Recent User Reviews
Due to its controversial and rather complex subject, “Lucy” was met generally with mixed reactions by the audience, but it didn’t deserve it at all. In my opinion, it was just above average, and the main problem was that director and screenwriter Luc Besson didn’t dare (or maybe wasn’t able) to go deeper and develop the interesting premise in a more satisfying way.
Scarlett Johansson plays Lucy, a young student, who is forced to be a drug mule by the mob, but things go wrong and the drug starts leaking into her body. Shortly after that, she discovers she can control every part of her body better than before, remember unimportant things from the past, and feel every emotion and thought of people close to her. In the meantime, professor Norman (Morgan Freeman), a scientist who has written thousands of pages about the human brain, talks about his research in front of young students, explaining that most people only use about 10% of their cerebral capacity and that they could do amazing and unimaginable things with, say, 20, 30 or 40%, but it still remains unknown what could happen if they could use 100%. Lucy contacts the professor, wanting to let him know what’s happening to her and help him develop his research. The mob starts chasing “Lucy” which will lead to a series of action sequences that will eventually end in a predictable way.
Most critics heavily criticized the movie because of the “ten percent of brain’s capacity myth”, even though Luc Besson pointed out in several interviews that he knew what he was doing while filming and was completely conscious that “the 10%” is not real. This is something that most people seem to forget or intentionally miss out. I think the same happened to “Gravity” last year, if you let me make this rather unusual comparison. Alfonso Cuaron also had to give explanations about the scientific inaccuracies of his work that pissed off a lot of physicists, but did that stop “Gravity” from being the best movie of the year? Of course not. Now, “Lucy” doesn’t even come close to Cuaron’s movie, but still, it has its own logic, it does not pretend to be 100% real, so I really don’t understand all the hate.
The most important and probably most positive aspect of “Lucy” is that it’s consistent and very well paced. The story-line is well balanced and focused, and the acting is fine (Scarlett is obviously a great choice for this role, as usual), but unfortunately, as I pointed out in the beginning, Besson doesn’t know what to do with the story and how to develop it properly. Apart from that, the CGI in “Lucy” was mostly disappointing, especially in the end, but I can’t complain about that, given the fact that the budget is rather low.
In some aspects “Lucy” may remind you of “Transcendence” that came out earlier this year. Let me stop you right there. Unlike Pfister’s lifeless and boring debut, “Lucy” is a well action-packed summer flick that most of you will probably like, if you are willing to ignore some of the “unbelievable” parts of it.… Full Review »
In the opening scene, a priest (Brendan Gleeson) hears a threatening confession. He spends the rest of the film interacting with members of his community (most of whom aren't very devout or very nice) and preparing for his fate. The characters are intriguing and the actors playing them turn in compelling performances. The film's sense of mystery combines with the priest's complex moral perspective (and dashes of humor) to create a rich, absorbing experience. The outcome is so powerful that it ends in silence on screen and in the audience.… Full Review »
Funny here and there to watch, nostalgic interest keeps you watching but overall very much underwhelming compared to the first installment. Not outright terrible but not worth paying to watch. I think its fair to say that this rendition firmly puts the series to the grave.… Full Review »