Lucy : Stupid beyond belief

"I recommend Roddenberry's version of this plotline. I think he had one in Star Trek ."

This movie reminded me a lot of "Where No Man Has Gone Before", the second pilot for Star Trek, except that Star Trek didn't have ridiculous clap-trap about drugs and babies: two people got super-powers from some kind of space zapper. Not explained; it just happened; let's move on. And their characters were consistent: the one who was a petty self-centered jerk before continued to be petty and self-centered with super-powers, and the other one remained compassionate and protective of other people.

Lucy, both the movie and the character, seemed inconsistent: at one point she said something like this: "I don't feel pain, fear, desire ." But she seemed to have a lot of desire to get more drugs. When confronted by some police, she apparently caused them to lose consciousness; later, when confronted by a criminal gang, she made them float in the air. Why? As far as I can tell, just because it looked cool. No other reason.

The idea of some kind of Higher Being passing knowledge down to humans also doesn't make a lot of sense. If you think it does, try to explain to a dog why you have to go to work.

well said 15906, well said

Puschit, you did not understand the explanation because the explanation is hogwash

Don't worry about a thing; every little thing gonna' be alright

THERE'S a "philosophy" for you, specifically.

Gee Whiz, dude, calm down.

IT IS A MOVIE. Lots of movies are bad. So what?

I really enjoyed the movie because I interpreted the whole thing as an over-the-top self-parody, a complete spoof and reductio ad absurdum of the silly idea that we only use 10% of our brain power. I recognized that idea as completely absurd when I first heard it decades ago. So I think this movie should have been classified as a comedy, and a good one, albeit it pretended to be sincere. But it was all tongue-in-cheek.

It occurred to me that it might have been intended as a cruel joke on people who try to get philosophy from movies. Also, it made money.

l0l, yes, it might.

does this encourage people to carry drugs thinking if they leak they get powers instead of bleeding to death.

Maybe stupid ones.

Do not intend to rave about it to you, in the least. If you hate this, it's your right, your choice. I write horror and sci-fi and am published. Big deal, right? Well, I was so delighted to finally watch a science fiction film that I felt was for adults.
The film connects the two Lucys. The first Lucy is actually considered to be the first 'pre human female.' That's fact, not fiction.

With regard to the story line, because of what transpires in modern-day Lucy's life, that is changing her existence because of that compound, she enters another stage of existence. She will always exist. She might be what humankind will turn into in millions of years (if we haven't killed ourselves off).

You have every right not to like itbut I just wanted to explain how I view it because I did like it very much.

Coelho and Chopra are published, it means nothing, it is obvious there are adults with subhuman intelligence out there, like you.

For me the major problem with the movie is once you cross a certain threshold of augmented superhumaness, it makes it hard to go back realistically.

For instance they display her being able to knock entire groups of people out simultaneously thus eliminating all and any threats, but later on, when she's supposedly even more powerful, she doesn't bother to anymore, and instead lets the assailants advance on her. For a movie trying to show how intelligent a human can become, THAT'S PRETTY RETARDED!

She is shown being able to sense peoples thoughts and feelings from quite some distance away, yet she was unaware she was spotted at very close range?

Basically these glaring mistakes are akin to showing full powered Superman being punched and hurt by a normal human. It wouldn't make sense there, and it doesn't make sense here.

They half assed try to explain this away as her focus needs to be on something, but her ability to focus on many multiples at once was also shown to be in her wheelhouse.

Well said idami, well said.

Obviously a person who has never seen "Battlefield Earth", to call this movie "stupid beyond belief" shows their ignorance. Yes there is a false fallacy (which Luc Besson admits too) but as a reasonable action movie it is okay, with a quite an attractive lead. So as a Luc Besson film, not as good as "Taxi" series, but still up there.
Avoiding it is NOT a proper response, believing that 99% of films can be true is the proper response.

---

The "philosophy" in this film is what I'd expect from a stoned, thirteen year old sci-fi nerd.

---

Yes, yes, it is puerile. I agree. But know this, the elite of this world really BELIEVE in what was shown in this movie. They all think they are "ascended" beings that deserve to rule. The imagery around them attests to this and they have to show us, even in veiled ways. in order to get our permission for their rulership.

The film isn't about the human condition. it is about the elite condition. The steps we see Lucy ascend turn her into a "god".

Who cares - it was fun and funny and, if it made you think (or even react negatively) so be it. I enjoyed it and so will many. As a Brit (living in Canada) I would call this tongue in cheek - no need to take things so seriously - just enjoy the experience. I did. As for the guy earlier, who said he knew (and it was obvious) that she would just disappear.well bully for you. Now we know how clever you are (you think)

I agree 100% here. This is an anomaly in my usual tolerance for mostly all movies and ideas for movies (I rarely trash a movie at all, even if I disliked it). The "percentage of the brain" myth put me off from the very beginning, but I was surprised by the first act of the movie. It still had an idiotic premise, but I found the visuals to be quite nice (besides those awful shots of nature that looked like it was made by a wannabe film student who was trying to be edgy and artistic) and it looked liked it may have been a mediocre/decent popcorn movie. Then the movie just got more and more absurd culminating in one of the worst final acts I have ever seen in a blockbuster movie. Seriously that final act was just an overload of stupidity and ridiculousness.

As for the message about humanity and the cosmos, I found it to be similar to what I thought of the shots of nature. It was trying to be edgy, philosophical, artsy, and profound but to be it came off as pretentious. If you want to make a dumb blockbuster movie, fine. Just don't try to wrap it as a deep philosophical exploration of evolution and human kind when you are simultaneously spouting out some non nonsensical myths that anyone who has taken a middle school science class knows is stupid. It would be like Michael Bay trying to preach about the beauty and subtleties of art, is just reeks of irony to me. I don't mind a movie that has a social message to it though, even if it is a dumb movie. This just tried to be a blockbuster and a art-house film at the same time, and failed at both. I really dislike everything that they were trying to do with this film, and the premise was terrible too.

My Personal Top 40 TV Shows
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls059266199/

there is just no philosophy or science in it, the movie only pleases the blissfully ignorant.

I agree.

My Personal Top 40 TV Shows
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls059266199/

Yeah, it was stupid. Pretty to look at, but stupid.