To err is human, to forgive divine. At least that’s what Alexander Pope tells us, along with other useful things during his day job like “That will be £3.99 please.”

In some ways, it would be better to forgive what Will Smith did in his new film, Hancock, which you may be familiar with after the premiere information for the film showcasing on this very site not too long ago.

However, as much as I want to, as much as the idea of the anti-superhero is something which should be celebrated, given all the superhero cliché films we’ve over the years now, with the revival of marvel comics’ fortune via Spiderman, Fantastic four, the hulk and many many others, with far more to come of course, given the CEO of Marvel has gone of record wanting to milk the comic nipple for all it’s worth before leaving the milky dugs bone dry.

Hell, DC comics even realised that they were missing out on the gravy train and revived two of their well known characters back to the big screen after a prolonged absence, Batman, which to be fair, was a very good movie except for that district attorney who didn’t seem to act any different to being on Dawson’s creek, and Superman, of which the only saving grace, appeared to be Kevin Spacey with a bald head.

So with that in mind then, given this film is about a superman who drinks heavily and basically is an arsehole to everyone he meets, you expect great things to be presented. And for the opening 25 minutes when Hancock is causing so much damage to the city, it would be better for him not to turn up at all, it carries you through with ridiculous strides, keeping your eyes fixed on the screen, wondering how bad he could get.

And then Jason Daterapeman with wife Charlie Thermos and some random child person come into play and basically, then it starts going down hill. You see, Mr Datarapeman is a do-gooder who wants to make the world a better, more worthwhile place. So instantly you begin to hate him.

After being saved by Will Smith, he takes it upon himself to turn around Hancock’s public image and get people to like him, therefore for some reason further his crappy career or at least that’s the impression I got.

The wife doesn’t like Hancock, which you could understand at the dinner table for instance where he tells the son (aka random child person) that he should smack a bully and then proceed to continue drinking.

The Prison experience is quite watchable if only for seeing a prisoner who took a disliking to our pal Will, violently having his head literally shoved up another prisoner’s arse. And there we have one sentence I never thought I would ever write. Thank you Hancock for that at least!

But once he starts getting back on the path to proper person of society, it becomes dull. I mean it too, after one final scene with rescuing the police woman and stating good job to everyone even if they are just hiding from gun fire, you could just walk out of the cinema and say that was a good film. But if you decide to stay, beware.

Basically, Will Smith gives off the impression through his character that he wants people to love him more and more as time goes on, with the few twists that go on, you end up feeling like he’s a true victim and we should all make him feel better by taking him out to dinner and there is no way he should pay either.

Charlie Thermos as the wife, gives off the impression that she needs to go do some more acting lessons, as judging from her appearance in the film, she is a cardboard cut out actress and frankly should remain confined to the naughty picture magazines we all love and make mess with. And yet, she still did fantastically well in “Monster”, very bizarre.

To quantify my argument above, I would remark on some of the worse bits with her and that would spoil the plot for those who have not seen it, suffice to say, she plays two states of emotion for the majority of the film which is hate couple with annoyance and then “lovey dovey” and that’s it.

She got her £20 million, why should she care, though granted that view was from what was witnessed from Leicester Square as well as quite a lot of the movie…

Jason daterapeman seems rather uncomfortable on the screen, possibly as a result of sharing screen time with two Hollywood people at the same time and perhaps to try and justify his selection for the role he plays, he acts like he does on that show he did “Arrested Development” so if you saw that show at some point, you know what to expect for the most part.

He did seem to be the odd one out during all this, considering it seems all the way through the film except for one point where the plot goes out the window, the writers probably thinking “F**k it, it’ll add a few minutes to the film”, then we actually see him get upset, and given the news he had, quite right too.

That’s perhaps the biggest crime of them all, the film seems to go one way, which is a great premise and story we are being given, and then goes off on another road, probably wondering what the hell to do next.

What we don’t get anywhere near enough of, is the torment of Hancock as a person, and his existence as a man who can do whatever he likes, say whatever he likes at any time, it’s hugely funny and it all gets cut off too soon and falls back to the standard, let’s all be good people plot, and like we said earlier, Will Smith needs your love good people, let’s give him a big hug at the end for being a good boy again.

Basically to cut this little ranting piece short, go for the first half of the film. It’s very good, and then leave the cinema. If you stay, you will think “That was OK for what it was.”