The best part of the movie for me was the three levels of dreaming. I also liked the idea that you can control and explore and share your dreams. The movie developed these ideas and suggested that anyone could do this. The action for me was a backdrop. It was hard to concentrate on any one action so for me the action is wallpaper to the central plot. The idea that you can change a person's core thinking and opinions by making them think the dreams are real is no different than some of the claims of hypnosis. Overall it was worth seeing if you ever wanted to control or change your or others' dreams?
The movie gave a striking view of Baghdad after the US invasion. It showed how disorganized everything was and the intrigues that were going on behind the scenes among the American factions: army, marines, CIA and State Department. Each had their agenda. Besides that there were the Sunnis, Shia, Kurds, Al Queda competing against each other. I think that was the strength of the movie. The scenery from Baghdad took you into the urban architecture, houses and narrow streets. Like the Later Bourne movies, I don't care for the fast moving jerky shots that are used. I still like cinematography that focuses on a scene for awhile and lets you examine it and feel it and explore it. Everything is moving too fast for you to do that.
This movie is fast moving and holds your attention. The plot is only average. The characters played by Russell Crowe and Rachel McAdams keep you engaged. Ben Afleck is somewhat flat. Robin Wright Penn doesn't really add anything. Jason Bateman does a acceptible job as the flashy drugged out PR person who is caught up in the corporate shenanigans. There are some political statements in the movie. Some of the scenarios are similar to present day current events and corporations that have been in the news. The storyline suggests that greed is functioning more than patriotism in some national security policies. All in all it is a good enough movie to warrant you're viewing.
The movie was full of start to stop action. There were a lot of wide lens shots from above views of the Middle East which were breathtaking. It was worth seeing for the cinematography. Leo Di Caprio did a decent job and was a nice contrast with Russell Crow. The scenes of Crow running deadly missions while shuttling his children to soccer games and the like were humorous or ironic as you choose to look at it. I was entertained.
Hancock is highly entertaining and appropriate for all ages. The idea of a superhero with bad habits and in need of a better image is most appealing. You have sympathy for him. He flies around and saves people but gets no respect. It caters to a lot of our fantasies. The twist in meeting a second super person (not hero) in Charlize Theron is delightful. This not a serious drama but overall light entertaining film that gets you out of your daily routine.