Lucy

User Score
6.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 689 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. May 14, 2015
    6
    "Life was given to us a billion years ago, now you know what to do with it". Well, for starters I know I enjoyed watching Lucy! And I think the second thing the movie taught me is that I should go out and buy Samsung products.

    The problem with Lucy isn't that it is a bad movie, because it isn't, it's fast-paced, has some great visuals, there isn't any needless conversation, it has the
    "Life was given to us a billion years ago, now you know what to do with it". Well, for starters I know I enjoyed watching Lucy! And I think the second thing the movie taught me is that I should go out and buy Samsung products.

    The problem with Lucy isn't that it is a bad movie, because it isn't, it's fast-paced, has some great visuals, there isn't any needless conversation, it has the necessary dark humour to pull it off and we get to see Scarlett Johansson's breasts being groped. You don't really need much more than that.

    Unfortunately, the way the "science" is presented is done in such a way that the director seems to have had in mind that the movie should be a piece of postmodernist social criticism that the viewer just can't do anything but agree with. That is a shame because many of the subjects that are rubbed in the viewer's face are definitely worth exploring, just not through the director's postmodernist goggles.

    Someone suggested cutting out Morgan Freeman's performances entirely to make it a better movie and I agree. Boy, does he play a redundant roll! It's too bad Amr Waked has such a small role in this movie, I would have liked to see him play Lucy's love interest a little longer. The movie could have been a lot more heart-felt if she actually managed to bond with him.

    If you feel a need to cleanse your eyeballs after watching this movie, I'd suggest you read up on "The catastrophe of Postmodernism" and "Time and its discontents" by John Zerzan. He'll get you to unlock that extra brain-power you're craving for.

    Still, after all is said and done I can't help but have enjoyed this movie! Scarlett definitely saved it.
    Expand
  2. Nov 23, 2014
    6
    The premise is good, but the movie would have really benefited if the writing was tightened up and if it was more grounded in reality and actual science. The visuals and acting were strong though, Scarlett Johansson's performance was especially good despite her character was written somewhat poorly and flat for most of the movie. I felt this movie could have been terrific with betterThe premise is good, but the movie would have really benefited if the writing was tightened up and if it was more grounded in reality and actual science. The visuals and acting were strong though, Scarlett Johansson's performance was especially good despite her character was written somewhat poorly and flat for most of the movie. I felt this movie could have been terrific with better writing and execution. Expand
  3. Apr 20, 2015
    5
    Very entertaining action film with a female character as the star for once. The film is a little bit empty and of course the premise is absurd, but we are supposed to take this as a sci-fi movie, so it should not matter when it comes to judging it. Johanson shows she can really be an action film star. Not much more to say. Entertaining. Not worse than some of the basic comic book moviesVery entertaining action film with a female character as the star for once. The film is a little bit empty and of course the premise is absurd, but we are supposed to take this as a sci-fi movie, so it should not matter when it comes to judging it. Johanson shows she can really be an action film star. Not much more to say. Entertaining. Not worse than some of the basic comic book movies some people praise that much now (talking about the basic ones, not the great ones like The Dark Knight). Expand
  4. Feb 19, 2015
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie could/should have been a lot better. The concept was interesting although scientifically inaccurate. Lucy OD's on some obscure pregnancy hormone and transcends physical reality when her brain hits 100% utilization. Too much padding in the form of intercut scenes and CGI to flesh out an otherwise boring plot. Just barely worth the $1.58 at Redbox. Expand
  5. Apr 3, 2015
    5
    While I love psychic powers and abilities in moving in games anything with that gets bonus points. Chronicle and Push, cough cough. I got excited when she first started getting her powers, but I soon found they sucked all the fun out of it. While this could have been a great action movie with a good story it tried to be all philosophical and had forced scenes where she could have easilyWhile I love psychic powers and abilities in moving in games anything with that gets bonus points. Chronicle and Push, cough cough. I got excited when she first started getting her powers, but I soon found they sucked all the fun out of it. While this could have been a great action movie with a good story it tried to be all philosophical and had forced scenes where she could have easily killed or knocked out all the enemies with her powers but instead didn't. Half-way through I was begging for some cool looking fight scene and never got it. I guess what I thought I was getting was a big bowl of super nachos and instead got a poorly cooked steak. Expand
  6. Feb 19, 2015
    5
    I liked Lucy, that said I must say the movie is empty.
    I liked the effects and the theme but there is absolutely nothing else in there. the movie is well produced and executed but totally meaningless. The characters are just plain and useless ( why bother to hire Johanson, Freeman and Min-Sink) and after watching the movie i felt totally empty and without any type of self-questioning
    I liked Lucy, that said I must say the movie is empty.
    I liked the effects and the theme but there is absolutely nothing else in there. the movie is well produced and executed but totally meaningless. The characters are just plain and useless ( why bother to hire Johanson, Freeman and Min-Sink) and after watching the movie i felt totally empty and without any type of self-questioning about whatever the movie wanted to express me.
    It follows my theory that Luc Besson has nice ideas and good film starts but has no idea about how to end films.
    Expand
  7. Nov 10, 2014
    6
    Lucy feeds on its original premise with silly thrills overshadowing it's complex intentions. Scarlets Johansson does her finest but when there is no character the audiencte can relate to + a weird premise = it's those fun thrills that remain in the mind after leaving the cinema.
  8. Sep 12, 2014
    6
    This is a science fiction, so don't expect any reality. It has a very original story and great acting. I don't know why everyone is so critical, it just lost focus near the end but overall, it's definitely worth seeing.
  9. Oct 22, 2014
    5
    The main idea of the movie got off to a good start, but as often happens, the ending was completely disappointing for me. However, the interesting storyline and sexy Scarlett's voice made a deal.
  10. Nov 16, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Some parts of the beginning had potential. Then, it just became implausible, absurd and pretty much just escalated too quickly. So in the end, 'Lucy' became a god? I thought it was trying to send a message that we don't use our brains enough but alrighty then. The last straw was when she injected herself with the 'drugs' and this black, tree-like thing started growing out of her. That part really hit me and realized I was not going to leave happy. When she started travelling through space and time made me laugh a bit. In the end, it seemed like the director collaborated with M. Night Shyamalan on acid. But yeah, I'll give it a 4 for effort and for the actors. Expand
  11. Nov 23, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The only thing that redeemed this movie was it's imagery. It wasn't outstanding or extraordinary but it was something that I concentrated on. I felt as though the movie was trying to break the mold of the typical Hollywood movie but managed to conform to all of those standards e.g having the Hollywood beauty (no offense to Scarlett Johansson). This felt like a pretentious movie that was trying to hard to be something that it wasn't but it didn't try hard enough to make me hate the movie. It was not memorable, predictable, it kinda sucked and I would have expected more from Luc Besson after I watched The Fifth Element, which is one of my favourite movies.
    As a side note: For some reason I was offended by one of the last scenes, when Lucy was skipping through different times. When she met the monkey and tried to connect with it. Thinking about it it may have been because of the racist undertones in the movie - which can be linked back to it being a typical Hollywood movie. The Koreans were the bad guys and the beautiful blonde American woman with the fantastic french forces and minds defeat the evil Koreans.
    Expand
  12. Dec 5, 2014
    6
    Lucy is a sci-fi action film. It uses quite a lot of CGI which makes the watcher feel like the things they're seeing are real. I would say that this movie focuses more on the science than the fiction. The beginning stars of like most normal action movie, but then over time it turns more scientific whiteout you even realising it.the cast was good (e.g scarlet johanson and Morgan freeman)Lucy is a sci-fi action film. It uses quite a lot of CGI which makes the watcher feel like the things they're seeing are real. I would say that this movie focuses more on the science than the fiction. The beginning stars of like most normal action movie, but then over time it turns more scientific whiteout you even realising it.the cast was good (e.g scarlet johanson and Morgan freeman) therefore the acting was good! It is watchable, and it isn't boring, but it does focus a lot on evolution so it feels almost educational in a way. Don't be out of by the way i said it feels educational, because it sandwiched between violence. Overall it is a fun watch. Expand
  13. Sep 20, 2014
    4
    Disappointed. Very disappointed. Very, very disappointed. Is this all accelerated evolution has to offer mankind? Here was a chance for Scarlett Johansson to kick some ass for 80 minutes and somehow there was no fun, no humor, no triumph of smartness over dumbness. "Limitless", a flawed movie, with Bradley Cooper better covered the expanding mental power in an ordinary human. BetterDisappointed. Very disappointed. Very, very disappointed. Is this all accelerated evolution has to offer mankind? Here was a chance for Scarlett Johansson to kick some ass for 80 minutes and somehow there was no fun, no humor, no triumph of smartness over dumbness. "Limitless", a flawed movie, with Bradley Cooper better covered the expanding mental power in an ordinary human. Better still, check out "The Sixth Finger" from the 40+ year Outer Limits show (season 1, episode 5). Expand
  14. Jul 25, 2014
    4
    Dull and Passionless

    Besson had some interesting narrative ideas (using the stock footage to show what was going on in Lucy's mind) but he abandoned those so early, they seemed like editing mistakes. A full third of the movie is a PowerPoint presentation and, while it's widely believed that people would pay to hear Morgan Freeman read the phone book, it comes off just as dull as your
    Dull and Passionless

    Besson had some interesting narrative ideas (using the stock footage to show what was going on in Lucy's mind) but he abandoned those so early, they seemed like editing mistakes.

    A full third of the movie is a PowerPoint presentation and, while it's widely believed that people would pay to hear Morgan Freeman read the phone book, it comes off just as dull as your last quarterly meeting.

    The film's true failing is that Lucy is no longer human within the first 40 minutes. She becomes completely unsympathetic. There is no hero here because we have no idea what she wants or why she is trying so hard to accomplish "the thing."

    It is, in the end, hollow and heartless.
    Expand
  15. Aug 11, 2014
    4
    this movie is all over the place, I didn't like freeman as a professor I thought he overshadowed the star and yet had only a minor role, the mating animals and copy paste start was pathetic, I didn't like the boyfriend scene and the yakuza were over the top, there were shades of matrix gun battles, who seriously goes to that sort of trouble for four packets of drugs, honestly. the policethis movie is all over the place, I didn't like freeman as a professor I thought he overshadowed the star and yet had only a minor role, the mating animals and copy paste start was pathetic, I didn't like the boyfriend scene and the yakuza were over the top, there were shades of matrix gun battles, who seriously goes to that sort of trouble for four packets of drugs, honestly. the police car chase...what was the point of that? the cop.... was she going to pass on the genetic super gene or something, what was the point? she builds a supercomputer and leaves him with a USB stick, which about sums up this movie. Expand
  16. Nov 8, 2014
    5
    This movie is just another episode of "Through the Wormhole", though one that is somewhat outrageous and off the chart, with weaker than usual science. I did not care for most of the action. There are some cool scenes and special effects which I enjoyed. It's a movie about a woman becoming god. I think she will be benevolent. Don't expect too much. Sit back, relax, and enjoy the good parts.
  17. Apr 18, 2015
    6
    *meh*

    Plenty of action which was awesome, but so little else. Clearly this movie is feeding off of Johanson's Avengers fame. Putting an iconic female action star and relying on that to carry the movie. The plot is just utterly stupid, using a long since disproven theory about the mind as its premise and expanding it to moronic levels of fantasy. At times the movie almost seems to
    *meh*

    Plenty of action which was awesome, but so little else.

    Clearly this movie is feeding off of Johanson's Avengers fame. Putting an iconic female action star and relying on that to carry the movie.

    The plot is just utterly stupid, using a long since disproven theory about the mind as its premise and expanding it to moronic levels of fantasy. At times the movie almost seems to believe its own bull. Still, if you simply shut your brain off and accept things as presented, then it is entertaing.

    Aside from Lucy, no one else is significant, either in performance or relevance to the plot.

    Overall:
    Lucy is turn-your-brain-off-at-the-door movie, and if you can do that it's allot of fun. Great action, stupid story.
    Expand
  18. Nov 7, 2014
    5
    This movie tries way to hard. ScarJo is good but there's better similar movies (looking at you Limitless). Some of the science is bit (very) dodgy too. Even as a straight action film, it's just not interesting enough. This movie needed a better script. Skip Lucy and see one of the better films it tried to imitate.
  19. Aug 29, 2014
    6
    If you can get past the fact that the whole idea behind the movie is painfully inaccurate you may find some enjoyment. The movie isn't something that will be talked about years from now but it's a pretty entertaining way way to spend 90 minutes, just don't expect too much.
  20. Aug 8, 2014
    5
    It was honestly such a dumb movie. The logic totally collapses and as Lucy gets more and more intelligent the script gets more and more ridiculous. Interesting style, absolutely no substance.
  21. Jul 25, 2014
    5
    When I saw Lucy, I thought of it like the third Matrix movie. Great concept. Very good and interesting set up and then the last 15 - 20 just sucked. I am a big Besson fan, but this movie lacked charm and style he usually brings to his movies. Much less action than I was hoping for. Scarlet does a decent job, but she could have and should have done better. Maybe she did not want to doWhen I saw Lucy, I thought of it like the third Matrix movie. Great concept. Very good and interesting set up and then the last 15 - 20 just sucked. I am a big Besson fan, but this movie lacked charm and style he usually brings to his movies. Much less action than I was hoping for. Scarlet does a decent job, but she could have and should have done better. Maybe she did not want to do what she does on the Marvel movies too much and I am not talking action wise. The score was terrible. Usually Besson movies scores draw you into the movie much more.

    This movie is worth a watch, but I would wait a few months for redbox or netflicks. Not worth $11 in the theaters.

    Overall, a great concept, but fails very short in my opinion. One guy was telling his girl that he thought it would be better. I have to agree with him. Very let down.....again.
    Expand
  22. Aug 4, 2014
    6
    I'm not going to jump on the Scarlett Johansson bad acting bandwagon, in fact I think she's very good in the role. As she uses more and more of her brain capacity she loses all her sense of feeling and humanity. Some people are confusing this as bad acting. The so called science behind a LOT of movies is silly, and this is yet another where you have to throw all your sense ofI'm not going to jump on the Scarlett Johansson bad acting bandwagon, in fact I think she's very good in the role. As she uses more and more of her brain capacity she loses all her sense of feeling and humanity. Some people are confusing this as bad acting. The so called science behind a LOT of movies is silly, and this is yet another where you have to throw all your sense of plausibility out the window. The movie never bored me. I would rate it higher if the last 15-20 minutes didn't push it to the outer limits of believability. It was actually laughable. Expand
  23. Aug 2, 2014
    6
    This film wasn't bad but it wasn't amazing. This is a film you have to watch and not take it so seriously, it's a fun ride and it does deliver. It starts off very well and has you on the edge of your seat but when it came to the film's end, it loses all the work it's put in throughout the movie. I must say I was hoping for a better close to such a great start. Over all, "Lucy" is worth aThis film wasn't bad but it wasn't amazing. This is a film you have to watch and not take it so seriously, it's a fun ride and it does deliver. It starts off very well and has you on the edge of your seat but when it came to the film's end, it loses all the work it's put in throughout the movie. I must say I was hoping for a better close to such a great start. Over all, "Lucy" is worth a watch because all the actors involved did a great job. Expand
  24. Oct 24, 2014
    4
    it's really dumb.

    for me I couldn’t suspend my disbelief enough. This is not how the brain works, this is not how humanity itself works and this is not how evolution works, and for a film that’s trying to report that it knows that! That’s a big sin.
  25. Aug 23, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If you want to watch this movie on the merits of the trailer, be warned that the trailer is deceptive. It makes it look like the movie is an action thriller, but its not. It tries to blend sci-fi with incomprehensible philosophy that is badly written in, and whatever "action" you see is monotonous, without conflict, emotion or even any semblance of a good, traditional action scene. Towards the end of the movie, we get to see Luc Besson's ravers dream, with gratuitous use of post-production CG (even though the CG is mediocre at best), that does not add any substance to whatever message he wants to convey in this film. What is he trying to say, that if we go 100% of our brain, we become God??? Even at 20% the film suddenly morphs into X-Men territory.

    S. Jo's performance in this is the only worthy thing out of this tripe. She really conveyed the transformation from an ordinary young lady, terrified for being forced into a drug smuggler, into inhuman woman who knows everything and has the power of God. The problem is that the transformation is too sudden. One minute you see her crying, the next she's gunning down anyone who stands in her way. In trailers I feared that the action would make her look like Black Widow from Avengers, but in the movie, with how easily and coldly she could dispatch her foes, she (tries) to look like Famke Janssen from X-Men 3. I say tries because there is no subtle hint of any effort, or conflict, behind the action. Its just there, like she's on God mode.

    Morgan Freeman is one of the Lord's of exposition, but when you ask him to do anything but that (especially if its based on dodgy sci-fi that is poorly written), you actually undervalue the actor. That's what happened here. Any scene involving him apart from the first three is crap, because there is no more plot that requires his narration to advance.

    Which leads to my point with Lucy; the film is genuinely about her, and any other character is superfluous. The problem is that she's an unemotional woman who is trying to fulfill the basic purpose of life. There is no balancing act, because other characters simply do not make their presence felt at all. There was even a scene, where the French police was asked to follow Lucy shortly after she used God mode on a dozen Korean mooks. He blatantly asked why he should be there, to which Lucy outright kissed him, implying that he's her "balancing act" of reminding her of humanity. WTF, it just came out of the blue?????

    Speaking of Koreans, why them?? Is Besson afraid of pissing off the Russians? Can't he use the French mafia, or even Western villains (hell, there was one supporting villain character who was English)?

    Finally, what was the point of this movie? S Jo's. intro and ending narration is painting a picture of what is the purpose of human life? In between I see images of chimps, predators, the act of animals humping each other and birth, and the ravers dream of how the Earth was made??? The worst part was that it was clear that these images were meant to pad out the film, with no unifying theme whatsoever. They were used as a sort of analogy; the predator scene was interspersed with scenes of S.Jo being captured by Koreans, the animal sex interspersed with Freeman's lecture.... Why do we need to see this, Besson? It's clear what the scenes are, so stop cutting in and out!!!
    Expand
  26. Aug 26, 2014
    5
    Although it's enjoyable to watch, this movie is not good science fiction. The premise is based on the old saw that says "we only use 10% of our brains." So what would it be like if we someone could use all 100%? Of course the premise is nonsense. If we really used just 10% of our brains, then evolution would have given us brains that are 10% as large as they are now. The brain is anAlthough it's enjoyable to watch, this movie is not good science fiction. The premise is based on the old saw that says "we only use 10% of our brains." So what would it be like if we someone could use all 100%? Of course the premise is nonsense. If we really used just 10% of our brains, then evolution would have given us brains that are 10% as large as they are now. The brain is an energetically-expensive organ. It makes no sense from an evolutionary standpoint that we would have brains 10 times larger than we need.

    A good science fiction film should have some basis in real science, or at least have a comprehensible and consistent explanation of whatever pseudo-scientific ideas it relies upon. This film is fantasy masquerading as science fiction. There have been a couple of films that develop this topic in a more satisfying way -- Charlie and Phenomenon come to mind. (Those films are good science fiction, check them out.)

    Still, the special effects are fun to watch, and the plot, while implausible, did hold my attention. Entertaining fantasy, but not science fiction.
    Expand
  27. Jul 25, 2014
    6
    I tend to agree with much of Joe Morgenstern's WSJ review (especially the fact that the movie is concise!), but it becomes a little mechanical toward the end. The first 40 minutes are tremendous, but as Lucy uses more of her brain, her affect becomes flat - and Scarlet needs her charm to carry her acting. She's the modern day Lawnmower Man (for good), but I wanted more of the lightI tend to agree with much of Joe Morgenstern's WSJ review (especially the fact that the movie is concise!), but it becomes a little mechanical toward the end. The first 40 minutes are tremendous, but as Lucy uses more of her brain, her affect becomes flat - and Scarlet needs her charm to carry her acting. She's the modern day Lawnmower Man (for good), but I wanted more of the light comedy from the first half in the second half. No movie should ever remind you of Transcendence. Expand
  28. Jul 25, 2014
    5
    A spirited action film with a bit of lax in the display of its own comprehension. Scarlett Johansson clearly stepping into a careful role fresh off the brilliant and curiously engaging "Under the Skin". The cinematography and prop placement standout but a solid environment could not carry this film. Loosely plotted and just below thought provoking, this film is one that takes itself aA spirited action film with a bit of lax in the display of its own comprehension. Scarlett Johansson clearly stepping into a careful role fresh off the brilliant and curiously engaging "Under the Skin". The cinematography and prop placement standout but a solid environment could not carry this film. Loosely plotted and just below thought provoking, this film is one that takes itself a tad bit too seriously when it could have had much more fun with it's premise. Expand
  29. Jul 26, 2014
    5
    Action movie with pseudo-science bubble.
    Clearly, creators of this movie were referring more to LSD than to the famous early human ancestor, even though we do meet the latter one. It's an attempt to make a nod to two different categories of movie-watchers:
    young people will un-mistakenly link colors and special effects to the popular drug while some philosophically inclined people will
    Action movie with pseudo-science bubble.
    Clearly, creators of this movie were referring more to LSD than to the famous early human ancestor, even though we do meet the latter one. It's an attempt to make a nod to two different categories of movie-watchers:
    young people will un-mistakenly link colors and special effects to the popular drug
    while some philosophically inclined people will see the parallel between the meeting of two Lucies and Danae and Zeus. Unfortunately, Sci-Fi part of the film falls short.
    Overall, quite entertaining but far from the best...
    Expand
  30. Aug 2, 2014
    5
    Lucy does entertain - it's action packed and ripe with incredible visuals. However , this movie suffers greatly in too many departments. It confuses more often than it takes you along for the ride, Lucy's character development is forced and unnecessary, but the movies biggest hindrance is bad writing. There are moments that shine, but in almost all cases it comes off as trite in itsLucy does entertain - it's action packed and ripe with incredible visuals. However , this movie suffers greatly in too many departments. It confuses more often than it takes you along for the ride, Lucy's character development is forced and unnecessary, but the movies biggest hindrance is bad writing. There are moments that shine, but in almost all cases it comes off as trite in its attempts to be sophisticated. It's existentialism is pretty silly and when it tries to be philosophical or sage it always sounds ridiculous. Scarlett Johansson saves it occasionally by being a strong lead, but more often than not the script is a laughable attempt at SciFi wonder and profound thought. The last line is one of the worst, and without spoiling anything, leaves the audience wondering what they just watched and whether it was worth their time at all, because it far from ends the film on a well-scripted note. It provokes thought, but not by nature of its own quality, rather because it's subject matter is inherently interesting. I wouldn't say it's not worth seeing, but I would certainly go in with low expectations - only then may it please you. Expand
  31. Sep 2, 2014
    5
    A cinema-going in a newly-discovered multiplex in Cairo inside a half-empty shopping mall, LUCY is another rare triumph of a female-driven blockbuster directed by Gallo-film entrepreneur Luc Besson, whose creativity and clout has been significantly ebbed away after THE BIG BLUE (1988, 8/10), LÉON: THE PROFESSIONAL (1994, 9/10) and THE FIFTH ELEMENT (1997, 8/10). So I have beenA cinema-going in a newly-discovered multiplex in Cairo inside a half-empty shopping mall, LUCY is another rare triumph of a female-driven blockbuster directed by Gallo-film entrepreneur Luc Besson, whose creativity and clout has been significantly ebbed away after THE BIG BLUE (1988, 8/10), LÉON: THE PROFESSIONAL (1994, 9/10) and THE FIFTH ELEMENT (1997, 8/10). So I have been intentionally steering clear of his subsequent work, however recently the noteworthy career renaissance of Scarlett Johansson intrigues me immensely and I am tempted by the conception of gearing up the the maximum of human's cerebral capacity. But, in the end, Besson overkills the idea since his brain capacity doesn't quite hit the requirement to facilitate such an ambitious project.
    continue reading my review on my blog: google cinema omnivore, thanks
    Expand
  32. Aug 21, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This will be the first time that I've reviewed a movie on this aggregator, apart from my typical video game reviews. The reason why? I guess a time for change, and a passion of confusion and problems that Lucy seems to bloat in our face. For starters, this is in no way a demonstration of attacking the "humans only use 10% of their brain" logical fallacy, as I'm willing to give the movie the benefit of the doubt and allow myself to believe that humans are capable of 'great' things. But in any case, even jumping that obstacle Lucy still seems to stumble on narrative consistencies, as well as awkward dialogue and other plot points unexplained, such as why exactly Lucy needs that European Cop to continue helping her with her escapades even after he had willingly got her the packages she needed to keep her brain "configured", how Lucy lost her way back home when she was sent back despite that the other three victims got to their respective locations just fine, and why exactly Lucy seems to haplessly murder and kill victims either because they are "in their way" (despite her saying that all obstacles are out of her way) or they don't speak english! (yeah, sounds a little racist)

    Which brings me to my next point: Lucy is not a likable character, despite her being the 'hero' and 'protagonist' of her own self-proclaimed movie. As I mentioned above, she kills innocent civilians only because supposedly all this knowledge is overcoming her human emotion, which I would believe if they managed to at least give Lucy some reason as to why she does what she needs to do. The importance of any kind of main protagoist for the audience is that we have to sympathize with them, and if we don't? We tune out. As a matter of fact, Koba from DAWN of the Planet of the Apes was more sympathetic than Lucy, and he's supposed to be the ANTAGONIST!

    Not to mention that all of the characters that surround Lucy are so, **** stupid. Lucy walks in a hospital with a silencer pistol all out? no one cares. Lucy changes her hair color in public? no one cares. Lucy body and molecules literally dematerialize on an airplane and NO ONE gives a **** They just keep asking her that they are going to land. Believe me, this is NOT how human beings would react to such crazy stuff. While Scarlett Johansson does pretty well at her role, even being a pretty interesting apathetic omniscient, and the gun play and visuals all play out nicely, but it's just spectacle with no substance, with a unlikable main protagonist and a confused execution of a brilliant premise. Not a recommendation.
    Expand
  33. Aug 14, 2014
    5
    Lucy is great if you can get past "the theories and higher-level thinking" involved (which are trying to hard I think), although at the end of the day, it's Scarlett Johanson dealing with bad dudes trying to kill her. A different movie than the other action flicks out there, but not one that will hold your attention like it should. Maybe a bit more work in the development department,Lucy is great if you can get past "the theories and higher-level thinking" involved (which are trying to hard I think), although at the end of the day, it's Scarlett Johanson dealing with bad dudes trying to kill her. A different movie than the other action flicks out there, but not one that will hold your attention like it should. Maybe a bit more work in the development department, because it falls apart towards the end.
    In summary, different film that you should probably rent (so you can replay key parts). Or skip it altogether if you want. Didn't really miss anything.
    Expand
  34. Aug 3, 2014
    5
    Completely implausible and utterly ridiculous, Lucy is a dull and uneventful experience thats offers nothing more than a typically charismatic performance from Scarlett Johansson.
  35. Jul 29, 2014
    5
    After a fairly interesting 30 minute set up, the film devolves into a series nonsensical "esoteric" visual compilations mixed with a few scenes of frenetic and confusing action - neither of which do much to grab the audience. The end is a mishmash mess of shootouts and silly "science" that graciously ends just before a headache starts.
  36. Sep 1, 2014
    5
    The premise is interesting, but the execution is so shallow and rushed, that the situations become funny and absurd, without this being a comedy of any sort. It isn't plain bad, because the mere action keeps it afloat, however, it is not a good movie by no stretch of the imagination. For something similar, I recommend Limitless or The Professional if you want another Luc Besson movie.
  37. Jul 26, 2014
    5
    I went into Lucy hoping to see a film that would be the third entry in the ScarJo Sci-fi Trilogy, along with Her and Under the Skin. This film is nowhere near as good as those, but Johansson’s performance is. In fact, her performance as Lucy is a perfect blend of the best parts of her portrayals of Her‘s (faceless) Samantha and Under the Skin‘s (mostly silent) nameless entity. BessonI went into Lucy hoping to see a film that would be the third entry in the ScarJo Sci-fi Trilogy, along with Her and Under the Skin. This film is nowhere near as good as those, but Johansson’s performance is. In fact, her performance as Lucy is a perfect blend of the best parts of her portrayals of Her‘s (faceless) Samantha and Under the Skin‘s (mostly silent) nameless entity. Besson may have failed at his ambitious attempt to give us a smarter summer movie, but Johansson saves the day with a sublime performance worth paying to see. Expand
  38. Aug 5, 2014
    5
    This movie is okay. That's all I could think during it. There were a lot of parts where I just called **** For example: the entire concept of the movie. Humans don't use 10% of their brain. They use more. Like I said, okay movie. There are better ways to spend your money.
  39. Aug 5, 2014
    5
    Greetings:

    First of all, this movie is great. (despite few things I will be talking further on) The movie start with an awesome "out of the bloom" intriguing introduction, not knowing nothing of what is going on from the start, it makes you feel that you are that girl (Lucy) because it place you on the point of view of this Lucy character from the get go. Scarlett Johansson has
    Greetings:

    First of all, this movie is great. (despite few things I will be talking further on)

    The movie start with an awesome "out of the bloom" intriguing introduction, not knowing nothing of what is going on from the start, it makes you feel that you are that girl (Lucy) because it place you on the point of view of this Lucy character from the get go.

    Scarlett Johansson has an incredible and surprisingly acting in this movie, which is one of the thing I really enjoyed of this movie with the sci-fi aspect of the ending (I wont give spoilers by the way) All though I am not saying that she is and have done back acting (is my perspective though) The only thing I find that makes you go nuts sometimes is the cut scenes between Morgan Freeman, just because it takes you out of the comfort and "over the edge of your sit" every time it switch it's from Scarlett Johannsson story from Morgan's Freeman introductions scenes.

    Despite the subliminal message this movie shows about "human scientists" studies, always finding the meaning of the real life and human capacity to understand human brain and their surroundings and meaning of life and what God created and "if or not" sub topics wrap up in the main topic of the story, it is a great flick in the point of view of filming perspective.

    Yet Morgan Freeman doesn't give nothing new in his acting on this movie, (which is not surprising) despite that who really shines in this is Scarlett Johansson besides that she is the actress that plays the main character, it is sad that the director din't put the same effort and care to show or try to nurture a different acting for Morgan Freeman.

    P.s. Overall and despite the message and weak acting's in some of the actors and the obvious and the typical acting of Morgan Freeman, the movie is packed with some great and awesome pretty looking visuals and fun. At the end, it is your prerogative to watch it or not.
    Expand
  40. Aug 31, 2014
    5
    Lucy stars Scarlett Johansen and Morgan Freeman, why wouldn't you be excited? The movie spent a lot on 2 big hollywood stars, but had little money left to get better supporting actors. The movie had potential, it sounded interesting and look good, but it unfortunate didn't live up to it. It wasn't bad, but wasn't exciting for me, i was sadly disappointed with this movie. It was boring atLucy stars Scarlett Johansen and Morgan Freeman, why wouldn't you be excited? The movie spent a lot on 2 big hollywood stars, but had little money left to get better supporting actors. The movie had potential, it sounded interesting and look good, but it unfortunate didn't live up to it. It wasn't bad, but wasn't exciting for me, i was sadly disappointed with this movie. It was boring at certain parts, a bit confusing ,and just didn't catch me. Overall, it was decent but nothing special. Expand
  41. Aug 24, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Without a doubt, Lucy disappointed me tremendously.
    After watching the trailer and learning that it was a box office hit elsewhere, I must say I had pretty high hopes that there finally would be an interesting movie that explores the vast possibilities of man using more of his brain capacity for truly great uses. But alas, everything boils down to violence, cruelty, arrogance and the total lack of respect for human lives in this movie. The weak plot, multiple loopholes and limited storyline left me shaking my head in disbelief.
    After Lucy presented herself at the reception of the hotel, the hotel manager contacted Mr Chang, and spoke to him in Mandarin. Lo and behold, when Mr Chang appeared subsequently with his gang, there wasn’t a single Chinese amongst them! Who did the manager speak to then?? And what’s up with planting a Korean gang in Taipei, ending up using the confusing mix of Mandarin, Korean and English to communicate among the parties?? With their obnoxious open acts of murder and kidnapping in the 5-star Taiwan hotel, it appeared as if the Korean gang owned it! So why not set the setting in Korea or introduce a Taiwanese gang instead??
    As Lucy’s cerebral capacity increased, so did her penchant for violence and cruelty. Shooting her would-be rapist was still conceivable, but shooting a cab driver simply because he could not speak English?? Was that what a human with increased cerebral capacity should be doing? And killing an anaesthetized patient at point-blank because the cancer had metastasized to his brain and spinal cord? What right did she had to end a human life like that? Horrors of horrors, after witnessing what she did, the surgeon still had the mood to explain to her what CPH4 was in an interested manner and appeared completely at ease. Unbelievable…
    After witnessing her avid display of violence, imagine my surprise when she “only” stabbed the hands of the gang leader after what he did to her, and “mercifully” left him alive to carry out his subsequent anticipated revenge and killings. In addition, since she now had the newfound multi-linguist ability, wouldn’t it be more credible if she spoke to him in Korean instead of English? At this end, Scarlet Johansson (and the director) would have impressed the audience even if she learnt to speak in a few Korean sentences, and left the rest of her English monologue for her own musings.
    If CPH4 was enhancing her cerebral capacity but shortening her life as well, then why did consumption of additional CPH4 on the plane revived her form in the end?
    I cringed at the car scene through the streets as she drove about literally crazily, and caused countless crashed cars and lost lives. Perhaps the director was trying to portray the impressive motor skills of the “heroine”, but her lack of regard for human lives appalled me. So what if “we never truly die? “ (quote from the film). With an increased in cerebral capacity, did she also attain the status of “God” to take away lives as she pleased? Why not just give her the power of tele-transportation and be done with it? Incomprehensible…
    The biggest question mark of the plot was why did she look up the professor played by Morgan Freeman in the first place? To show off her qualities? She certainly did not need his help, and all the group of esteemed doctors and researchers did for her in the end was to set up the intravenous drips which I was pretty sure she could have done herself… Moreover, if she ended up everywhere in the end, then what was the need to pass on her knowledge into a thumb drive?
    In the end, my conclusion after watching the movie was that, as our cerebral capacity increases, our level of humanity, compassion and judgement can only spiral downwards. I certainly hope that is not the case.
    Expand
  42. Aug 27, 2014
    4
    Too much money, creativity limited . The beginning is interesting; it decreases after the first 30 minutes.
    Horrible ending! It had to end somehow though
    Morgan Freeman character UNNECESSARY in the movie.
    I could say - It kind of catches you because of the curiosity of how is gonna be the "incredible" outcome.
  43. Feb 8, 2015
    5
    I was a little disappointed on how short the movie was. It introduced a lot of deep concepts, but did not explore any of them in depth to my liking. There was a potential story that was wasted....
  44. Feb 12, 2015
    4
    While the premise and concept of this film is absolutely ridiculous, the special effects laughable, and the plot without actual resolution, the movie still finds a way to be at least slightly entertaining. I think that mostly stems from Scarlett Johansson doing a great job with the character and the movie, however outlandish, is actually a little bit interesting. It still isn't worth yourWhile the premise and concept of this film is absolutely ridiculous, the special effects laughable, and the plot without actual resolution, the movie still finds a way to be at least slightly entertaining. I think that mostly stems from Scarlett Johansson doing a great job with the character and the movie, however outlandish, is actually a little bit interesting. It still isn't worth your time but it isn't a complete waste of time and being under and hour and a half guarantees that if you feel that it is, at least it didn't waste much of it. I do feel that they missed an opportunity to make a great movie though. There is a time between the film starting and Lucy becoming a superhero/magician/Neo that I thought we had a real gem on our hands. Unfortunately they left reality at the door and chose to make a borderline comedy instead. Expand
  45. Feb 1, 2015
    6
    Give Luc Besson credit for not being dull that being said the film is far from great. This film is similar to Transcendence in plot but the presentation has more action. The main issue is you never felt anything was at stake. Lucy was never really in trouble and in the end your just kind of indifferent. B-
  46. Dec 28, 2014
    6
    Premissa Inteligente,desenvolvimento lerdo e incoerente,Conclusão fraca.
    Mas com excelentes atuações de Scarlett Johansson e Morgan Freeman,e bons efeitos especiais
  47. Jun 11, 2015
    6
    El mensaje es tan claro que no encontramos nada que destacar, tanto así qu lo mejor de la falta de emotividad que encontramos en la película es que dura 90 minutos.
  48. Jan 30, 2015
    5
    There is a cult that promotes Scarlett Johansson as a good actress. Combined with Luc Besson, who was once a talented director, Scarlett does action and being confused in Besson's latest eye candy thriller. In the end it runs out of other films to steal from and gives up.
  49. Oct 10, 2014
    6
    Let me start by saying this: It's flawed. The whole "%10" thing is wrong. The myth originated back in the early 1900s, when scientists found that only 10% of your brain contained a certain type of cell or neuron (can't remember which), which they thought was all your brains capacity. Later, they found out that the 90% WAS in fact being used, and that you use 100%, no matter how minorly, atLet me start by saying this: It's flawed. The whole "%10" thing is wrong. The myth originated back in the early 1900s, when scientists found that only 10% of your brain contained a certain type of cell or neuron (can't remember which), which they thought was all your brains capacity. Later, they found out that the 90% WAS in fact being used, and that you use 100%, no matter how minorly, at all times.

    But the movie itself is fun to watch. Good action sequences, good story progression, and developed characters. If you don't mind the many flaws, its a great movie. But I would not recommend showing this movie to children under a certain age, due to some... suggestive scenes.

    Overall, a good movie with many flaws. Watch it if you have the free time to do so.
    Expand
  50. Jan 16, 2015
    4
    This film had a couple of interesting ideas, not new ideas, but fun ideas...but seems to be a series of short vignettes, each incorporating some cool notion or special effects that the director wants to explore, but without much connecting each scene. I didn't hate it - but it is something like a 1-1/2 or 2 star film.
  51. Sep 22, 2014
    6
    Lucy feeds on its original premise with silly thrills overshadowing it's complex intentions. Scarlets Johansson does her finest but when there is no character the audiencte can relate to + a weird premise = it's those fun thrills that remain in the mind after leaving the cinema.
  52. May 18, 2015
    4
    (Spoiler alert)

    The main character loses her charms after 25 minutes. First she is a human with heart, but changes to a heartless psychopath. Personally I find it important that the main character is a person I can relate to, but her actions makes me as viewer want to distant myself from her. Where this happens? Her coldness and emotionless starts in the hostipal where she just
    (Spoiler alert)

    The main character loses her charms after 25 minutes.
    First she is a human with heart, but changes to a heartless
    psychopath. Personally I find it important that the main character
    is a person I can relate to, but her actions makes me as viewer
    want to distant myself from her. Where this happens?
    Her coldness and emotionless starts in the hostipal where she
    just kills the patient on a table. The reason is that she wants the doctor
    to remove the bag of drugs. A pity that the script writer chose to
    make her personality so cold.

    A second issue in the movie:
    In the movie she archives a high brain capacity, thus I guess a high
    IQ. But what does she do?? She attaches a silencer to her gun.
    Walks with the gun in her hand, every one can she the gun, and walks
    slowly to the operation room. How can such an intelligent person do
    that?? Or was the movie script writer having a break?

    Third issue:
    The actors in the movie don't respond to Lucy at all. She has a gun in her
    hand, and no one notices it. How unrealistic.

    The movie stops taking me on the journey after Lucy's cold and heartless
    act.

    Apart from the first nice 25 minutes, the movie has another good thing.
    Gordon Freeman tells one of the people who listen to his idea that
    is about the brain is used for 10% is actually not real, it's a hypothesis.
    So says the Gordon Freeman. In real science should use that word more often, even some "proven" facts
    might be false ideas, that look truthful.... (humans are masters in telling half truths)
    Any detective knows that truths that connect, are not always a real presentation of the facts.

    If the movie continued the first 25 minutes to the very end, the movie would receive at least a 7.
    But with the flaws mentioned here in this review. I don't want to give it a higher value than 4/10
    Expand
  53. Nov 17, 2014
    6
    Silly at its finest, "Lucy" mostly succeeds at making an enjoyable summer blockbuster even if its ridiculousness gets a little too much. Is it satisfying? More or less. It's surely some dumb fun and it's better than some movies released this year. I only recommend this movie to people who like to see some brainless action and witty performances.
  54. Jan 30, 2015
    6
    Lucy reminds me quite a bit of Limitless but maybe even more crazy Sh*t, Seeing it follows Scarlett Johansson's character involuntary ingesting a not very well known "Super Drug". This gives her the ability to use more and more of her brain power and basically become super human. The effects in this film really added to the immersion and is one of the strong points of the film. The storyLucy reminds me quite a bit of Limitless but maybe even more crazy Sh*t, Seeing it follows Scarlett Johansson's character involuntary ingesting a not very well known "Super Drug". This gives her the ability to use more and more of her brain power and basically become super human. The effects in this film really added to the immersion and is one of the strong points of the film. The story to this film isn't much, once it hits the less then mid way tipping point it becomes more about pure action and less about plot. Lucy does cover a few unique topics from evolution to the concept of Time but it feels like the movie is to fast paced and action packed to touch base much on said topics. Lucy is a good film for a weekend action flick or something to watch with your buds. But feels like wasted potential. Expand
  55. Sep 22, 2014
    6
    This was a weird one for me. I really enjoyed the thought behind the movie. The beginning of the movie was really well made and had some quick cut scenes that added to the message. And I know the science is always questionable, but it's a movie, not a documentary. The message is not about the science anyway. I found the action unnecessary and it distracted from what could have been aThis was a weird one for me. I really enjoyed the thought behind the movie. The beginning of the movie was really well made and had some quick cut scenes that added to the message. And I know the science is always questionable, but it's a movie, not a documentary. The message is not about the science anyway. I found the action unnecessary and it distracted from what could have been a really good drama. And it kicked off quite nicely. I heard a review on the radio which kind of gave away the ending, but after seeing the movie I am glad it did. Because if it didnt, I think i wouldnt have been disappointed. But I think the message outweighs the rest. Expand
  56. Oct 28, 2014
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What if a person could use 100% of their brain power? It’s a question that I think of more than I would like to admit and that’s why I have decided to research the use if binaural frequencies in film and music as I am studying film at SAE. However, I digress. For the purpose of a review, let’s look at Luc Besson's take on this question.
    In true Besson style, the movie's main character is none other than a brash yet fragile female action hero played by Scarlett Johansson. Besson’s use of female action heroes has been prevalent in earlier works such as, The Professional, The Fifth Element and La Femme Nikita. When Lucy (Johansson) is forced into being a drug mule only to have the bag of synthetic drugs explode in her stomach, her fly by the night travelling rebel persona is quickly overpowered. With her brain now on overdrive running at 20%, she is automatically turned into a trained killer that can read minds and control matter. Drug Runner bad guy, Oldboy star Min-sik Choi has to now pursue Lucy to exact revenge. Lucy must retain the rest of the drug before her body rejects it and she dies, while also trying to understand her condition and explain it to Professor Norman played by Morgan Freeman. There is a good use of action and intensity as we see Lucy progressing through stages of accelerated brain power and having the ability to control her world similar to Christopher Nolan’s “Inception”. Upon reaching Professor Norman and killing the bad guys, Lucy reaches 100% brain capacity and after travelling back in time to the birth of man, she morphs into a sludgy computer only to turn to dust leaving a flashdrive of her knowledge for mankind to learn from. Sounds hard right? Well it’s not.
    As soon as Lucy has the drug inside her and she discovers that she can feel no pain (20%), there ceases to be an element of threat. After she can control minds and objects, she has become super human and therefore fears no one. There is a need for her to find the remaining bags of the drug or face being turned into dust, so I guess you could say that the only real antagonist is time. She is crudely pursued by Mr Jang (Choi) but to what end? She knows and more importantly the audience knows that Mr Jang doesn’t stand a chance.
    By all means see this film for there are parts that are something to admire. Johansson is fantastically mesmerising as a dead-pan hero with flashes of fragility and flaw and Besson beautifully creates a style of film that is visually stunning. His use of symbology to enhance scenes of fear and entrapment are a delightful addition, however unfortunately you might find that the story and the threat of an antagonist lacks conviction.

    Adam Styles
    Expand
  57. Jan 22, 2015
    6
    "Lucy" 10 Scale Rating: 6.0 (Decent) ...

    The Good: Starts off as a great idea and is very entertaining, for the most part. Scarlett Johansson does a terrific job in an action role and the effects are top notch. The film moves along at break-neck speed, remaining interesting throughout, and you find yourself just having to know how it ends. A solid enough action/sci-fi flick. The Bad:
    "Lucy" 10 Scale Rating: 6.0 (Decent) ...

    The Good: Starts off as a great idea and is very entertaining, for the most part. Scarlett Johansson does a terrific job in an action role and the effects are top notch. The film moves along at break-neck speed, remaining interesting throughout, and you find yourself just having to know how it ends. A solid enough action/sci-fi flick.

    The Bad: While I tried to ignore it and just enjoy the movie, the premise starts to become more than a little silly. At times, it also feels very random and too far out there to be taken seriously. Morgan Freeman, as great as he typically is, was adequate ... but his role probably could have been played by just about anyone and would have felt the same.
    Expand
  58. Feb 7, 2015
    5
    only reason you would watch this movie is to look at scarlett johanasson ...no really but in all seriousness this is an average flick , morgan freeman adds a nice touch to it and the story is interesting but this is ur avg 90 minute flick
  59. Jun 10, 2015
    5
    I don't understand how Lucy actually has got Positive reviews.This movie is really boring and doesn't have any reason what so ever to even be existing.It doesn't make any sense at all,the character Lucy is boring and let's not even being with the Directing that feels so dumb and uneven.There are some good parts at times but overall Lucy is just a huge let down.
Metascore
61

Generally favorable reviews - based on 45 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 27 out of 45
  2. Negative: 2 out of 45
  1. Reviewed by: Ben Nicholson
    Sep 5, 2014
    80
    This undeniably silly, but raucously entertaining, off-the-wall transhumanist actioner is an absolute riot.
  2. Reviewed by: Tom Huddleston
    Sep 5, 2014
    60
    This ridiculous, highly watchable, at points startlingly psychedelic action thriller is probably Luc Besson’s best film since ‘Léon’ (which isn’t saying a great deal).
  3. Reviewed by: Kate Stables
    Sep 5, 2014
    80
    Besson is at his balls-out bonkers best in this genre-scrambling, mind-expanding exhilarator.