Faster than a speeding bullet.
More powerful than a locomotive
Able to LEAP tall buildings in a single bound.
Marvel was the first to fly and Superman barely had super strength in the beginning. Classic Captain Marvel outshined Superman in the beginning IIRC. Hancock didn't steal anything from Superman, Superman wasn't even the first strong hero IIRC. If you want to get technical then the notion of someone having super strength and durability dates back to Greek Mythology seeing as Hercules had both.
You can claim Gladiator is a rip off/tribute to Superman. Its pretty obvious too, but you can't say that Hancock is a rip off when they are nothing alike outside of basic powers for a standard Super Hero. How interesting do you think a super hero story would be if the guy couldn't fly, have super durability/strength or speed? You may as well call the movie "Regular Guy does stuff!"
Your logic of a rip off is bad. I guess Batman and everyone else with Man in their name is a rip off as well.
True, I wasn't saying that Superman took all of his abilities from him or anything. I was saying Marvel was the first to fly IIRC. However like I said they all ripped off the Greek and Roman Gods. Superman took Hercules' strength, Hermes speed and whant not.
i just watched Hancock again, and yea Hancock is no match even for movie superman his no way near as strong,, for instants when the train was moving towards him he had to lean forward to obsorb more impact where as superman could just stand there, and also when he was getting shot to the face his head was moving around as if it was from the impact wher as superman gets shot in the eye with out it even rippling,, and whats this about his ass being burnt by the fire supermans heat ray would cut him in 2. Superman would break Hancock inhalf literally
Man you are full of fail. No were was it stated that he had to lean forward, he just did it. The same result would've happened if he just stood there or bent over. Hancock can't be hurt by bullets or explosives, they bounce right off of him as was shown during the bank robbery. His ass wasn't burnt IIRC his clothes caught on fire.
bullets bounce of metal doesnt mean it cant be ripped apart,, why did he lean forward when the train came for him where was it stated that he could of taken the train bending over? if he hadnt lent in the train would of probably pushed him back im not saying it would hurt him, and he even said to the guy i had a hot arse thas why he was going for the ice cream.
Maybe you should watch the movie again.
Hancock? Are you ****ing serious? What's next? Mighty Mouse?
Hancock, like someone said, is a rip off of both Superman, AND X-Men, with that damn suite. His wife obviously had the powers of Storm, and even though Hancock could fly, and bullets bounced off of him, and he stood in front of a train.. doesn't mean he is nowhere NEAR the capability of Superman. Didn't his wife mention that she was even stronger than Hancock was? So overall, SHE can take Supes?
What hurt Hancock anyway? Wasn't it something like him and his wife being too close to each other at a long period of time? All Superman has to do is find the ***** with his Super-Speed and sniff her out whereever she is, and hold her in front of Hancock before they are both ready to die, and then Supes would be like okay, you think your bad? Back in the bar, wannabe. OVER.
Come on..
Last edited by Tra-EL on Mar 26th, 2009 at 05:51 PM
Idk why you ate comparing metal to hancock because bullets can go through metal. Like phoenix said bullets bounce right off hancock causing him no harm. A rocket launcher bounced off of hancock and you can't say that a rocket launcher can bounce off of metal. And he wasn't harmed by the fire. His clothes were all burnt and he might have felt the heat but he wasn't harmed.
Failure once again. I'm going to ask you to tell me how he is a rip off of Superman and the X-Men. I'll admit his new costume looks like the Wolverine one from the movies but that is about it. You also didn't pay attention to the movie. She did not have any storm powers. That storm was the product of their powers clashing in that fight. His strength is comparable to movie Superman. The guy effortlessly lifted a beached whale and chucked him far into the ocean.
His wife isn't stronger than him, she just said that. She wasn't whooping him in that fight.
Yeah his wife is his weakness, a weakness that can't be exploited unless they want to get close to each other. He can blitz away from her at whenever he wants. Since you want to play it that way then all Hancock would have to do is sniff out some green rock and give it to Superman.
He leaned forward because he wanted to. He was an ******* who didn't think logically at that time. It was never stated that he had to brace himself so don't say that he has to. Durability is durability no matter how you position yourself.
If you are talking about that thing he said to the guy that was pretty much off screen then yeah, that doesn't even count. I'll rewatch it to see exactly what you are talking about but just because one's ass is on fire does not mean that he is being hurt or weak against fire. You can cover Superman in gasoline and set him on fire and he will burn, but he will not feel pain or show burn marks.
How is he a rip off of super man and X-men? That's like saying everyone superhero is a rip off of another superhero. You people have yet to give a good reason or a reason that makes sence why hancock is a rip of superman. And hancock became weak when he start falling in love with the girl. When he was around her at first there wasn't any signs of him becoming weak.
well, hancock DID need to cool down. but anyway, movie hancock simply doesn't have the feats to come anywhere close to movie superman. sorry, but hancock simply loses and loses hard until he gets some better feats. end of story.
You would want to cool down as well if you were on fire. Just because it doesn't hurt him doesn't mean he wants to just walk around on fire all the time. I think this is about Superman Returns vs Hancock. Returns isn't connected to the other ones IIRC so all of his old movie feats don't count here, but I may be wrong. Just so we are all clear on where I stand,
Comic Superman beats Hancock
Movie Superman loses.
superman returns superman still wins. hancock has nothing that comes close to superman lifting an island made out of kryptonite with a piece of kryptonite stuck in his side. again, until hancock 2 comes out and he gets some more feats, hancock loses.
He is a rip-off of Superman because what the movie Hancock is about, has already been DONE in Superman already.
It's supposed to be compared to Superman anyway by the way he DOESN'T care about his heroism. I'm not talking about the plot (which is only in reverse to the Superman story) but he is a rip-off, PERIOD. Open your eyes. He can #1- Fly. # 2. He has Super Strength and # 3: Invulnerably.. he as ALL the credentials of Superman but yet, the whole movie was supposed to point out that he ISN'T Superman. ( A drunk, broken down fool who doesn't give two shits about anything.) The only thing different is that he doesn't wear a cape, is black, and sports a Wolverine outfit.
Give up on the Kryptonite thing. After ALL THESE YEARS, the most famous master mind of his time, who is far beyond and above any other human being who calls themselves a genius and builds forces and freaks of nature just to HURT Superman in LEX LUTHOR, can't even bring Superman down when it comes to the Green Rock. What makes you think that Hancock can 'sniff' out Kryptonite and simply just 'hand it over' to Superman when he can't even dress himself? Superman has been battling Kryptonite since it has ever come into existence. With Hancock's stubbornness, and jock like attitude, he may even be Superman's easiest opponent to date!
Last edited by Tra-EL on Mar 26th, 2009 at 06:58 PM
In a way, once I think of it, Hancock's version of being a Super-hero kind of reminds me of 'Kingdom Come' storyline.
A fresh new line of hero's who did things their way and didn't give a hell about what the real hero's before them did to earn that right to be a hero. Of course, it was the Justice League/Society of America, led by Superman, who took care of business in the end.
At the end of Hancock, I understand he see's the light and does whatever he needs to do to save the people, esp. his wife. But watching it in FULL made me think that this guy is an abortion of Super-hero's. It took him THIS long to understand the meaning? What a fruit-cake.
1. Superman wasn't the first hero to fly.
2. Superman copied off of Hercules for having super strength and invulnerability. Almost every superhero has those 4 things.
Doom trumps Lex so he isn't the greatest human mind. Kryptonite does hurt Superman and it is pretty impossible for Superman to exploit Hancock's weakness. What makes you think Superman can find Hancock's wife and hand her over to him especially since he doesn't know who she is.
no, superman doesn't sundip. he simply flies above some clouds and lets the sun shine on him more directly. so, superman wins because hancocks feats don't come even remotely close to this yet.
who cares if hancock is a rip off of supes or not? clearly, his creation was influenced by supes, but whats wrong with that? pretty much every hero was influenced by supes, be it either to make the character similar or to be totally opposite or somewhere in between. supes is the character that other characters are measured by. is hancock a rip off of supes? no. he is not. is he influenced by him? certainly.
So your telling me in the superman movies he was drunk that didn't care about anybody but himself who doesn't age at all unless he partners up with someone that is the same as he is and has a women in the movie that's the exact same as he is. Yeah I really seen that in superman. And stop tryin to say that hancock is a rip off because of his powers. A LOT OF SUPERHEROS HAVE SUPER STREGTH FLIGHT AND INVONERALBILITY. I tell what it hancock had all the powers that superman has then mabey you have a point but he doesnt
If you would of read my post, I specifically said that everything that was done in Hancock they already DID with Superman (Flying around, saving people, understanding strengths, powers, etc) other than the PLOT. The plot is in reverse to hero's like Superman, and is made for us to see that Hancock is a super-hero like Superman, but obviously has issues and doesn't go about them the way Superman would. THAT is clear.
It is what it is. Yes, Superman wasn't the first to fly, but he was the first hero of ANY HERO that came after him. He was the first with an origin and on the scene in the comic world in 1938.
To compare Hancock and Superman is ridiculous because for what we know, we have NO idea about Hancock and if there IS a possibility of a back story. Maybe something like Kryptonite sides on Earth that can in fact hurt Hancock. We know absolutely nothing about him. He has NO origin story. Superman is one of the worlds most recognizable hero's and some say he's a figure of the world. We've seen him in action with comic books for 76 years! Hancock has made it to the big screen for just a block-buster movie with a big name actor. I don't think he is even meant to be compared to a hero like Superman, because it's just retarded.
76 years of existence compared to 1 year/movie. This is going in circles, and no one will EVER get to the bottom of this, unless DC release's a line of Hancock comics, and in fact they did meet face to face.
It's like debating Cassette tapes, to CD's if you ask me. Yes they can do the SAME thing and produce music.. but are they really on the same level with each other? That's Superman Vs Hancock.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 26th, 2009 08:21 AM
