Comments
I think a Hancock sequel COULD work. I don’t see how the story is told. Yes, that particular story is told, but should Superman have stopped after the first film? This is an opportunity for a whole new superhero story to be told. While the first film wasn’t fantastic, it was still very entertaining and I like Will Smith in a superhero role. I really don’t think they would make the main focus of the film Bateman’s story, but use it as an ancillary part of the plot. IF they can create hundreds of Superman, Batman, Spider-Man stories, etc., I am SURE they can create a new story for Hancock.
I didn’t like Hancock,,,
I found it predictable and boring.
Fool me once Smith!
I thought the first half of the movie was ingenius… the rest I could have done without.
I don’t see how they could bring the magic back for a sequel.
Another sequel? Everything in my body screams in pain to read about this but it’s really inevitable. Money rules. And money always overrides everything else.
Reboot.
790 speaks the truth….I really tried to like it…..but ( please read 790’s post for rest of comment)ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
The first half was worth watching, then it crashed after that. Now to be thinking about a sequel and continue the story about his(Jason Bateman’s character) charity campaign? Eh, eh, eh.
Yah, I agree the beginnig of the movie was pretty funny and entertaining, then when it tried to turn serious with it’s “twist” it just got dumb…
I loved Hancock , I thought it was a lot of fun .
I think its wide open for a sequel
Oddly enough,I was just wondering,kinda out of the blue,when they were going to do another Hancock movie.
Personally,I liked it for what it was and what it tried to do.
As with everyone else, the first half was pretty well crafted, then once the girl shows up, it all goes downhill. I always thought it was strange how he’s an immortal god, yet alcohol affects him, that might deserve a nice explanation as it just blew my mind.
“Hancock” was good for me because I thought it was nice to see a drunk superhero, but after the bank robbery seen the film went downhill from there. I think the idea of doing this sequel if they are gonna use this concept is a bad idea to me. One of the things I didn’t like was the whole plot twist where the “Gods render each other mortal” idea, and this is gonne go even more into that.
Movie was fair, I mean I enjoyed it but I do not think that story wise it shoudl warrant a sequel. I am sure that if they come out with one it will genereate a hefty profit though and have a few cool tricks in the bag. But overall I dont think that the first film’s storyline was strong enough to spawn a sequel…just my opinion
I actually liked the Gods makin each other mortal part. I thought it was an interesting little thing to include.
Hancock was the of the Black Superman. LOL
What's your opinion? Leave a Reply!
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!