Escape to the Movies: Lucy - It's Almost a Black Widow Movie

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

This movie still looks completely stupid and tensionless.

You don't give the hero game-breaking superpowers, goddamn it! There's a reason why DIO is the one with Time Stop, why Todd Ingram has psychokinesis and why Frieza can blow up entire planets by himself. It adds tension to the story by making the bad guys threatening. Here? It looks like all she does is pull another superpower out of her ass to solve the problem.

I remember quipping that unless her opponents are also superpowerful, I don't see much point in watching this bullshit. It's like the Crossover Rule of FanFiction; If Frodo is a Jedi, then Sauron has to have the Death Star.

EDIT; And one more thing! It's not a Black Widow movie because despite her skills and resources, Black Widow is still a squishy mortal. She can still be killed just as easily as anyone else.

Brockyman:
Wow, and I thought Bob was pretentious....

1 "Rape Survivor cliche"
No. Just No. I have to assume you know nothing about movies or comics so let me enlighten you on the "hero gets his motivation/learns his powers from trauma" cliche
Batman - Bruce Wayne's parents are murdered in front of him
Superman - Entire home planet destroyed sends him to one of the places in the universe he can have superpowers
Spiderman - Painful metamorphosis from radioactive spider bite.
Iron Man - Captured by terrorist and uses the reactor that keeps him alive to power the suit as a side effect
The Hulk - "Duh!"

Others include the Thing, Black Widow, Thor (to lesser extent, more of a "life lesson") Wolverine (and various other X-men)

The only two I can think that didn't go through personal trauma are the Human Torch/Invisible Woman/Mr. Fantastic, although the transformation was kinda painful and the learning of abilities over time and Green Lantern, who got his ring from a dying alien that he didn't know.

So, now that your proven wrong on point 1.

While I don't necessarily agree with Lucy's bit being akin to a rape survivor cliche, your comparisons aren't particularly good. Yes, those are all forms of trauma that their respective participants overcome/react to as part of their path to heroism. However, none of your examples are physically invasive/violations (as is very much the case in rape, and in having your body surgically opened up and filled with something you don't want in there). It's erroneous to suggest any trauma that isn't rape isn't the same as rape in such a context simply because, as I understand your argument, there are all kinds of trauma people have to get over.

I might not go as far as saying Lucy's premise is a rape survivor-type story, but I'd say it's closer to one than any of the examples you put forward.

scnj:

The other big problem with the film is the weird almost racist and sexist vibes I got from the trailer. Yeah, it's exciting to see a female led pseudo-superhero movie. But her origin story is that something was done to her against her will, and she had to survive the trauma in order to obtain her powers. It's practically the same as the overused strong rape survivor cliche.

And also, for all her so called enlightenment, there's that weird moment in the trailer where upon finding out the Asian man speaks no English, she shoots him. Because apparently him being of no use to her at all makes him unworthy of living. Kind of a weird message to send. And finally there's the Chinese text on the walls, which is just made up of random words. That's a language that is used by a huge percentage of the population, reduced to meaningless set dressing. Imagine how jarring it would be to just see English words like 'apple' and 'box' written large on a wall in a film. There's pretty much zero difference here.

-Sexism: I feel, having looked over Besson's work and having first-hand or partial knowledge of many of them, that it's a recurring theme to some capacity - yes, many of his female characters are gutsy, strong, take-no-crap badasses, but that usually stems from them either being experiments or trained soldiers (5th Element, Joan of Arc [both with Milla Jovovich, who excels at the whole "strong but damaged punching bag" thing - how many times has she died throughout Resident Evil?] Starship Troopers, Nikita), having suffered incredible tragedy or trauma (The Professional, Columbiana), or simply being savagely insane (The Family), and that isn't touching on the other things he's worked on where the women are not only victims of intense violence but often involve sexual abuse and slavery (Transporter, Hitman, Taken, From Paris With Love [aka Travolta head-shots a woman]). So, superpowers through kidnapping and forced drug-smuggling frankly sounds up his alley.

-Racism: I have a bit less knowledge on it, but I remember a review of The Family saying something to the effect of Besson being a "traitor." Having seen the movie, I kind've understand - the titular family (DeNiro, Pfeiffer, and the others) are Americans in Paris under a witness protection program hiding from their former mob family. They are, frankly, awful people who quickly take control of various parts of the village they live in (DeNiro destroys a water tank to get back an overcharge on the bill or something and fantasizes about grabbing an annoying neighbor and shoving his face on a hot barbeque grill, Pfeiffer is given attitude by a grocer and BLOWS UP the store, the son immediately runs some kind of information racket at school, and the daughter has an affair with a teacher and almost commits suicide when she finds out he's married, having previously beaten would-be rapists to a pulp with a tennis racket - technically the least troublesome and more sympathetic of them all but nevertheless portrayed as, at best, wildly unstable). The French citizens are either jerks or so cheerfully oblivious that they fall over themselves trying to help the family, but the family, despite being portrayed as conniving, insane, brutal, and revenge-minded, are the people we're supposed to care about. My point is that Besson seems to keep a lot of focus on the American cast when he makes films for the US and anyone who's from another country or isn't Caucasian is usually some sort of antagonist or victim in a broad, stereotypical way. Again, not really surprised by the outcome here.

People liked Dumber movies like Pacific Rim (Tanks >>>> >> > >> > > > >> > Giant Robots ; If getting hit by a robot hurts you, a 120mm HEAT shell WILL kill you).
So yeah I too dont get the antagonism against the movies stupid premise. Much stupider have been debated as logical before...

My degree was in Psychology and the 10% myth is one of the most annoying things in the entire fucking world!

That being said the last film I watched that was partly based around this idea was "Limitless" (even getting the actual myth wrong and saying 20%) and that was surprisingly good.

I think that people gaining intelligence based superpowers or supercharging the brain is a great sci-fi jumping off point and giving it a vaguely plausible sounding link to actual science is unnecessary. If you're going to go down that route do it right.

I have a real problem with Science fiction which requires you to know as little as possible about science in order to enjoy the science-sounding parts. Doesn't stop it from being a good movie (at all!) but it's just an unnecessary annoyance that adds nothing and irritates nerds like me.

Brockyman:
1 "Rape Survivor cliche"
No. Just No. I have to assume you know nothing about movies or comics so let me enlighten you on the "hero gets his motivation/learns his powers from trauma" cliche
Batman - Bruce Wayne's parents are murdered in front of him
Superman - Entire home planet destroyed sends him to one of the places in the universe he can have superpowers
Spiderman - Painful metamorphosis from radioactive spider bite.
Iron Man - Captured by terrorist and uses the reactor that keeps him alive to power the suit as a side effect
The Hulk - "Duh!"

Assuming we're talking about the films, you're only right about those first two. The rest, you're pretty wrong on.

Spider-Man - His uncle gets murdered by a guy he lets get away because "its not my problem"
Iron-Man - As a weapon's manufacturer, he sees his weapons used to harm the people they were meant to protect, so he believes that only an individiual, not a corporation, is responsible enough to protect people.
The Hulk - I wouldn't even characterize Bruce Banner in any of the films as a "hero".

Notice something about all of those characters though. They're motivated by the victimization of other people, while more common for female characters to be motivated by their own victimization - very specific, violating physical trauma. In recent memory, all the female-led AAA games use this as well: Remember Me, Tomb Raider, The Last of Us, etc.

2. Racism

By putting gibberish on the wall, and implying that its Chinese, its hugely insulting, basically saying "Hey, entire language is bullshit gibberish goobidy gook" That is real racism.

Also, have you seen a lot of the English Translations and errors from Asian nations? They are everywhere!

Yeah, mistranslations. Not completely making shit up, taking a look at it, and going "yeah, taht random bullshit looks like the rest of the random bullshit from the english language"

Only difference is most people have a sense of humor and tolerance instead of nit picking a summer movie.

Genuine attempt at a translation that ends up changing the meaning into something humourous vs not even trying and slapping crap together that appears like it would belong to a language even though it doesn't. Not the same thing, at all.

AxelxGabriel:
Hey Bob? For all that talk about Knowledge being good and all, are you completely forgetting the fact that the further her powers get, the less empathetic Lucy gets and how little concern she has about randomly killing people?

She killed a taxi driver just cause he didn't speak English for fuck's sake!

Actually that's precisely what getting that mentally advance would provoke really, considering how "emotions" are usually something that gets in the way, and if she's thinking "rationally" and as it seems, she has limited time, getting things done quicker is kinda of what she'd go for.

Adam Jensen:
And come on Marvel, give us a Black Widow movie.

zvate:
Would a black widow movie even work?

Thunderous Cacophony:
-snip- Black Widow moves into position to replace Captain America as the leader of the (reformed) Avengers once Chris Evans retires.

I've said this other places... but where a Black Widow film is concerned... just... no.
Black Widow is an interesting character... but she's not a "leading character" IMO and honestly any attempt to make her one by centering an entire movie on her has to be utterly without fault or you risk diminishing her in the other movies where she's great.
Granted... her film would not likely be as Elektra was to Daredevil... but where she lacks something solo, she adds considerably to team & support dynamics.
And again, she is one of few Marvel female characters with a running title who have an original name and premise that is not the female-counterpart of a male character (She-Hulk, Capt. Marvel, Spiderwoman, etc...) so in that she has a unique appeal.
But on her own, even with Johansson as the actress, I would rather her continue being a substantial part of an ensemble than have Marvel take a swing with her as lead and miss.
With the slate of Marvel films already scheduled but not announced, I think we WILL see a female-led film among them... but I really hope it's not her. I'm personally very satisfied with the way they utilize her in the stories so far.

Though I would not say no to her in any of Marvel's blu-ray one-shots at all.
I would even rather see an entire TV series built around her... but I don't think she carries the iconic stature that these other solo heroes in film have. I think the same is true of Falcon, Hawkeye, and War Machine.
And iconic heroes need strong supporting characters... and those do really well for that specific role.
Give them ample screentime in films on that level and I think they will continue to excel.
To be fair, the right writer/director combination could potentially make it work. But finding that sweet spot is tricky to do and risky to attempt. (James Gunn for GOTG is an excellent example... for while I've always been confident he was the right guy for it, there is no doubt there was inherent risk in the entire enterprise.)
Say Marvel scalped someone like J. H. Williams or Gail Simone to write the film? Maybe...

But when it comes to Marvel putting a female lead up on the big screen, they, because of the nature of the industry and the overall climate of the fan base, can. not. screw. that. up. Not on the first swing.
So no... not on Black Widow. They need something more and I'm willing to wait for it to be done right... not right now.

Just an opinion. And I could be wrong.

Speaking to the bit about Black Widow at the end there, I'd have to agree with you. I wasn't sure she was the right person for the role in Iron Man 2 (even though she wa barely a character then) and some aspects of her performance in the Avengers bothered me. But, Winter Soldier? She fucking nailed the role in that movie, so I really hope they give her her own film eventually. I want more of her!

scnj:
And finally there's the Chinese text on the walls, which is just made up of random words. That's a language that is used by a huge percentage of the population, reduced to meaningless set dressing. Imagine how jarring it would be to just see English words like 'apple' and 'box' written large on a wall in a film. There's pretty much zero difference here.

Yeah, there really is no excuse for that in this day and age, especially when major studios personally oversee the dubbing and/or subtitling of their movies into other languages, which includes Chinese in the vast majority of cases. I mean, we've got filmmakers bending over backwards to appease Chinese censors, but actually bothering to write their language correctly, something that doesn't affect the story in any way so you can farm out to the translators you're already paying? Pfft! I'm half-hoping China bans this movie for that, so the studio realizes the impact their decision had.

Jim_Callahan:
The 10% myth is annoying precisely because everyone with so much as a middle-school level grasp of science knows it's nonsense, but that still leaves a lot of incredibly annoying idiots who are always taking it completely seriously.

Really? I don't recall learning that in middle school. Maybe I was sick that day.

I like how when you say "God" you show Shiggy.

My whole thing of disliking the stupid over used myth is like taking a bite of a sandwich and getting onions in my first bite, and having pick them off. I might be able to enjoy it from here on , but do I even want to keep going. May be the onions left a bit of their flavor and now I need pull off the lettuce. How much of it do I need pick apart before I just enjoy it...especially when it's my first experience with the sandwich. I don't like a jarringly stupid thing be my initial thing of when I start off a movie. (or just something I hate having right away.) If the movie recovers from the fumble I might forgive it, but they don't always.

Take Edge of Stupidity...I mean Edge of Tomorrow. The set up is completely stupid. No not the aliens crash landing in the middle of Europe...that isn't what I'm talking about, or even the sci fi elements. They screwed up basic real world stuff. As someone who's actually been in the military , I was just rolling my eyes at the first 20 mins of this movie. They would never in a million years force a guy who's made a career of doing PR work to go into combat. Only way that sort of thing would happen is if you had like a say a plane crash...and a limited number of bodies...but when they literally have millions of humans to recruit and send into battle after being properly trained they're going send those guys. That makes as much sense as taking someone and forcing them to perform brain surgery against their will with no experience. The armed forces do not stuff people into combat that have no training there if at all possible. Especially not a deserter, and then arm them with millions of dollars of hardware. This person might use it to try to escape or kill others when they freak the hell out. Having someone who's like that is worse than sending one less person. They are giving you less than nothing. Deserter are throw in the prison...they are done.

There's no way William Cage's CO would ever change orders and hand him over to the General of another country without telling him first.(aside from it was some sort of top secret mission being sprung on him at the last minute, which it wasn't. The armed force is all about long well prepared plans when at all possible. You practice doing something 100 times so one time you really need to do it, you do it right.) If William Cage really didn't want to go...he could resign right then and there. Unlike enlisted guys...commissioned officers can resign. Yet they just dump him on the base, and Bill Paxton talks about going into combat like just some sort of passage of manhood everyone needs to do...when not everyone is cut out for combat. (my roommate is someone I'd never want to go into combat with...the guy would freak out and get us killed.) They don't give someone a day to train and toss them into the meat grinder. You may die out there, but they will give you a fighting chance.

Obviously the movie got more interesting, but the beginning was terrible. I get they wanted come up with a reason a older person like Tom Cruise would be put in the position of a new recruit, as a younger actor could just been that with no one questioning it...but this angle was extremely stupid. I can think of simpler reasons, like he was just at the base filming an ad for the campaign.. (which Operation Downfall...was Operation Failure or backfire already taken?) He went along to show how confident the troops would win, and was just going wear the armor, and hang back as a morale thing not knowing that the critters knew he was coming. Nope they came up with full on stupid reasons.

Lucy looks alright, but I think I will wait till a second run theater gets it like I did with Edge of Tomorrow. I have only so many dollars I want to spend on movies that I see right away....and this been a busy year. Some are going be put in the secondary tier. I suppose if this summer had less going on like a few of the past I'd probably gone and seen Lucy right away, but I have plenty of other stuff to see. (like Guardians of the Galaxy..hell yes!)

Black Widow already had a movie of her own. It was called "Captain America: The Winter Soldier."

(Seriously, why was Cap even IN that movie? Black Widow gets to drive the plot, gets the most interesting moral dilemma, and has the most interesting character arc.)

Anyway, this at least sounds like an interesting action movie romp. I too am tired of the "don't mess with nature" narratives that Hollywood seems to keep pumping out.

I always thought the "you only use 10% of your brain" thing worked liked this. It's not that you don't use the other 90%, its that you use it passively. The 90% governs things our body does automatically, regulate heart and lungs, digest food, perform maintenance, etc etc. If we did have manual 'control' of 100% of our brain, than we'd probably die because there would be so many things we'd have to do simultaneously to stay alive ont op of firing off every little neuron for every little muscle contraction. The closest we'd get to super powers is probably Luffy's Gear Second...but we'd still die because we're not rubber.

Any-who, this is something I pieced together in my mind when I was younger and I never bothered fact-checking. Is this correct or at least close?

bobdole1979:
are you joking? The Rock would be PERFECT as Shazam. He has the muscle bound super hero look down but can also bring a naive child like wonder to the part. The only other actor that could do it would be Chris Pratt

as for Black Widow... ehhh her own movie wouldn't be that interesting, I mean she's an assasin ok neat. I would rather have Ms Marvel as the first Marvel Female Superhero to get her own movie.

I'm 100% on board with the Shazam idea. I used to not like The Rock, then I saw Pain and Gain.

zvate:
Found the review intersting as always but Bob's last screen has me thinking... Would a black widow movie even work? I know a good movie can be made out of anything but for all her nuance the character is allowed very little range and as one of those connecting elements allowed within multiple different mini-franchises her growth and development would be seriously limited. I know that's a problem for all the characters but they aren't all used as universal multi-verse paste to nearly the same degree...

She's basically a superspy. Spy movies can work. I'm not a great writer, so I'm not going to pretend I have the script, but I can't imagine that it's anywhere close to unworkable as a concept. Plus, we already know she has a lot of history with SHIELD and possibly other agencies - If nothing else they could do a prequel movie focusing on the various Super Spy Stuff that qualified her to be an Avenger in the first place.

Grabehn:

AxelxGabriel:
Hey Bob? For all that talk about Knowledge being good and all, are you completely forgetting the fact that the further her powers get, the less empathetic Lucy gets and how little concern she has about randomly killing people?

She killed a taxi driver just cause he didn't speak English for fuck's sake!

Actually that's precisely what getting that mentally advance would provoke really, considering how "emotions" are usually something that gets in the way, and if she's thinking "rationally" and as it seems, she has limited time, getting things done quicker is kinda of what she'd go for.

But if her brain is already that advanced shouldn't she be able to instantly analyze and replicate the guy's language he was speaking? I haven't seen the movie, but if you've got ultimate knowledge and KNOW what he's saying and have the capacity to completely understand something within moments of exposure, I'm pretty sure SPEAKING the language would not be beyond you.

I'll be honest - when I saw the trailers for Lucy, I was absolutely DREADING its release - not only did they play up the whole "only use 10% of the Brain" bogus like it was going to take it seriously, but also only shot Lucy as a villain protagonist who showed no emotion, and only used her powers to kill and maim everything in her path - one "joke" involved her shooting a taxi driver for "not speaking English", and having the other drive to the hospital by threatening to kill him too. It didn't help that the other pop culture "Lucy" to have "telekinetic powers of the mind" as her gimick was A) also a villain protagonist (albeit with a far more believable and sympathetic backstory than "forced to be drug mule and 'accidentally' get injected with superpower drugs"), and B) had her name used as a deliberate pun on "Luc-ifer", i.e. the goddamn devil.

But now that MovieBob pointed out how Lucy actually uses her freshly opened mind to do "help everyone for the greater good" good rather than "screw everyone in my way because I have the power" evil, it honestly changes my mind on the movie somewhat. Don't get me wrong, I'm still not sure how the hell a Triad/Yakuza could get their hands on drugs that could give somebody superpowers instead of, say, a high or overdose, how the drugs gave Lucy superpowers instead of outright killing her on the spot, or why ANYBODY would be stupid or desperate enough to keep going after Lucy by the time she begins displaying demigod-like powers (especially if it's still just the criminal gang chasing after her and not, say, an actual army with a potential "nuke 'em as the only way to be sure" back-up plan), but this sounds like an interesting subversion of most "with absolute power comes absolute corruption" storylines, and the parts where Lucy does use her knowledge for mankind's benefit (which ISN'T shown in the actual trailers for some confounded reason) do sound like they would make a nice contrast to the rote-"wronged hero kills the wrongdoers in the most cartoonishly violent fashion possible" setpieces the film otherwise has.

But yeah, I had "I Origins" pegged as a stinker the instant I watched it's teaser trailer online. At first, I thought it was a semi-interesting premise (or at least a fairly harmless one), with the relatively friendly banter between "Hipster Scientist" and "New Age Chick" about science versus spiritualism, but the second they spoiled the twist of the movie ("New Age Chick" dies, but "Hipster Scientist" later learns she's reincarnated as a woman in India... zuh?), and on top of that tried to justify it with "eyes are the windows to the soul" line (since when was THAT ever a pseudo-science theory, and not just a metaphor?! JEEZ!!!), I had it condemned to either be never mentioned by anybody after its initial release, or ripped apart on a "The Lone Ranger"-level by MovieBob. Glad to see how he used it as a perspective flip to point out how Lucy was more palatable than how its dumb trailers tried to make it out to be.

P.S.: Anybody else make jokes about how "I Origins" sounds like it's trying to pass itself off as a prequel to "I Robot"? 'Cause if not, I call dibs!

I am very displeased with all the people in this topic failing to grasp the importance of suspension of disbelief in fiction.

Thunderous Cacophony:

zvate:
Found the review intersting as always but Bob's last screen has me thinking... Would a black widow movie even work? I know a good movie can be made out of anything but for all her nuance the character is allowed very little range and as one of those connecting elements allowed within multiple different mini-franchises her growth and development would be seriously limited. I know that's a problem for all the characters but they aren't all used as universal multi-verse paste to nearly the same degree...

Good ideas here. Maybe in the MCU, Black Widow has some "history" (wink, wink) with Matt Murdoch/Daredevil, like in the main comics universe. You know who's such a huge BW fan, he just sat down one day and hammered out a script for a movie about her, as well as name his daughter Natasha? David Hayter, screenwriter and former voice of Solid Snake. I'm not sure what he's doing nowadays, so Marvel should use his script and bring him aboard to direct as well.

Can't say this review really on the movie, all I know about the movie is it's morality. How are the action scenes? How does it handle making tension for a character that can do anything? Does Lucy become a more likable character after shooting an innocent cab driver?

I would go see the shit out a Black Widow movie! Also I'd pretty much decided I was gonna go see Lucy when the trailer for it showed before Dawn of the Planet of the Apes earlier this afternoon.

Brockyman:

DrOswald:
My problem with the 10% brain thing is not necessarily that it is wrong. It is that it is wrong in a very specific way.

Lets put it this way: Star Gate uses worm holes. Now, all us nerds know that worm holes don't work like that at all. However, one could argue that it is an entry level introduction to the idea of a worm hole. To paraphrase Terry Pratchett, it is an analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way.

Science fiction pseudo-science doesn't have to be right. In fact, it can be ridiculously and horribly wrong and still be just fine. But it should lead the viewer to the right questions if they delve deeper. This is how dumb science can still make smart science fiction. It opens the mind to new possibilities.

The 10% brain usage trope does not do that at all. It doesn't raise any interesting questions. If you do go look it up all you find is that it is completely wrong in all the most uninteresting ways. There are no further questions to ask, no more knowledge to seek.

In any case, it wont ruin the movie for me. I just really hate the trope. Looking forward to seeing the movie.

The only thing I wanted to address is the wormhole "science". The fact of the matter is, no one really knows how they work, as we've never been able to create one or actually observe one. They are theoretical and only been discovered via equations in General Relativity studies.

I think the real damage here is that people think they know everything, while science itself is the constant quest for knowledge and change. If new evidence comes along, you retest your theories or laws, even if they are considered "proven facts". However, there are many in the scientific community that use the term "settled science", and have almost a religious like zeal for their theories and that's super dangerous thinking...

The fact is, we don't know. We never fully know. There could be a device that manipulates/controls wormholes (or something similar) for travel. There could be non carbon based life. There could be devices that break the speed of light, cancel gravity, terraform planets. The point of sci-fi, and even science itself, is to imagine what can exist.

The argument about the 10% is another case of pretentiousness by the nerd/geek community. The nicest way I can say it to those who are mad about it is, get the f*ck over it.

But just because we don't know somethings doesn't mean we don't know anything. And we do know this one. We do not use only 10% of our brain. The fact is we do know.

I don't believe that it is pretentious to point out bad writing when criticizing a work. Using the 10% brain excuse in Lucy is bad and lazy science fiction writing. It undermines the central premise of knowledge is power by basing the entire thing on something that is both provably false and perpetuating a basic ignorance of society. It doesn't make the entire movie bad but it is not a good part of the work.

It sounds like I'll hate the main character for being a god mode sue from the get to, also, I'm pretty sure that everywhere in the world that's not america people know science is true (a depressing sentence to write), so it's not progressive.

otakon17:

Grabehn:

AxelxGabriel:
Hey Bob? For all that talk about Knowledge being good and all, are you completely forgetting the fact that the further her powers get, the less empathetic Lucy gets and how little concern she has about randomly killing people?

She killed a taxi driver just cause he didn't speak English for fuck's sake!

Actually that's precisely what getting that mentally advance would provoke really, considering how "emotions" are usually something that gets in the way, and if she's thinking "rationally" and as it seems, she has limited time, getting things done quicker is kinda of what she'd go for.

But if her brain is already that advanced shouldn't she be able to instantly analyze and replicate the guy's language he was speaking? I haven't seen the movie, but if you've got ultimate knowledge and KNOW what he's saying and have the capacity to completely understand something within moments of exposure, I'm pretty sure SPEAKING the language would not be beyond you.

Well, no. The problem is inputs. She may be able to instantly analyse the language and learn it but she needs enough inputs to establish patterns.

Plus, that happens very early on in the process from what I can see. Almost immediately after the process starts, so all she might be aware of is that she is being hopped up on super smart drugs and needs to get to a hospital right now or she may die. All she shows at that point is that she suddenly learned how to punch a guy good and she can shoot well enough to kill 5 or 6 guys that she got the drop on. Not exactly on the level of instant translation of any language.

edit: Plus, I think the cab drivers are supposed to be part of the group of people who kidnapped her.

Maybe Hollywood writers only use 10% of their brain and that's why they are so stuck on the myth. Honestly it's not that hard to just say humans have not tapped the full potential of their brains to take off with a cool science fiction story.

What sounds nice to me and may make it too tempting to pass up is the run time. Kind of tired of overly long bloated films so a film that gets there and gets the fun done might be what I'm looking for right now.

Honestly when I first saw the trailer at the MCM Expo a week ago, the concept is similar to Limitless (well the whole using more than 10% of your brain) but using it more offensively at kicking ass! Either way I pass at this one.

Adam Jensen:
I am very displeased with all the people in this topic failing to grasp the importance of suspension of disbelief in fiction.

I think the level to which people are willing to suspend their disbelief varies from person to person. I'm willing to enjoy almost anything mecha without complaining even though realistically they are wildly impractical; but if someone makes a movie propelling misinformation, like say intelligent design, then it will end up bugging me and affect my watching of the film.

"super powers through vastly increased knowledge" always makes me think of Paul Atreides/Muad'Dib from Dune. Of course his ability to calculate all the possible outcomes of his every action, effectively allowing him to predict but not necessarily alter the future in a meaningful way, wound up bringing him misery more than anything else.

DrOswald:

otakon17:

Grabehn:
Actually that's precisely what getting that mentally advance would provoke really, considering how "emotions" are usually something that gets in the way, and if she's thinking "rationally" and as it seems, she has limited time, getting things done quicker is kinda of what she'd go for.

But if her brain is already that advanced shouldn't she be able to instantly analyze and replicate the guy's language he was speaking? I haven't seen the movie, but if you've got ultimate knowledge and KNOW what he's saying and have the capacity to completely understand something within moments of exposure, I'm pretty sure SPEAKING the language would not be beyond you.

Well, no. The problem is inputs. She may be able to instantly analyse the language and learn it but she needs enough inputs to establish patterns.

Plus, that happens very early on in the process from what I can see. Almost immediately after the process starts, so all she might be aware of is that she is being hopped up on super smart drugs and needs to get to a hospital right now or she may die. All she shows at that point is that she suddenly learned how to punch a guy good and she can shoot well enough to kill 5 or 6 guys that she got the drop on. Not exactly on the level of instant translation of any language.

edit: Plus, I think the cab drivers are supposed to be part of the group of people who kidnapped her.

Okay, if they're apart of the group that kidnapped her, fine. Also, in another point if it's when she starts undergoing the change, she probably hasn't hit that "rational and clear of emotions" stage quite yet.

Worgen:
Hmm, well that ads that kept touting the 10% thing made me not care about this movie and dislike the idea behind it but the review made it sound interesting. Not great but at least something fun to drink too.

Although I also cant get the image out of my head that this is just a western version of elfen lied.

The name certainly doesn't help dispell that impression.

The "second terrible looking Hercules movie" is the shit. For once, a trailer actually made a movie look dumber than it really was.

I hope we get a review next week.

Adam Jensen:
I am very displeased with all the people in this topic failing to grasp the importance of suspension of disbelief in fiction.

The thing is, people become more savvy overtime. Ideas that once seemed plausible by the general public eventually get discarded and heavily ridiculed towards the end of their lifespans.

It's kind of like in the 1950's all sentient robots were being created in garages by tinkerers. Nowadays that kind of movie would be laughed out of the theater. Even reboots of those older works have those solitary scientists working for large robotics corporations and using resources from work for their personal projects. People eventually learn that things aren't feasible.

If you were to be able to control all of the functioning's of your brain wouldn't it leave you a drooling moron due to the sensory overload coming from all of the things you have to manage?

Adam Jensen:
I am very displeased with all the people in this topic failing to grasp the importance of suspension of disbelief in fiction.

It's like the Spoony One said: "There's 'suspension of disbelief' and then there's 'get the fuck out.'"

Suspension of disbelief works in other fiction is due to mitigating factors; Take Superman for example. The guy can fly super fast, is super strong, and can shoot lasers from his eyes and breathe ice on bad guys. We can buy that because he's from Krypton, an alien. We know starting out that the world Superman starts in slightly different from our own. Superman's biology is couched in the fact that it's unprovable by science. Suspension of Disbelief works by operating in that grey area where science can't explain it, but isn't so fantastical it compromises the plot.

Lucy starts from completely bullshit myth that anyone with some understanding anatomy can easily disprove. And even then, her powers are so overpowered that theres no point in even having a plot.

(Am I making sense or should I sober up first?)

CelestDaer:
The big backlash I'm hearing about Lucy is how it's another white girl kidnapped by racial stereotypes as a premise, and then the white girl gets to have her revenge on the kidnappers and that's okay because they started it. Thanks, tumblr.

you mean it isn't? I'm pretty sure I would do the same thing if I gained super powers after being cut up and imprisoned.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here