• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

Lucy (2014) - Luc Besson, Scarlett Johansson, Morgan Freeman, Min-sik Choi

blueyoda

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
1,173
Reaction score
153
Trophy Points
73
I've lost a lot of respect for Luc Besson these last few years, but this trailer would seem to indicate he's BACK.

Even if he's not, we get:

SCARLETT JOHANSSON PISSED OFF WITH A GUN!

lucy-scarlett-johansson.jpg


Morgan Freeman (Driving Miss Daisy)

spike-lee-solo.jpg


AND CHOI MIN-SIK!

Choi-Min-sik-old-boy-765.jpg


 
Now ^ THAT is a good trailer.
 
Reviews indicate that the story is pretty ridiculous, but the direction and acting are, of course, pretty good.

Also, pointing a gun sideways. :p
 
That's a picture of Spike Lee not Morgan Freeman. :lol:

And this is Samuel Jackson

I'm a fan of Besson. But that trailer looks like it gives away most of the plot.
 
Sold! Looks like good times.
 
Ziester said:
That's a picture of Spike Lee not Morgan Freeman. :lol:
I think it was a test and you failed.
Or maybe you won.
Arff, you never know with Blueyoda. :)
 
Ziester said:
That's a picture of Spike Lee not Morgan Freeman. :lol:
I think it was a trap and you failed.
Or maybe you won.
Arff, you never know with Blueyoda. :)
 
Well, that certainly was a movie trailer all right. Could be good times.
 
Lucy is... the One!
(BIG echoes of Matrix. Only annoyance was the "10% of the brain" thing. Really? That again? It's just not ture. Oh well. Makes a nice mcGuffin to tell a good story!)
 
dangermouse said:
. . . Only annoyance was the "10% of the brain" thing. Really? That again? It's just not ture. Oh well. Makes a nice mcGuffin to tell a good story!

Agree.
I have always maintained we are using 100% of our brains and this is the best we am.
Ain't no untapped potential, ain't "you can do better," like your 5th grade teacher chastised.
We operate at 100%. Take a look around.

Now, if someone actually made a script with reconfigured brains.
Minimize cell size, increase efficiencies, multiply cells and connections ten fold.
But no. The ole 10 percent.
Sorta like, Most People Only Use 10% Of Their Money. I wish.
 
It looks like a lot of unapologetic dumb fun like Fifth Element. I'm in!
 
1. Ingest 15 kilos drugs
2. Become God
3. ???
4. Profit!
 
Profit, as in Jim Profit.
Now you're talking.

Adrian-Pasdar-Profit.jpg
 
So, I have mixed feelings about this movie.
I spent a good moment in theater and I was entertained, but man, it could have been so much more than this.
I know it's not fair to judge a movie for what it could have been rather than for what it is, but I'll try to explain.


Spoilers ahead.


This is a movie that starts with a very interesting plot based on a scientific subject - what if we could gradualy use up to 100% of our brain? - but it get sidetracked pretty fast with all kind of superpowers that you obviously could not have even if you could use 100% of your brain.
They sort of use the idea that the body evolves at the same time as the brain (here the brain can control the body to the point of changing form, controling other people's bodies, seeing everything everywhere, etc...) and at one point you don't even need the body and the concept of space and time does not apply to you anymore... Mmmmkay...

I could have deal with this if the drug Lucy took was from, I don't know... space! Or if the whole movie was totaly designed as a superhero movie. But the movie starts like if you are about to watch the next "Inception's smart" movie. And it is not that at all, no matter how hard Morgan Freeman is trying to sell you the scientific side of it.

They could have play it smart with a more scientific approach, and I'd have loved it. (I can imagine enough spectatular, amazing things one could do by controling 100% of his brain without loosing too much sens of reality)
They could have play it full science fiction/superhero, and I'd have loved it. (it's kind of what they did after all, but then I needed a movie more grounded in fantasy than in a pseudo reality).
But Luc Besson mixed the two in a way that... entertained me, I can't deny it (Besson knows how to make a scene work and Scarlett is good.), but that also made me think at one point: "Oh, ok. That is that kind of movie after all... Whatever, Let's go all superpower crazy!".

That's why I was at the same time pleased, but very frustrated.
 
TMBTM said:
...That's why I was at the same time pleased, but very frustrated.

edit potential ?

and yeah, the whole "10% brain used" thing is annoyingly inaccurate.
 
baileym43 said:
edit potential ?
.

Not sure.
(still spoilers ahead)
The movie is 1h29 and if we cut most of her crazy powers the movie would be very short... (and less fun!)
Maybe if there are enough interesting deleted scenes ?
But at any case, the meaning of the movie is to be found in its ending (passing your knowledge) and it shows Lucy making unbelievable things to say the least. So if we cut all her crazy powers before, the ending would just look weird.
So maybe going the other way and reducing to a minimum the scientific side of the movie could work, but even if there are not many science related scenes they are the base of the plot... so rather difficult to remove!
You understand that the movie is not really grounded in reality when Lucy is rolling against the walls of her cell. (And even at that moment I thought that maybe it was the effect of the drug that gave her hal"lucy"nations (see what did?!).)
To be fair, even when Morgan Freeman started to talk about controling others people's mind and immortality during is speach to students at the beginning, I started to get a bit worried. So, in a way the movie tells the audience pretty fast that what will follow will be over the top. Maybe it just was not what I really wanted for this movie.
That's why I'm not saying the movie is bad. (I rated it a 7/10 on IMDB) But I feel it's a missed opportunity to be something... more.
And I'm not sure there are enough things available to make it a "smarter" movie, to remove the inaccuraties without removing the fun, or to make it a pure fantasy action movie without removing what the movie wants to tell.
 
I haven't seen it but based on what I've read here and the trailer I saw with Apes a few weeks ago, it sounds more like the Lawnmower Man minus computers than Limitless.
But if you drop the superpowers schitck could it be joined with Limitless to make two parallel stories about increased intelligence?
 
TMBTM said:
The movie is 1h29 and if we cut most of her crazy powers the movie would be very short... (and less fun!)
[...]
And I'm not sure there are enough things available to make it a "smarter" movie, to remove the inaccuraties without removing the fun, or to make it a pure fantasy action movie without removing what the movie wants to tell.
Just watched this, and I'd edit in the other direction - remove Morgan Freeman's lecture, the brain usage percentages, the whole "10% of our brains" nonsense and the CH-14 chemical explanation if possible, so we have no idea what the blue crystals are or where they come from. Also trim some of the shootout at the end to emphasize the cosmic stuff. Maybe even just end on one of the galaxy shots, a total wtf ending, no resolution. ;-)
 
Back
Top Bottom