Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Lucy - New Luc Besson Film

Options
«134

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Sam Mac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,227 ✭✭✭Sam Mac


    I'm always up for a bit of Besson! :D bring it on!


  • Options
    #3
    Adamantium
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,563 ✭✭✭Adamantium


    Looking oddly like she did in Lost In Translation. LIT ScarJo is best ScarJo


  • Options
    #4
    bnt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,960 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    New International trailer: slightly spoilerish.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zogp645sQ68

    From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, ‘Look at that, you son of a bitch’.

    — Edgar Mitchell, Apollo 14 Astronaut



  • Options
    #5
    JP Liz V1
    Registered Users Posts: 85,240 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1


    Salt + Limitless + Crank = Lucy :p
    https://forumofgames.com/




  • Options
    #6
    cloud493
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,835 ✭✭✭✭cloud493


    This is out tomorrow :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    candy-gal1
    Registered Users Posts: 6,568 ✭✭✭candy-gal1


    The trailer looks amazing imho, going to see this tomorrow so really looking forward to it! :D


  • Options
    #8
    Bipolar Joe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,443 ✭✭✭Bipolar Joe


    Gonna go see this next week, looking forward to it. I love a lot of his films, The Professional is an all time favourite. This looks like it could be a great film with a stupid premise.


  • Options
    #9
    Fysh
    Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,016 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    It looks like daft fun, and Donald Clarke's review in the IT has me optimistic that it will get on with actually entertaining me quickly enough to allow for full "ignore the godawful nonsense science being used to justify things" mode to kick in :)

    (Having said that, I'm not paying £16+ a head to see it in IMAX - it'd want to be very good and have a bunch of solid recommendations from friends before I splash out for that...)


  • Options
    #10
    cloud493
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,835 ✭✭✭✭cloud493


    Thats what a cineworld card is for :cool:


  • Options
    #11
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Anything from Beeson is generally good fun, he's one of those filmmakers who can write and shoot action better than anyone, his script for The Transporter is well worth grabbing as every single punch and kick is detailed in it, something that very few other writers would bother with.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Fysh
    Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,016 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    cloud493 wrote: »
    Thats what a cineworld card is for :cool:

    In my case, it's what a 2 for £12 Odeon voucher is for :)


  • Options
    #13
    Kylo Ren
    Registered Users Posts: 10,364 ✭✭✭✭Kylo Ren


    The whole notion of it being based on the myth we only use 10% of our brain makes me wary. I'll wait for it on Netflix. It looks like Limitless with more action. That was a fairly forgettable movie.


  • Options
    #14
    cloud493
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,835 ✭✭✭✭cloud493


    I liked it a lot so. Few points.

    - seemed a wee bit short to me.
    - Johansson is really good as the lead, but she's kind of, the only character with any significance almost, without giving anything anyway.
    - Morgan Freemans character is almost irrelevant to the plot I felt.
    - lot less action based than the trailers suggested, but thats not a bad thing.
    - Make a damn solo Black Widow movie please.


  • Options
    #15
    candy-gal1
    Registered Users Posts: 6,568 ✭✭✭candy-gal1


    Saw this this afternoon, Amazing and Fantastic is what I thought anyway, and Scarlett J being her usual perfection lookswise self :p;):)

    The only flaw I would have is it being much shorter than I thought it would be, but other than that WOW!

    Her change from the first 20 or so minutes and then throughout till the end was great and believeable, you could almost feel everything with her in it and she did a very good "blank face, who cares" look/attitude!

    Will definitly go again, and maybe again, gets into your head and not at all forgettable imho :)


  • Options
    #16
    cloud493
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,835 ✭✭✭✭cloud493


    I thought it was a wee bit short. Seems to run to the last leg, so to speak.


  • Options
    #17
    Fysh
    Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,016 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    I enjoyed this quite a bit. It reminded me a bit of Crank, in that it doesn't hang around or waste too much time on exposition, just kind of gets on with things. Besson gives us some nice demonstrations of style (I liked the cross-cutting between the main scene the wildlife scene in the opening sequence, for example) and some absolute bobbins "science" to justify what's going on - but it's fine, because unlike some films with a ludicrous premise, Lucy doesn't dwell on it - just sets up the excuse and gets on with things.

    There's less action than the trailer might suggest, but it's well paced and fun. It's not long but the right length for the story being told.


  • Options
    #18
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Lot of people complaining about the short run time but I'd like to see more films, especially blockbusters embrace the shorter fun time. A film that can tell it's story in 90 minutes is far preferable to a bloated, over blown 120-180 minute blockbuster. While I've yet to see the most recent Transformers film, I have my doubts that it needed 3 hours to tell the story considering that past entries in the series had about an hours worth of story and then 90 minutes of pratfalls.


  • Options
    #19
    CrazySka
    Registered Users Posts: 618 ✭✭✭CrazySka


    Saw this tonight,

    Just thought the story was weak with no real substance or thought behind it, visually was very impressive, reminded me of the later matrix films though in that it expected you to just swallow concepts that were never explained at all..

    But again visually, very nice to watch bad was glad they kept the run time short, think if it was another 20 mins late I would have left feeling like ore went on way too long.


  • Options
    #20
    Looper007
    Registered Users Posts: 4,216 ✭✭✭Looper007


    A decent watch but damn I wanted more kick ass action from Mr Besson and whoever made the trailer really oversold it. I wanted Taken with Scarlett Johansson, without kidnapped daughters and Eastern European sex smugglers :pac:. God some of it did drag, was the whole intercutting of Animals eating and screwing and waht the earth was like in the past needed to be fair every few seconds and the third act is complete waffle. I bet some of the actors were trying not to laugh when saying that dialogue. It felt more like some David Attenborough show on acid. Mr Besson, I expect better from the man that gave us masterpieces such as Leon and The Big Blue.

    Anyway the good stuff, Scarlett Johansson is great for the first two thirds of this movie especially the first 20 minutes. She is proving a top notch action hero but for me she's a little under used in this. Morgan Freeman picks up a another big pay check but Choi Min Sik was a great baddie. The first 20 minutes
    With Lucy been tricked into smuggling and everything in the hotel with Choi Min Sik and his gang is dark comedy at it's best
    is the best in the film pity the film didn't get as nasty or darkly funnier after that. It's Besson cruise control really.


  • Options
    #21
    constitutionus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,988 ✭✭✭constitutionus


    i thought it was great craic !

    :)

    like noah a bit more arty in places than i was expecting, and it may get a bit too trippy at the end for some.

    but as an old school Sci/fi fan i found an enormous amount to enjoy here. its certainly not your traditional shooter film.

    dont know if itll be everyones cup of tea but it made a nice relief from the usual blockbusters , and at an hour and a half or so it zipped along nicely.

    8/10 from me.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Player 2
    Registered Users Posts: 52 ✭✭Player 2


    I'm surprised by the reactions I'm reading here - perhaps I'm being too harsh on the film, but Lucy was one of the worst films I've seen in 2014.

    I knew literally nothing about it as I sat down in the cinema last Friday; and for the first 20 minutes or so, my interest was piqued. Luc Besson, thumbs up, Scarlett Johannson, thumbs up...

    Then ScarJo launched into some frankly awful amateur drama class attempts at terror (i.e. shaking as much as possible and opening her eyes as wide as they would go); which set the tone for her acting throughout the rest of the film. That blank expression attempt at correlating infinite intelligence and power with a lack of empathy / emotion was explored better in the likes of Dr. Manhattan's character in Watchmen, for example. Here I thought she came across as a crow looking into an empty bag of crisps.

    Amongst the other offenders - Morgan Freeman. An excellent actor; and perhaps not directed well by Besson, but when someone in front of you is morphing their hands into claws and other magical items, surely it would evoke some sort of amazed / stunned reaction, rather than simply looking straight at Lucy and nodding along as she spoke?

    Beyond that, I won't say much more for fear of nit-picking, or indeed, spoiling the plot for anyone, but suffice to say, I'm not really bothered about the effects the drug had on Lucy, the heavy-handed metaphors late on in the film, or the director's interpretation of the 10% of our brain myth, etc, etc.

    I'm as guilty as anyone of enjoying a "leave your brain at the door" kind of film, but this one requested that I bring 10% of it with me - and that 10% was being used to roll my eyes every 5 minutes.


  • Options
    #23
    justback83
    Registered Users Posts: 359 ✭✭justback83


    Player 2 wrote: »
    I'm surprised by the reactions I'm reading here - perhaps I'm being too harsh on the film, but Lucy was one of the worst films I've seen in 2014.

    I knew literally nothing about it as I sat down in the cinema last Friday; and for the first 20 minutes or so, my interest was piqued. Luc Besson, thumbs up, Scarlett Johannson, thumbs up...

    Then ScarJo launched into some frankly awful amateur drama class attempts at terror (i.e. shaking as much as possible and opening her eyes as wide as they would go); which set the tone for her acting throughout the rest of the film. That blank expression attempt at correlating infinite intelligence and power with a lack of empathy / emotion was explored better in the likes of Dr. Manhattan's character in Watchmen, for example. Here I thought she came across as a crow looking into an empty bag of crisps.

    Amongst the other offenders - Morgan Freeman. An excellent actor; and perhaps not directed well by Besson, but when someone in front of you is morphing their hands into claws and other magical items, surely it would evoke some sort of amazed / stunned reaction, rather than simply looking straight at Lucy and nodding along as she spoke?

    Beyond that, I won't say much more for fear of nit-picking, or indeed, spoiling the plot for anyone, but suffice to say, I'm not really bothered about the effects the drug had on Lucy, the heavy-handed metaphors late on in the film, or the director's interpretation of the 10% of our brain myth, etc, etc.

    I'm as guilty as anyone of enjoying a "leave your brain at the door" kind of film, but this one requested that I bring 10% of it with me - and that 10% was being used to roll my eyes every 5 minutes.


    Same opinion! I'm so surprised with the reactions to this film. I found it to be completely ridiculous, in the top 3 worse I have ever seen! I must admit, I enjoyed the first 20 mins - after this it became a complete joke!


  • Options
    #24
    Roar
    Registered Users Posts: 7,426 ✭✭✭Roar


    All I could think of at the end was Cartman as the trapper keeper

    4x12-Trapper-Keeper-south-park-21569863-720-540.jpg


  • Options
    #25
    Frankie5Angels
    Registered Users Posts: 2,315 ✭✭✭Frankie5Angels


    Saw this yesterday evening. Must be up there with the worst films I've seen in the last 5 years anyway. As some have said, it's visually impressive but I just felt there was absolutely no point to it. Scarlett Johansen (sp?) was nice to look at, but other than that this one was instantly forgettable.


  • Options
    #26
    evil_seed
    Registered Users Posts: 3,444 ✭✭✭evil_seed


    This movie completely lost me towards the end. It's entertaining but very bizarre.

    ScarJo
    takes the blue pill, becomes limitless and enters the matrix to become transcendent
    is how I would some this up


  • Options
    #27
    Loughc
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 24,756 Mod ✭✭✭✭Loughc


    justback83 wrote: »
    Same opinion! I'm so surprised with the reactions to this film. I found it to be completely ridiculous, in the top 3 worse I have ever seen! I must admit, I enjoyed the first 20 mins - after this it became a complete joke!

    Same opinion as this! Awful film. I got free tickets for it and even for free I felt cheated.


  • Options
    #28
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,883 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Blonde Akira?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #29
    paulieeye
    Registered Users Posts: 895 ✭✭✭paulieeye


    Utter shcutter!

    A pretentious attempt at trying to be thought provoking based on a completely bullsh!t premise that we only use 10% of our brain. The script was scribbled down by a 12 year old by the sounds of it..."at 50% we begin to control matter"...really? Using more of our brain allows us to control matter?? "How do you know this Mr Freeman?" ..."i have no idea...just guessing lolz""

    One thing...I could of sworn she went back to paris before she met her friend in her house...didnt they show a city scape with the eiffel tower in the background just before she met her friend who likes the secytimes and gave her the vitamin advice(!) ?? Next scene shes back in japan china and then flies to paris again


  • Options
    #30
    cloud493
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,835 ✭✭✭✭cloud493


    paulieeye wrote: »
    Utter shcutter!

    A pretentious attempt at trying to be thought provoking based on a completely bullsh!t premise that we only use 10% of our brain. The script was scribbled down by a 12 year old by the sounds of it..."at 50% we begin to control matter"...really? Using more of our brain allows us to control matter?? "How do you know this Mr Freeman?" ..."i have no idea...just guessing lolz""

    One thing...I could of sworn she went back to paris before she met her friend in her house...didnt they show a city scape with the eiffel tower in the background just before she met her friend who likes the secytimes and gave her the vitamin advice(!) ?? Next scene shes back in japan and then flies to paris again

    For a start, its china and not japan.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Devostator
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 45 ✭Devostator


    Major Dallas, I first would like to salute a warrior, you are a shining example of this Army's might, in the name of the Federation and it's territory...
    The Fifth Element > Lucy


Advertisement