Polishing the Turd: Hancock

As long as there are summers, there will be summer blockbusters, and you can bet that as long as there are summer blockbusters, there will be cinematic atrocities in desperate need of some positive press.

Well, fortunately for Hollywood, I've never met a celluloid turd I couldn't polish to a robust sheen, and this summer's latest megadud is no exception. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you… Hancock!

Let's begin with this less-than-glowing take by Newsweek:         

There's lots of potential… though the question arises whether the
concept is more suitable to a five-minute "Saturday Night Live" skit
than to a feature film… Then, nearly an hour into this misshapen 90-minute entertainment,
"Hancock" takes a disastrous left turn, abandoning all its satirical
setups, and all sense … Oy, what a mess! … The superhero genre
screams for a makeover, or at least a smart deconstruction, but
"Hancock" isn't that movie. It just ups the foolishness ante.

Hm. Tough enough to keep me interested, but not so much that I break a sweat. How about:

Then there's this little gem from Mike McCahill of The Daily Telegraph (UK), which is so bursting with ripe quote-bits that it almost seems like the reviewer is winking at me: 

What we want from a summer entertainment is something slick, bright and
pacy; but between the jittery pseudo-realism of Peter Berg's direction
and the maudlin undercurrent to its hero's redemption, all Hancock can
summon up is the faintest sensation of nausea.

Ho ho ho… I laugh heartily at your weak attempt at criticism. Now you will learn that my Turd of Fury Polishing Style is superior to your weak Flying Tomato Attack Technique. Hiiii-ya!

OK, enough easy ones–time for something I can really sink my teeth into. Let's try this in-depth hatchet job from The Movie Boy:

This is a giant mess of a movie… The action set-pieces, if one can call them that, are far from thrilling, just a bunch of CGI and poor greenscreen work without a modicum of editorial rhythm or wonder… they've all been seen before, and with a lot more inspiration. … The blatantly stupid developments that occur in the final minutes are riddled with enormous plot holes and a total disregard for the viewer's intelligence. It's not just misguided, it's insulting. … Performances are as forgettable as the rest of it… Arriving in theaters a mere five days after the veritably exciting and imaginative "Wanted", "Hancock" will hopefully be seen for what it really is: a lifeless, empty, condescending fraud.

Ouch! But never fear, my trusty quote-scalpel is ready. Voilà:

Finally, here's one that definitely poses a challenge, which maybe suggests the reviewer is wary of serving up softballs to people like me who make our livings turning their mudslinging into high praise. From
The New York Post:

This movie fails so spectacularly - and on so many levels - that it's like
watching a train plummet off a bridge. …  Leaving behind the laughs for schmaltz, "Hancock" chickens out at the last minute, lurching toward a cop-out happy ending that gives every indication of having been reshot at the behest of test audiences.

But as long as Americans have bad grammar, my friend, I will still have a job:

That's all for now, but take comfort in the fact that the premiere of Disaster Movie is but a few short months away. Until then, may all your pigs wear lipstick, and may all your turds be… polished!

Previously: Polishing the Turd: The Love Guru.