It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

HOuse of Hancock is a dramatised story based on the much-publicised story of the feud between the one-time wealthiest woman in the world and the third wife of Australian mining magnate, Langly "Lang" Hancock (and thus, also her stepmother).Without wanting to introduce spoilers, I will confine my comments to simply complement actors Mandy McElhinney (Gina Reinhart), Sam Neill (Land Hancock) and Peta Sergeant (third wife, Rose) on very powerful renditions of their respective parts. At the time that the Hancock sage took place (1990s and early 2000s) the Australian media made both women out to be totally ruthless even though there was more than enough money in the Hancock empire to keep the both (and all their relatives) in the lap of luxury for ever. However, the movie skilfully showed the softer sides of all the protagonists - although, as the credits were very careful to explicitly point out, the film is a dramatisation and not necessarily based on actual events.The one complaint I have is that Mandy McElhinney should have has a LOT of prosthetic body-weight added to her for later parts of the movie because she did not accurately depict Gina Hancock (who is grossly overweight) in bodily appearance although, facially, the likeness is uncanny. The same could also be said of Sam Neill who was a bit slim compared with his character.Nonetheless, compelling viewing and definitely worth repeated looks.