Ed Wood (1994) 20th Anniversary

 With how I'm always talking about recent films of the past few years, I feel like it's time for me to try and branch out. You know, talk about films from more than ten years ago, maybe even twenty. So in celebration of it's 20^th anniversary, I thought it would be nice if I talked about one of my all time favorite films from one of my all time favorite directors. And that film is Tim Burton's “Ed Wood.”

For those who don't know, “Ed Wood” tells the true story of the worst director of all time, Edward D. Wood Jr. In the film, it shows his rise to that legacy, with the making of his three best known films: “Glen or Glenda,” “Bride of the Monster,” and what people call the worst film ever made, “Plan 9 From Outer Space.” And between the making of said films, we see the constant struggles he goes through in trying to make them, as well as keep his personal life in check.

This film was released during 1994, one of the best years for film. Films like “Pulp Fiction,” “Shawshank Redemption,” “Forest Gump,” and “The Lion King” were some of the big ones, but this one doesn't seem to get as much attention as those others. Ever since its release, “Ed Wood” has developed a cult following, becoming a film that anyone who goes into film making should watch. It shows us the striving passion one has when it comes to following one's desires, even if people think it's complete crap. What makes a man like Ed Wood different from other terrible directors like Michael Bay and Paul W.S. Anderson, is that Ed Wood didn't care if it DID become a hit or not, as long as he got to make it. He loved making films, not making money, and his passion for it is what makes it special.

Johnny Depp as the titular role does a fantastic job. As the second film he did with director Tim Burton, it's without a doubt his best performance. This was also the film that restored Depp's faith in acting, as he was almost considering quitting after some unpleasant situations. Everything about his character is just so entertaining to watch, that I simply could not get enough of it. How he wasn't nominated for an Oscar that year is beyond me, because he DEFINETLY deserved at least a nomination.

Then we have Martin Landau as Bela Lugosi, the actor who played Dracula in 1933 and Ed Wood's idol. While I do love Depp as Wood greatly, Landau as Lugosi is absolutely outstanding. I can see why he won the Oscar for Best Supporting, because you actually do believe that he IS Bela Lugosi, especially with the make-up, curtsy of Rick Baker's talent.

The best scenes by far are when Wood and Lugosi are onscreen together, and we see both the torments that each of them are going through. Lugosi was addicted to drugs after his successful run, and by the second half it really brings you to tears. I also love how they incorporated Swan Lake, the theme of “Dracula,” into the film whenever there's a sad moment involving either of the two.

Sarah Jessica Parker plays a role in the film as Dolores Fuller, Ed Wood's first wife. While I've never really been a fan of her, Jessica Parker just makes this role work. Her reactions and tone really fit the kind of woman who would be disgusted by a man who cross-dresses and give a role to a different woman. Then we have Patricia Arquette as Kathy O'Hara, the woman that Ed meets after Dolores leaves him, and the one who helps him get back on his feet into the world of film making. Not only do we have Swan Lake in the soundtrack, but we also have the theme from “Glen or Glenda,” and it is played most notably with Ed Wood's tender moments. Others include Mike Starr as the producer of “Glen or Glenda,” Bill Murray as Ed Wood's homosexual friend, and Lisa Marie, Tim Burton's former fiance, in the role of horror hostess, Vampira.

Tim Burton was the perfect man to direct a film such as this, since Ed Wood is similar to characters like Pee-wee, Batman, and Sweeney Todd, rebel characters who not everyone gets. His usual style is toned down, but it's fitting, as it allows his talents outside of the artistic route to take a break, and make way for something a little different. I also love how he made the film in black-and-white, like we were watching an old film from the fifties. This film celebrates the works of Ed Wood, as noted in the opening narration by Criswell, played by Jeffery Jones, as a tribute to “Plan 9.” Writers Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski made one of the most excellent screenplays, despite the stinkers they had prior and later on. And with them working with Burton again in the upcoming film “Big Eyes,” you better believe I'll be there to see it.

Edward D. Wood Jr. is one who never played by the rules, and always did things his way. He'll always be an inspiration to many, and I hope that more people view this film in the future, because it is definitely one of the greats. It's one of the greatest films ever made, and I love it with every fiber of my being. Happy 20^th anniversary “Ed Wood.”

Rating: 10/10

Next Time: 13 Nerdy Nights of Horror begins with “Godzilla (2014)”

Men, Women, and Children

 In the 80's and 90's, Ivan Reitman has had much acclaim as being one of the best comedic directors of that generation, giving us films like “Ghost Busters,” “Twins,” and “Kindergarten Cop.” While he is still working today, he hasn't really given out the same kind of appeal as he did twenty years ago. However his son, Jason Reitman, managed to not only follow in his father's footsteps, but even surpass him, with critically acclaimed films like “Thank You For Smoking,” “Up in the Air,” and one of my favorite films, “Juno.” And this year, he has given us two films: “Labor Day,” which I haven't seen yet, and today's topic, based on the novel by Chad Kultgen, “Men, Women, and Children.”

As an ensemble film, we are told many different stories that happen at the same time, but they all revolve around society's changing with today's internet. It shows us just how less interested we have become of most reality, and how we're constantly dependent on our phones and tablets. The film dives into the themes of loneliness, depression, isolation, puberty, profanity, shame, adultery, over-protective restriction, and even suicide. These themes are perfectly represented in almost all of these stories, and every single one of the cast members do a fantastic job of portraying them.

If I had to choose one story that stuck out with me the most, it would have to be the romance between Kaitlyn Dever and Ansel Elgort. What really cements it in, is that they are parallels of one another, as they both have mothers who never understood them, and they have their own online worlds they exist in to get away from all the crap that is surrounding their lives. And when their worlds are taken from them, they either find true happiness within each other, or feel like there's no where else to turn. The ending of this left me in tears, as it was just one heartbreaking moment after the next. As someone who has been suffering from depression and feeling suicidal, I relate a lot to this. I know how it feels to be treated unfairly or told that your longtime passions or hobbies aren't what others want. If this film does get Oscar recognition, Ansel Elgort is the one that should be nominated for Best Actor. After appearing in “Carrie” last year, then doing this and “The Fault in Our Stars” this year, he has really showcased how good of an actor he can be at such a young age.

As for any runner ups tales, it would have to be with Elena Kampouris and Will Peltz, giving us a depiction on how far people will go just to get noticed or not made a complete joke out of, and what the consequences will be when going too far. While not much can be said about Will Peltz, the main highlight here is Elena Kampouris. I feel like this film should be shown to all those girls forcefully starving themselves. You know what I mean, those girls who think they're fat but they really aren't.

I have to also give props to the story involving Adam Sandler and Rosemarie DeWitt. Not only does this showcase lost desires, years after marriage, but it also turns cliches on their sides, in ways you don't expect them to. And DeWitt and Sandler both give excellent performances to back it all up. I still hold the fact that I'm an Adam Sandler fan, but I do agree with people that he does manage to do better with dramatic work.

Overall, “Men, Women, and Children” is a film I'm glad I got to see. Performances aside, the writing and direction are flawless, and I hope when it comes to theaters nationwide it gets much recognition. Jason Reitman has delivered another great film, with a great cast.

Rating: 10/10

Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

Comic book writer, Frank Miller, is...well...a strange case. He's basically one of those people that has had respect in his early career, but later got offensive to high levels. You can watch episodes of Linkara's "Atop The Forth Wall," and pretty much get a good idea of what kind of man Frank Miller is. That's not to say he's given out some good material; let's not forget, he WAS the guy that brought Batman back to his darker roots with "The Dark Knight Returns." Then there's the cult classic comic book, "Sin City."

For those who don't know, "Sin City" is a black & white comic that is a violent and gritty work of fiction; it uses colors for certain areas, but as a way of symbolism. Examples are red being power, blue as corruption, green is envy, and yellow as danger. When brought to the big screen, director Robert Rodriguez had Miller on board to make sure that every shot, pose, and effect was like it's predecessor, making it the first comic book movie LITERALLY brought to life. It's one of those examples of a shot-for-shot recreation done pretty damn well. The visual style is just breathtaking to look at, as it really manages to have both the look and feel of something new, and is a contender for Rodriguez's best film.

Talks of a sequel have been jumping around for a few years now, and it really has been raising speculation as to whether or not one was going to happen. When we did get a date for it, it ended up being swapped out for a different Rodriguez film, which either was a Grindhouse film or a shitty kids' film. It wasn't until after "Machete Kills," that we actually got an official release date for the sequel we've been waiting for: "Sin City: A Dame to Kill For."

Much like the last film, it tells at least three different stories throughout the course of the film: one story involving D'wight dealing with a girl from his past, a gambler with lucky hands who tangles with Senator Rourke, and Nancy and Marv going up against Rourke to take him out for good. While it may not seem like much, it's the characters that truly make this film a one of a kind, much like it's predecessor; to be honest, it rivals up there with the original, as well as the first GOOD Robert Rodriguez film since then.

The visuals are still a wonder to look at, and the camera angles are mesmerizing, to say the least. If there's one thing about the "Sin City" movies that they succeed completely at, it's the visual styles and color schemes, which I think they improved upon. And for a film like this, the 3D actually added to the experience of it, like adding secret sauce to your favorite burger. The action scenes are also fantastic to look at as well, with it being fast paced and pretty damn gory; I mean, it HAS "Kill" in the title, so why wouldn't it have violence?

The returning cast members from the first film, like Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Powers Boothe, Jessica Alba, Jamie King, and Rosario Dawson, all mange to do a pretty damn good job with what they're given, so no fault on their part; yes, I liked Jessica Alba in this film, don't go crazy. With the newest cast members on the other hand, there are only three that are majorly worth talking about. One is Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Johnny, the man with a lot of luck. Joe just seems to have this welcoming presence to him, that also gives you the feeling he's a daredevil; going up against the most powerful man in all of Sin City to prove he's better, just shows he's not afraid to let down a challenge, even if it means death. Gordon-Levitt still maintains to be one of my favorite actors, and this performance alone would be enough to prove why. Then we get Josh Brolin as D'wight, taking over the role that was originally played by Clive Owen; and while I enjoyed Clive Owen, Brolin just seemed more intimidating as D'wight. You can see the look in his eyes, that he's holding back, trying not to let his inner demons get the better of him. And lastly, we have Eva Green; oh my god, where do I begin with her? If you remember her role in "300: Rise of an Empire," try to imagine that only turned up to 11; sexy, manipulative, crazy, and simply hard to take your eyes off of. I do find it interesting, how in both Frank Miller movie sequels this year, she's pretty easygoing about performing full frontal. Maybe she just likes this type of character, who knows?

Now if I did have any complaints about the film, I'd have about two, but they're only nit-picks. One is the story in which the film is named after, "A Dame to Kill For," which features Brolin and Green's story, does tend to go on a bit too long; not that it was bad, I just felt like they should have cut to another story for a while, and then come back to finish it off. The other complaint I have is that the film just stops near the end of Nancy and Marv's story; again, it wasn't bad, it's just there wasn't quite enough weight for it to end like that. In fact, why didn't they just show that story as a break from D'wight's? Then end the film with D'wight's story, that would have been more fitting; but I digress.

Overall, "Sin City: A Dame to Kill For" is a film that's true to it's title; it's to kill for. If your a fan of the first film, don't miss your chance to check out this one. I'm a bit sad that the film is bombing as hard as it is, because it deserves a lot of love. Hell, go see it in 3D if you want; like I said, the 3D was great.

Rating: 9/10

Hercules

                Folks, do you want to know who my most hated director in Hollywood is? Is it Michael Bay? No, too easy. Is it Paul W.S. Anderson? He’s up there. What about Rob Zombie? The less said about him, the better. Oh wait, maybe it’s Uwe Boll! Too cliché. Tyler Perry? No, my most hated director is none other than Brett Ratner, better known as the guy who destroyed the “X-Men” franchise, and the dumbass who keeps giving Christ Tucker a career; words alone can’t describe how much I hate this prick. Not only can this guy hardly make a cohesive film, aside from “Red Dragon,” but he’s also earned the reputation for one of the most offensive scumbags that Hollywood has. So yeah, I really don’t like this guy. And wouldn’t you know it, he has a film about Hercules released in theaters right now…but let’s real quick talk about the OTHER Hercules film that came out back in January.

                “The Legend of Hercules” stars Kellen Lutz (who is a god-awful actor) as Hercules, the half-god son of Zeus, who is sent by his father and brother to battle an army, after they find out that he is in love with his brother’s fiancé. When sent to battle, he is ambushed and sold off to fight in battles for money, and now has to fight his way back home and regain his status…does half of this plot sound familiar? Yeah, that’s because this film is a complete rip-off of both “300” and “Gladiator.” If a film is going to be based on a character of Greek mythology, why not just adapt THAT?! But even if it did, this film is quite honestly the worst looking film I have ever seen. The production value is just absolute crap, and it makes the film look really cheap; hell, you can even tell that there’s a backdrop behind someone, and the costumes look like this was a high school production. With how this film is structured, you’d think this was made by the Asylum, and it somehow made it to theaters, but no; this was made by Summit Entertainment and directed by Renny Harlin, the guy who gave us “Die Hard 2,” “Cliffhanger,” and “Cutthroat Island.” And while they were all stupid films, Harlin has proved that he can make a film look SOMEWHAT appealing, but not this one. “The Legend of Hercules” looks like it was just shot on a budget of $1 million, but…do you want to know how much this film REALLY cost? $70 million dollars…Are you kidding me?!! You mean to tell me that a film like this cost $70 million to make?!! For god’s sake, this makes “Sharknado” look like an Oscar contender! “SHARKNADO” PEOPLE!!

                So yeah, that film was completely awful; so bad, I decided to give Brett Ratner’s version a chance, with the hope that it wouldn’t be like “The Legend,” which I noticed the film threw some punches at. And for one, it is WAY fucking better than that film; however, that’s not saying much, is it?

                After conquering the Twelve Labors, Hercules and his team are finally ready to find land of their own and retire from being mercenaries. It is then, that they are called for one last job by the princess and king of Thrace, to lead their army against Rhesus, the proclaimed tyrant, but Hercules believes there is much more to this than what he’s been told. Now, I’ve been told this film is also based on the graphic novel by Admira Wijaya and Steven Moore, but I haven’t read it, so I can only judge this film as a standalone film.

                The moments that seemed a bit out of place mostly revolved around Hercules having his colleagues help him keep his legend what it is: a legend. They even show that the monsters, like the Hydra, were really pirates building up a myth to terrorize others. That’s actually a clever idea, humanizing Hercules, to make it seem like it’s all an act, but then there are some head scratching moments that you have to ask, “Wait, then why does this…?” Moments like that seem to get to you when you think about it. I also didn’t find that much investment in his two of his colleagues:  Atalanta and Autolycus. They didn’t seem to have that much character, aside from the typical archetypes, which tend to make the film seem a bit predictable, especially Autolycus; I’m sure Rufus Sewell was doing his best with what he was given, but his Autolycus was nothing compared to Bruce Campbell’s (Hail to the king, baby!).

                The twists, that this film supposedly had with the villains, also seemed very contrived and lack motivation; don’t get me wrong, Joseph Finnes and John Hurt gave good performances, it’s just their characters didn’t work for me. I don’t know if that’s what it was like in the comic, or if it even was true in the mythology, but I felt like a re-write would have helped out a little bit. Then there’s that running gag with Amphiaraus, played by Ian McShane seeing his death approaching through visions, but never actually dies; the only time it was funny was during an escape scene, and was saved by Hercules.

                Now aside from the negativity, was there anything good in this film? Much to my surprise, there was. The production design and the action scenes are actually quite good; it has a gritty looking style to it, like something out of the 80’s. And for a film that’s PG-13, there’s definitely more gruesome stuff than you’d expect; heads on pikes, chariot decapitations, heads impaled with arrowheads with a punch, etc. Even with how bad films like “X-3” are, I will admit they're at least decent looking. I also did find a good mutual connection between Hercules and his nephew, Iolaus; there is a good relationship between the two, since Iolaus is the only blood family Hercules has left. I also liked how the princess’s son looked up to Hercules, like any modern day fan would; it is touching for what it is, and the kid wasn’t annoying, to say the least.

                I’ll also give props to Dwayne Johnson, since he does a good job at playing the son of Zeus himself. I mean, the main tropes needed for the character are there: strong, bulk, fight evil, and be kind-hearted. I actually did think his portrayal of Hercules was believable, and I wouldn’t mind him playing him one more time.

                Overall, while I do still hate Brett Ratner, I'll admit this was at least...passable. If you go into this film with the mindset that you’re just watching The Rock kick ass as Hercules, then you’ll get your money’s worth. But if you’re looking for true Hercules entertainment, watch “Hercules: The Legendary Journeys” produced by Sam Raimi and starring Kevin Sorbo. It's a great show, with Bruce Campbell as Autolycus, and it lead to “Xena: Warrior Princess.”

Rating: 5/10

The Guardians of the Galaxy

                Let me be the first to say that Marvel Studios has really been keeping their a-game going! After the MASSIVE disappointment that was “Iron Man 3” (sorry guys), the films after have been getting better and better. I’ve already mentioned that “Winter Soldier” was my new favorite of the “Avengers” series, but now that moment has changed. Ladies and gentleman of Planet Earth and movie goers alike; I give to you…“The Guardians of the Galaxy.”

                Space outlaw and ravager, Peter Jason Quill (aka Star Lord), acquires an orb to sell off the markets of Xandar. When he encounters Gamora, an alien servant of Thanos; Rocket and Groot, two bounty hunters; they are arrested and meet up with Drax the Destroyer. Now the unlikely group of misfits have to find out the mysteries of the orb and stop Ronan the Accuser from getting it, and destroying the galaxy. This film has just about everything that makes a film pure enjoyment. I don’t think I can recall having this much fun with a film like this, to where I felt like a kid again, watching a comic book film in the theater for the first time. And for a film about a team coming together to stop an evil force, this film not only surpasses “The Avengers” and “X-Men: Days of Future Past,” but puts those films TO SHAME!

                Chris Pratt delivers the performance of his career as Peter Quill; after his work on “Parks and Recreation,” he has managed to go from the chubby side character, to a full blown action star in a comic book film. Hell, even the producers were impressed with his performance, since they fully admitted that whether he was in shape or not, he was awesome. His chemistry with the other Guardians really adds to the moment, whether it’d be funny or serious, he’s got it strong. Zoe Saldana also manages to rival with Pratt, in terms of performance; if “Star Trek” and “Columbiana” proved anything, it’s that she’s got the chops for an action lady of this generation. The interactions she has with Quill are really investing, as they work off of each other, since both have parallels amongst their lives. Dave Bautista as Drax also adds some greatness to the film, despite him being my least favorite of the Guardians; not that he was bad, far from it, but just that everyone else was better than him. But hey, that’s just my opinion though.

Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel as Rocket and Groot, what can I say? The two characters work off of each other so well, that you actually feel their brotherly bond throughout the course of the film. They’ll both stick up for each other, and it works for the duo of a big hulking muscle and the smart-aleck strategist. Cliché, but they manage to make it work to their fullest.

                Lee Pace as Ronan was just an excellent villain, and he manages to give off the strong intimidation of the tyrant that the character is. His presence and his actions really give off the feeling of chaos brewing in his eyes, like he’s just ready to step up from right-hand-man and crack at any moment. Other big name stars like Benicio del Toro, Glenn Close, John C. Reilly, Karen Gillian, Josh Brolin, Michael Rooker from “Slither,” and Djimon Hounsou also give off great supporting work, adding to what was already a great cast, making it even better.

                The film was written and directed by James Gunn, who is best known for “Slither,” a film which I still consider to be one of the best effects films of the past decade. While he hasn’t had the best track record in terms of writing, aside from one or two projects, this film manages to put him back on the green for me. And I have to talk about the action scenes in this film, which are some of the best I’ve seen this year, and the climax adds so much more to it. For a film I had below-average expectations for, it still manages to surprise me.

                Overall, “Guardians of the Galaxy” is a must see film, and I can’t wait for it to come out on Blu-Ray. I’m sorry, but I don’t think we’re going to top this film for Phase 2, unless “Age of Ultron” pulls a miracle. It’s the best film of the “Avengers” series, and I don’t think I could recommend it higher than what I’ve said. I mean, after seeing some of the mediocre blockbusters released this summer, this one feels like a breath of fresh air.

Rating: 10/10

Earth to Echo

                Three years ago, I, and many others, have hailed the film “Super 8” as this generation's “E.T.” And why not? It was an exciting film that really did pay homage to movies of that time period and generation, all while being its own story. People complained on how the film wasn’t really about the alien, as it was about these kids, and others have complained about why the alien was there to begin with. To those I say…fuck off. The film was successful, and is a film that defines a modern day classic. How that film didn’t get a single Oscar nomination (fuck you, “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close”) is beyond me. Now where as that film was fantastic, let’s talk about its mentally challenged cousin, “Earth to Echo.”

                “Earth to Echo” is a children’s found footage film (if you’re still reading after that part, enjoy the fun), about a group of kids who live in a smalltown in Nevada, that’s soon going to become a freeway. When their phones go out of whack, they realize it’s a map, and try to follow it before the night is over. What they find is an alien robot, and that the map leads to parts of a key to Echo’s spaceship. Now they have to assemble the key, find the spaceship, and return Echo home, before the men building the freeway find him and destroy the ship.

                Now, disregarding the fact that this is a found footage film, it still wouldn’t have made a difference on what is already a cheap knock-off of much better films, just without any heart. Throughout the course of this film, it rips off “E.T.” without question, as you can count the scenes that are directly from the film. Bike chase? Check. Shady big bad authority figures? Check. A girl tagging along the adventure? You get the picture. Hell, there’s even a scene where they capture the alien, and start to dissect it. Movie, I’ve seen “E.T!” Stop trying to pretend you are! And to make matters worse, the ending of this film, I’m not even kidding, rips off “Super 8” as well, by showing the alien ship being built by metallic crap around the neighborhood…just no. Now, I’ve said before that rip-off films can work, as long as they manage to be enjoyable in its own way, as well as have a personal image to itself. However, much like “R.I.P.D.” and “Vampire Academy” (which we’ll touch on the latter this October), it doesn’t do any of those things, and just comes off as some guy’s poor excuse to make a quick buck, without any effort put into it.

This film was also done COMPLETELY by first timers; actors, writers, editors, etc. The only experience person working on this film was Joseph Trapanese, who wrote the music to this film; and yes, there is music in this film. Now, it would have worked okay, if the music was done when someone was playing it off his or her MP3, but no…music comes out of no-where in a found footage movie…Uh, can I ask why? Why does there need to be music in a found footage film out of the blue? “Chronicle” didn’t do that; hell, NONE of the found-footage movies have ever done that, because it shows that this film just doesn’t know what it wants to be.

The acting is just lousy from…pretty much the entire cast. Throughout the film, I never felt like I was watching actual kids, as opposed to kids trying to act. They don’t do some of the things that kids normally do, and all I saw was them just playing cardboard cutouts of what characters are suppose to be. We got the mopey hero, the girlfriend, the one who can’t keep a promise, the compulsive geek, the bad guy, and top it all off with adults who are really stupid; seriously, who lets kids into a bar or even order them drinks? Surprisingly enough, the only one I actually liked was the geek, Munch, who I swear looked like the kid version of Chris Farley; did anyone else notice that, or is that just me? As for the alien, Echo…there really isn’t much to say about him at all. For a film about kids helping an alien, the alien really isn’t that memorable, despite its name being in the damn title!

If you just look at a preview for this film, with the idea in your head that it’s a found footage kids movie, then you know exactly how it’ll turn out. If you want a film to take your kids to go see, take them to “How to Train Your Dragon 2.” If they’ve already seen it, go see it again. Or better yet, wait for “Guardians of the Galaxy,” because I’m sure kids will have a blast with that as well.

Rating: 1/10

Lucy

                Luc Besson is one of the most…intriguing director/writers I’ve seen in Hollywood. Not that he’s a bad film maker, although films like “Lockout,” “From Paris With Love,” and the “Arthur and the Invisibles Trilogy” could prove me otherwise, but tends to have many ideas he wants to put in films, yet has a hard time keeping it in check. Thankfully, he has plenty of films that have worked like “The Fifth Element,” “Taken,” “The Family,” and “Leon: The Professional” showcasing that he is capable of making it work. And today, we take a look at Besson’s newest film, “Lucy.”

                The film tells of a young woman named Lucy, who is tricked into delivering a new type of drug that allows the human mind to access 100% of their brain, as opposed to the usually 10% we normally use. The deliveries are made by surgically inserting the bag into her body, but the bag soon gets opened from an injury, resulting in the drugs entering her bloodstream. Now with her mind absorbing knowledge and all kinds of new abilities, she has only 24 hours to get the remaining drugs back, and get her knowledge to the people who are studying this phenomenon.

                “Lucy” is a strange case of a film, as it has so many inventive ideas and structure going on, yet in the end it doesn't seem to find a proper footing for itself. It makes it difficult for me to talk about whether the film’s good or bad, without sounding like I’m just rambling. The best way I can describe this movie, is it’s a lot like how “Transcendence” turned out, having a good premise and ideas, but with an execution that isn’t up to par; hell, both films even have Morgan Freeman in them.

                Scarlett Johansson as the titular character, when the film was starting out, had shown the shift in tone from a ditzy blond to one so smart that she can’t feel pain or any kind of emotion; and to the film’s credit, this really did start to get me invested in her arc in the first act. Hell, that scene of her talking to her mother, saying how she’s suddenly remembering everything that happened in her life from the day she was a fetus, was actually quite touching. However, what ruins the tension is the fact that when they’re on this pursuit for the remaining drugs and facing the dealers, it isn't much of a struggle due to one detail: using more than 30% apparently gives you telekinesis. That means that Lucy is practically a superhero, so it’s hard to have that much sympathy for her, especially when they confirmed that she’ll be dead within 24 hours of the drug entering her system. The best way I can describe this is…Neo in “The Matrix,” going into the sequels afterwards. You see him in this a weaker state, only for him to become like this super being that can basically do almost anything. Hell, there’s even a scene in the film where her cop friend, played by Amr Waked, asked why she should bother keeping him with her, since she’s capable of doing pretty much everything on her own. Her response is “you’re a reminder.” A reminder for what? Humanity? If that was it, then why didn’t you just say that?

                Choi Min-sik, the guy from the original “Oldboy,” plays the drug-lord, Jang. And to his credit, he’s good with what he’s given…but that’s all he is in the film, a drug lord. Hell, we don’t even know what his backstory is, or how he was able to get such a drug like this. Was it an experimental drug that he was finally going to release to the public? How did he acquire such a drug? Question like these are never answered throughout this film.

                With all the ideas and questions behind it all, it’s hard for me to recommend this film, because of all the bat-shit insane executions that Besson gives them, which was the opposite effect that “Transcendence” had. I felt like if a different director had handled Besson’s script, it could have turned out to be a really calculative gem. However, that’s not the case. Is “Lucy” the worst film of the year? No, I’ve seen FAR worse. Is it the best? Not by a long-shot. Maybe if you can catch the film at a discount, Netflix, Redbox, or TV, then I’d say check it out. Maybe you might get a different response.

Rating: 4/10