Search


Feed

About Me

Kyle Smith (Twitter: @rkylesmith) is a film critic for The New York Post and the author of the novels Love Monkey and A Christmas Caroline. Type a title in the box above to locate a review. Find an alphabetical listing of The New York Post's recent film reviews here.

Buy Love Monkey for $4! "Hilarious"--Maslin, NY Times. "Exceedingly readable and wickedly funny romantic comedy"--S.F. Chronicle. "Loud and brash, a helluva lot of fun"--Entertainment Weekly. "Engaging romp, laugh-out-loud funny"-CNN. "Shrewd, self-deprecating, oh-so-witty. Smith's ruthless humor knows no bounds"--NPR

Buy A Christmas Caroline for $10! "for those who prefer their sentimentality seasoned with a dash of cynical wit. A quick, enjoyable read...straight out of Devil Wears Prada"--The Wall Street Journal

Rotten Tomatoes
Search Movie/Celeb

Advanced Search
  • Recent Comments

  • Categories

  • « Review: “Diminished Capacity” | Home | Special for Hockey Fans »

    The Eagle and “Hancock”

    By Kyle | July 4, 2008

    Fourth of July special question: how many eagles are there in “Hancock”?
    I noticed:

    1. Eagle on bench Hancock sleeps on.
    2. Eagle on his knit cap.
    3. Eagle-shaped gold pendant worn around his neck.
    4. Was Charlize Theron wearing an EAGLES t-shirt to bed? I’m not sure.
    5. Eagle on back of Hancock’s fancy new uniform.
    6. Giant eagle statue as he walks into bank robbery shootout.
    7. Stone eagle over bell on his trailer/home.
    8. Eagle drawing on wall inside his home? Not sure.
    9. Live eagle with him on top of Empire State Building.

    Share/Save/Bookmark

    Topics: Movies, Politics |

    5 Responses to “The Eagle and “Hancock””

    1. buruboi Says:
      July 5th, 2008 at 10:16 am

      a friend and I were debating whether this flick was allegorical of US benign but mislead hegemony. This seems to settle this issue..

    2. sparty Says:
      July 5th, 2008 at 6:14 pm

      there were several eagles in the mural he creates on his cell walls

    3. Chuck Says:
      July 6th, 2008 at 12:09 pm

      Just curious as to why a movie critic, meaning some one with no actual sports knowledge, would write such a terrible article in the post.

      You obviously have zero hockey knowledge and do nothing but take shots at a great sport.

      What are you a fan of, that mockery of a game called Basketball in which you have refferes swinging games for league ratings?

      How about football. Oh yes American football. By the way whats the latest news on the cheating in that sport, and i mean the spygate scandel.

      Baseball? So is it official yet that half the league takes steroids? Or will Mr. Selig continue to mask the problem and act as if nothings wrong. Tsk Tsk what a shame all those tainted records.

      But hey buddy at least you dont have any of that in hockey. Its all legitimate. Violence? Of course. But football is just as violent so thats no excuse. The fact that there was a lock out hurt the sport? Oh dont even. People were wondering how much longer baseball would last in the early 90’s. Do people even go see the Marlins or Nationals any more I heard that they set a new attendance records with a whopping 69 at their last home game.

    4. Mo Says:
      July 8th, 2008 at 9:08 am

      “mislead hegemony.”

      you can’t be serious….

      Did we:

      1) Take over Iraq’s election process and have Karl Rove run the country?

      -No they had free elections.

      2) Did we take over Afghanistan and let Dick Cheney run that country?

      -No.

      3) Did we let Halliburton get all the oil contracts from the country?

      -No companies are bidding on it, and Halliburton isn’t even involved.

      4) Culturally, would it be so bad if their backwater culture was influenced by ours?

      -No, they’d stop hanging gays. They’d stop beheading prisoners while they were alive, instead waterboard the worst criminal they find to protect their people, and then have endless debates on whether or not waterboarding constitutes torture.

      I think this last point is the most important. IS our culture better than their culture? YES. If it’s not, why our we living here and not there?

    5. neoconjob Says:
      August 6th, 2008 at 3:17 am

      I finally saw this film and it seems you have forgotten, in your rush to heap more praise on your beloved country and its fearless leader, that Hancock is also drunk while creating all his “collateral damage” or as you put it “the job that no one else wants to do”. So how does him being inebriated fit into the allegory? This one I would love to hear.

      PS–I saw the Return of The King again a few days ago and during the scene section where they march on Black Gate at Mordor and are outnumbered until Gandalf calls in the giant eagles I thought of you immediately trying to say how Tolken also saw the Eagles as the USA but instead of it being about the Iraq war it was about Wolrd War 2 where the US stepped into save the Brits which lets face it is all Middle Earth is, the UK. Either way its bs and I think Hancock was meant more as a harsh criticism of the US as opposed to a kiss on the nut sack which is how you see it. And again there is no way Cheney is Batman. More like the mob boss.

    Comments