Gideon58's Reviews

NO STRINGS ATTACHED
Despite a storyline so old and overdone it's got cobwebs growing on it, the 2011 romantic comedy No Strings Attached might be worth a look thanks to some clever dialogue and a wonderful performance from the leading lady, who makes the film seem a lot better than it is.

Adam (Ashton Kutcher) and Emma (Natalie Portman) met at summer camp when they were kids. Now Adam works on a Glee-like television show and Emma is a doctor beginning a very busy internship. The revelation that his ex-girlfriend is now dating his former television star dad, has Adam a little commitment-shy and Emma isn't exactly ready to rush into a relationship either as she feels just doesn't have the time. But she and Adam do agree to a sex-only relationship and do I really have to say anything else?

I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out what the money men behind this movie were thinking...there are at least dozen far superior movies out there with the identical storyline, including one that came out the very same year called Friends with Benefits. It's bad enough that they picked a story as old as the hills. but why do it the same year as another movie on the very same subject. I would think a second movie released the same year would mean that the second movie must have something new to bring to this plot chestnut that hasn't been explored before, but it really doesn't. And to watch the same tired plot being played out again with nothing but the names changed to protect the innocent, we get a movie that seems four hours long that was only an hour and 47 minutes.

The film does benefit from a proven comedy commodity behind the camera. Ivan Reitman has been in the director's chair for comedy classics like Ghostbusters, Stripes, and Twins and his expertise at mining laughs is a big asset that helps disguise the funny but ultimately empty screenplay by Elizabeth Meriwether, one of the creative forces behind the FOX comedy New Girl The film was a disappointment considering this kind of talent behind the camera.

One thing they did do right here was casting Natalie Portman as Emma. Portman offers a vivacious and charismatic performance that makes this film tolerable, despite the fact that Portman is way too intelligent a screen presence for this kind of silliness. Even Kutcher is less annoying than usual and laughs were also provided by Kevin Kline as Adam's dad and New Girl's Jake Johnson as Adam's BFF, but this movie takes too long to get to a conclusion we saw coming ten minutes in. Portman fans won't be disappointed, but everyone else? Approach with caution.

I liked it too, and for all the reasons you gave...plus because unlike most big budget movies these days it didn't go all bombastic.

It's another one I watched on your recommendation, Citizen...I promised to watch it after reading your review...it took me awhile but I finally got around to it and thanks.

I've been meaning to see this.

Thanks Gideon, I'm glad to hear my review thread is doing some good

I was just looking at your review thread starting at the very beginning, and you have a ton of great films reviewed here! I've watched some of them thanks to your review thread too.

Whether or not you realize it, I always check your thread with regularity and there are a least dozen reviews on my thread that only exist because I heard about the movies because I read YOUR reviews.

ROPE
The genius that was Alfred Hitchcock makes the 1948 psychological thriller Rope a lot better than it should have been.

This economic thriller, based on a play by Patrick Hamilton, is a fictionalized re-imagining of the Leopold-Loeb murder case. In this story, we are introduced to Brandon (John Dall) and Phillip (Farley Granger), who have actually just murdered a friend of theirs named David Kentley and have him stuffed in a large chest in the middle of their living room. Brandon feels the murder is "justifiable homicide" because he feels David is their "intellectual inferior", but Phillip is racked with guilt about what they have done and wants to take it all back as soon as it happens. Brandon is not only guilt-free, but doubly excited about the dinner party they are about to throw, where the guest list includes David's parents, his girlfriend, and a former college professor of Brandon and Phillips named Rupert Cadell (James Stewart). Brandon is so stoked about doing this, he even moves the table settings for dinner from the dining room to on top of the chest.

Through the screenplay credited to Ernest Lehman, Hume Cronyn is credited with "adapting" the piece from Hamilton's play (whatever that means), is a little on the talky side, it does provide us with a couple of flawed and fascinating protagonists in the form of Brandon and Phillip. Brandon, in particular, holds a morbid fascination for the audience with his passion regarding murder as sport and the validity of such passion. Even though the idea of murder as sport is rather twisted, it's not nearly as twisted as Brandon's heinous justification for this crime...it would have been one thing if he and David had gotten in a struggle with a gun and it went off accidentally or if David was killed in self-defense, but to commit murder because the victim is your intellectual inferior is disgusting and cannot be rationalized in any way.

But this is where Hitchcock's skill at cinematic storytelling kicks in...he manages to tell an unappealing story that only has limited appeal as a story, again, because of the heinous nature of this crime. Hitchcock and Lehman accomplish this by having David remain a viable character throughout the story. Once the dinner party commences, David is the center of conversation and everyone wants to know why he's late. The actor who plays David even receives top billing in the closing credits. Hitchcock also effectively uses his camera to tell the story...one of my favorite scenes in the film is when Rupert is recounting what he thinks happened to David and instead of the camera being on Rupert, the camera is flowing all over the room, documenting what happened, and you just KNOW this is exactly what happened.

I can't let this review go without commenting about the relationship between Brandon and Phillip that is established. Even though there is nothing overt in the screenplay regarding the nature of their relationship, it's pretty obvious that Brandon and Phillip are lovers, something you didn't see a lot of onscreen in the late 40's. It's quietly confirmed in the way their housekeeper, Mrs. Wilson, talks to them. Hitchcock doesn't shy away from it, but doesn't shove it in the faces of the audience either. Though the relationship between Brandon and Phillip does come up in the documentary The Celluloid Closet, which examines the history of homosexuality in the movies.

I believe this was the first teaming of Hitchcock and Jimmy Stewart and you can see why he quickly became one of Hitch's favorite leading men and Jon Dall is quietly brilliant as Brandon. Sometimes Granger is a little hard to take as Phillip, but the performance fits the character...you expect the guy to evaporate into a pool of water at any second. Kudos to the set director for the stylish apartment that is the setting for the film and to Hitchcock's inspired decision to use almost no musical score...this movie didn't need one. Once again Hitch proves why he was the man and why he never won an Oscar continues to be the greatest mystery to most film historians.

I agree with much of your review And yes the apartment set was nicely done by the art department, which is important, as we never leave that room.

I thought John Dall was superb, but I wasn't a big fan of Granger...and as much as I like Jimmy Stewart I feel he was poorly cast and didn't fit the personality of his character. I would have preferred Montgomery Clift in Granger's role and James Mason in Stewart's role.

I like the idea of Clift in Granger's role, I don't know about James Mason though.

I owe Rope a rewatch, also because I've only seen it once, but it didn't quite work for me... I liked the idea though. It's also almost too much of a Hitch-perfect storyline... People hiding bodies "in plain sight" for a certain almost too planned out line of suspense...

__________________
/watching movies for mark f/
MovieMeditation's Cinema Reviews // Film Diary 2015 // Letterboxd Profile // MovieMeditation's Top 50 Horror

The tension in that movie nearly killed me. My favourite Hitchcock film.

Agreed. Rope was very underwhelming after everything i'd heard about it. Not that i disliked it mind you.

THE NOTEBOOK
Experiencing it more than a decade after its release, I was curious to see if 2004's The Notebook would live up to its reputation as a cult classic in the romance genre and I am happy to report that it did in spades.

This star-crossed romance with a contemporary face lift opens with a nursing home resident (the late James Garner) visiting another resident (Gena Rowlands) and continuing to read a story to her that he apparently started long before our story begins. We then flashback to a 1940's summer where a young factory worker named Noah (Ryan Gosling) meets and is instantly entranced by a beauty named Allie (Rachel McAdams) at a local carnival. After a rocky start, Noah and Allie fall in love but are eventually torn apart by Allie's wealthy family who use the excuse that she is going to college in New York as justification to keep her away from Noah, who they merely consider trailer trash and not worthy of their daughter.

Based on a bestseller by Nicholas Sparks, this riveting love story found memories of movies like Gone with the Wind, Splendor in the Grass,The Way We Were, and Titanic coming to mind as we watched two people experience immediate sparks but are kept apart by various forms of circumstance and even though we are completely behind this romance from the beginning, we know the road to their happiness is going to get ugly. This is confirmed when we are informed through Garner's narration when the couple finally admits to being in love with each other, but we're only twenty minutes into the film.

Director Nick Cassavetes, whose previous directorial credits include action-filled dramas like Alpha Dog, surprises with a delicate hand at mounting a romantic melodrama that provides all the classic landmarks in a story but provides a few surprises along the way as well. Cassavetes reveals a sharp eye for what is romantic and erotic without being tasteless...the scene of their first attempt at lovemaking in an empty house where she is tentatively removing her clothes and with every piece she removes, he rips something off or their canoe ride where they caught in the rain are undeniably moving...Cassavetes brings a surprising sensitivity to the sexy here and leaves us wanting more.

Needless to say, the film is given a huge boost by the magical performances by the leads. With each performance of his, Ryan Gosling continues to prove that he is more than a pretty face and lovely body, delivering a performance of charm and strength that puts us completely behind the character. Rachel McAdams, another actress who I always thought was a one-trick pony like Amy Adams, is an effervescent leading lady who keeps this character likable despite some unlikable behavior in her character. James Marsden trues to come between our stars the same way he tried to break up Amy Adams and Patrick Dempsey in Enchanted. The late Sam Shepherd scores as Noah's dad and there is a razor sharp turn from the always watchable Joan Allen as Allie's mother.

Of course, Garner and Rowlands are absolutely heartbreaking and the film is beautifully mounted. There is exquisite attention to period detail and I must applaud Robert Frasee's cinematography, Chuck Potter's set direction, and Karyn Wagner's lovely period costumes. If you're a fan of romantic melodrama, this is a classic not to be missed.

Neighbors 2 Sorority Rising
Neighbors 2 Sorority Rising is the disastrously tasteless and unfunny sequel to the 2014 film that is further documentation as to why sequels are methodically destroying Hollywood. It's a sad state of affairs when they start making sequels to movies that weren't the least bit funny and, therefore, completely unworthy of a sequel.

Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne return as Mac and Kelly Radner who, after their battle with the off the chain fraternity in the first film, are now pregnant with their second child and in escrow on selling their house when they learn that the house inhabited by the fraternity in the first film has now been purchased by a group of girls who want to start their own sorority because sororities are not allowed to party. The girls know nothing about starting a sorority but an assist from first film refugee Teddy Sanders (Zac Efron) whose life has gotten pathetic since the first film and decides to help the girls, partially as a method of getting back at the Radners.

Revenge is not an uncommon theme for sequels, but the silly and implausible screenplay by Andrew Jay Cohen and Brendon O'Brien carves a wide birth of credibility in order to make this story viable. not to mention the suspension of disbelief. It was really hard to wrap my head around the fact that after everything that happened in the first film, that a sorority would be allowed to move into the exact same house, with 19 year old girls wreaking twice the havoc that the guys did in the first film. I also found the bonding of Teddy and Radners a little hard to believe as well. I was also a little disappointed that, I'm guessing in an attempt to mine more laughs, they made a major change in Efron's character...the character was kind of a psychopath in the first film, but he had a brain. His brain has been completely removed for this film. There is an actual scene in the film where Rogen actually teaches Efron how to hard boil eggs and Efron burns his fingers because he didn't realize the water would be hot.

Nicholas Stoller, whose previous work with Jason Segel, has provided some relatively solid entertainment in the past, needed a more iron hand over these wacky proceedings and I use the word "wacky" kindly. Rogen and Efron work very hard to be funny and Rose Byrne continues to be the unfunniest actress to continually be cast in comedy films. Ike Barinholtz manages to steal a laugh here and there and there are couple of fun albeit brief cameos from Kelsey Grammer and Lisa Kudrow, but I really have to give this one a pass...as sequels go, this one rates right up there with Sex and the City 2.

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2
As far as sequels go, there is a lot worse stuff out there than 2014's The Amazing Spider-Man 2, and it scores in terms of intentions, but it suffers due to an overly intricate screenplay that doesn't really address everything it should.

The film opens as expected with Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield) easing into his role as a crime fighter despite media speculation about his motives (something that should have been addressed in the first film) while finally coming to learn the truth about his father (Campbell Scott) and why his work led to his eventual death and how his work is connected to an unexpected villain in this piece that we really don't see initially, other than the geeky, desperately needy Oscorp electrician (Oscar winner Jamie Foxx) whose accident turns him into what appears to be the villain, but really isn't at all. We also see Peter haunted by the words of Captain Stacy (Denis Leary), who he promised that he would stay away from daughter Gwen (Oscar winner Emma Stone) in order to keep her safe.

The screenplay by Alex Kurtzman and Robert Orci is the source of everything that is right with this movie and everything that is wrong. I like that it addresses things from the first film, like Spidey's promise to Captain Stacy and I also like the way it separates this franchise from the Sam Raimi franchise by re-thinking relationships established by Raimi and company and still keeping them viable, primarily the relationship between Peter and Harry Osborn, which was a prominent part of the Raimi franchise, but it is approached from a different angle for this movie which is equally as compelling. On the other hand, the story is slowed to distraction with Peter's relationship with Aunt May, which is lovely on the surface, and the little she reveals about Peter's parents became unnecessary when Peter finally sees the tape of his father. Not to mention...this guy is a superhero, why is he still living with his aunt? That scene arguing over him or her doing his laundry was a silly waste of screentime. I also like the way the screenplay really established Oscorp as the villain, not Electro.

Director Marc Webb still knows how to mount viable action sequences, but the problematic screenplay made some of it seem superfluous. Some of the production values also de-valued the work of some of the actors' work as well. Jamie Foxx was initially fun as Max, but his performance gets buried under CGI technique when the character becomes Electro, though the sequence where he undergoes the change was absolutely spectacular. Garfield and Stone still delivered chemistry as Peter and Gwen, but Foxx was wasted and Dane DeHaan's Harry Osborn didn't work for me either, but there is entertainment value here, even if you have to mine for it a little.

SHOW BOAT (1951)
MGM brought their patented gloss to the 1951 version of Show Boat, the third film version of the legendary Broadway musical that actually premiered onstage in 1927. This splashy and colorful version works thanks to a story that still engages the audience and a perfect cast.

Based on a novel by Edna Ferber, this musical broke a lot of ground back in the 20's because it brought subject matter to the stage that hadn't been addressed such as gambling and racism. Needless to say, the subject matter was a little easier to take thanks to its cushion of a memorable music score by Jerome Kern and Oscar Hammerstein II.

In 1946, MGM produced a lavish revue saluting the life and music of Kern called Til the Clouds Roll By which concluded with a medley of songs from Show Boat and the success of this musical finale was most likely the inspiration of this lavish third and final film remake.

This is the story of the Cotton Blossom, a riverboat run by Captain Andy (Joe E.. Brown) and his wife, Parthy(Agnes Moorhead), that is actually home for a theatrical troupe that travel from port to port playing to sold out audiences. Upon arrival at one port, it is revealed that the show's headliner, the vivacious Julie LaVerne (Ava Gardner) is half-black and is married to a white man and at this time, interracial marriage was still against the law so Julie and her husband Steve (Robert Sterling) are fired. Enter Gaylord Ravenal (Howard Keel), a professional gambler who is immediately smitten with Andy and Parthy's daughter, Magnolia (Kathryn Grayson) so he pretends to be an actor in order to romance Magnolia. It works, they're married but their happiness is short-lived.

In addition to the score, Jerome Kern also provided the screenplay for this classic story and with lyricist Oscar Hammerstein II, provided one of the most lyrical scores ever written for a musical. The iconic score includes "Who Cares if My Boat Goes Upstream?", "Make Believe", "You are Love", "I Might Fall Back on You", "Can't Help Lovin Dat Man", "Bill" and, of course, "Ol Man River".

This film marked the first screen pairing of Howard Keel and Kathryn Grayson and they are just magical together....their vocal chemistry is just as strong as their screen chemistry. They made such an impression here that MGM reunited them for two more films, Kiss Me Kate and Lovely to Look At. Ava Gardner, never a favorite of mine, really lights up the screen here as Julie and makes every moment onscreen count, even her musical ones, even if she is dubbed by Annette Warren. The dubbing is beautifully done. Personally, I would have loved to have seen Lena Horne play Julie, who sang her songs in Til the Clouds Roll By, but casting Horne in that role in the 50's would have cost the film a lot of bookings in the south so TPTB went with Gardner.

The film also features an early appearance from a couple once touted to be the next Astaire and Rogers, Marge and Gower Champion, who provide a couple of spectacular dance numbers. As expected with an MGM musical, the settings and costumes are breathtaking and a perfect backdrop for this enchanting musical valentine.

NO RESERVATIONS
Despite a hard working cast, the 2007 comedy No Reservations ultimately doesn't quite measure up due to a rampantly predictable story and a couple of very unappealing central characters.

The film stars Oscar winner Catherine Zeta-Jones as Kate, an accomplished gourmet chef at a trendy Greenwich Village eaterie whose busy job and empty life are thrown a complicated curve when she is made guardian of her niece, Zoe (Abigail Breslin) when Kate's sister dies in a car accident. When Kate takes a little time off to get Zoe settled into her new life, another chef named Nick (Aaron Eckhart) is brought in to temporarily pinch hit for Kate and unwittingly threatens Kate's job and pretty much her entire existence.

The primary problem with Carol Fuchs and Sandra Nettlebeck's conventional screenplay is that the two characters at the core of the story are pretty unlikable making it very difficult for this reviewer to invest in the slow burn of a relationship that is supposed to develop between them. I think everyone knows or has worked with someone like Kate...she is an ice queen all about her job, intimidates her kitchen staff with her no-nonsense approach to her work and is convinced that whenever she's not there, the place falls apart. Near the beginning of the film, Kate is observed balking when she is asked to come out of the kitchen to speak to regular customers who want to compliment her food, but later when customers want to compliment Nick on his cooking, she blows a gasket. It should also be mentioned that Kate is in therapy but never reveals anything resembling genuine feelings. Though it is amusing when she tries serving Zoe the kind of food she cooks at the restaurant and Zoe won't touch it.

Zoe is no prize either...she makes her aunt work extremely hard for her affection, initially thumbing her nose up at anything Aunt Kate tries to do to make her comfortable. She begins to thaw when Kate offers to take her to work with her, but when that gets Kate in trouble, she turns the tables on Kate, blaming her and having a fit when her attempts to push Kate and Nick together don't instantly work. Zoe displays behavior most parents would not put up with but is given slack when she whines that she misses her mother. For a grade school child, this girl is surprisingly manipulative and very into disappearing for no other reason than to scare the hell out of Aunt Kate.

The only saving grace in this story is Nick, an utterly charming and gracious guy who is as talented in the kitchen as Kate is, but that's where the similarity ends...the guy knows how to have fun, instantly connects with Zoe, and treats Kate with the respect her job deserves, even when he is offered said job.

Zeta-Jones works very hard to make this character appealing but she is fighting the script all the way. Breslin, fresh off her Oscar-nominated performance in Little Miss Sunshine does some solid work, but her character's behavior sometimes makes it hard to notice. I also enjoyed the always watchable Patricia Clarkson as Kate's boss and Bob Balaban as Kate's shrink, but it is Aaron Eckhart's Nick that is the glue that makes this film worth sitting through. Eckhart creates a charming and very sexy character who makes us laugh at him and fall in love with him mainly because he's the only character who makes all the right moves. Unfortunately, Eckhart's work is not enough to make this completely work.

HEAVEN CAN WAIT (1943)
Stylish fast-paced direction by the legendary Ernst Lubitsch, a witty screenplay and a terrific cast combine to make Heaven Can Wait the classic it deserves to be.

This film has nothing to do with the 1978 Warren Beatty film, which is a remake of Here Comes Mr. Jordan. This film opens with the recently deceased Henry Van Cleve arriving at the gates of Hell and explaining to Satan why he thinks he belongs there. The film then flashes back to turn of the century Manhattan where we meet Henry's family, a wealthy and tightly-knit family who spend a lot of time catering to the womanizing playboy Henry. Henry's self-proclaimed power over women seems to be confirmed when he steals his cousin's fiancee, Martha, right from under his nose. The film then provides an overview of Henry and Martha's 25-year marriage, which wasn't exactly roses and cotton candy.

This delightful comedy is anchored by a rock solid screenplay by Samson Raphaelson, rich with adult humor that is well serviced by Lubitsch, who received an Oscar nomination for his work here. The idea of a man arriving at the gates of hell demanding entry is an intriguing one and even though we seriously doubt that this charming man belongs in hell. it's clear that he does and we can't wait to hear his side of the story. The opening scenes allegedly documenting Henry's power over women aren't really necessary but they are economical and don't get in the way of the primary delicious story.

Lubitsch works wonders with what was clearly a hand-picked cast, all working at the top of their game. Don Ameche turns in a slick and charming performance as Henry, a devilish rake who remains completely lovable for the entire running time and he is perfectly complimented by the breathtaking Gene Tierney, whose lovely Martha proves to be more than the shrinking violet who initially enters the story. It's so much fun when Martha reveals that Henry is not as clever at hiding his scandalous side as he thought he was. Charles Coburn delivers his accustomed scene stealing turn as Henry's grandfather and Louis Calhern and Spring Byington were fun as Henry's parents. There are also a pair of scene-stealing performances from Marjorie Main and Eugene Pallette as Martha's parents, who actually have the movie's funniest scene, which deals with spoiler alerts and the funny papers.

The film also features first rate production values, including Oscar-nominated cinematography, meticulous art direction/set direction and some really stunning costumes and was there anyone who adorned period costumes better than Gene Tierney? An absolute delight from start to finish that provided equal parts belly laughs and warm sentiment.

ZOOTOPIA
The Oscar Winner for Outstanding Animated Feature of 2016, Zootopia is a colorful and endlessly imaginative valentine to television and film police dramas that takes familiar movie themes from other genres but establishes its own credentials as an independent work by making all the characters animals working out of their natural place in the animal kingdom.

This is the story of Judy Hopps (voiced by Ginnifer Goodwin), a passionate young rabbit who wants to step out of the shadow of her farmer parents (voiced by Don Lake and Bonnie Hunt) and decides to leave the quiet little hamlet of her birth called Bunny Burrow and attend the police academy in the giant metropolis of Zootopia. Upon graduation, Judy excitedly reports for police duty but is dejected when she is assigned meter maid duties. She still decides to to be the best meter maid on the planet, but is eventually given the chance to solve a missing persons case with the aid of a slick hustling fox named Nick (Jason Bateman) but the case turns out to be so much more.

Screenwriters Byron Howard and Rich Moore (Moore also provides the voice of Doug) have constructed the accustomed overly complex screenplay that we have come to expect from Disney. This screenplay is inspired by several television and movie dramas of the past but it is inspiration only as the characters here are all animals and the writers never forget that. As in a lot of Disney stories, this story does present animals who should be natural enemies, like the rabbit and the fox, and has them learning how to peacefully co-exist, but this story adds an additional layer to this through line for the characters by also exploring the difference between animals who are predators and ones who are prey, something never addressed in such a direct manner before to my knowledge, making for an intriguing underlying theme for the story. Have to give a special shout out to the scene in the DMV...just brilliant.

I also love the care and originality put into establishing the central character of Judy Hopps...we first observe Judy in school participating in a school play where the major theme is that anyone can be anything they want to be. It's so obvious as we watch Judy's excitement in what she's doing on this stage, that this school play was her creation, she's not just an actor cast in a part, made all the more believable by the audience's half-hearted reception to the performance, a funny bit I didn't see coming. I also loved the viable chemistry that is generated between Judy and Nick...I'm always blown away when I feel actually chemistry between animated characters but it happens here big time.

The look of this film is absolutely dazzling with some dizzying camerawork, if you can call it that. There are moments during Judy's train trip to Zootopia where I actually got a little dizzy and the city itself was breathtaking. Goodwin and Bateman are superb as our star-crossed animals and mention should also be made of Idris Elba as the police chief, JK Simmons as the Mayor, Nate Torrence as Clawhauser, and Jenny Slate as the Mayor's assistant. Despite an extra ending or two, this film was a joy that completely enveloped me. I don't admit it very often, but this is one Oscar the Academy got right.

LUCY
The 2014 spectacle Lucy is an intriguing premise that sadly gets buried behind a lot of cinematic smoke and mirrors that consistently challenge viewer attention span.

The film stars Scarlett Johanssen as a young woman in Taiwan who inadvertently finds herself involved with some powerful drug dealers who force her to be a drug mule by placing the drugs in her stomach surgically, but the effects that this drug have on our heroine after she attempts to remove them are something she can't explain, rationalize, or escape from.

Director screenwriter Luc Besson (The Fifth Element; The Professional) has taken an interesting idea for a movie and given us an overblown and over stylized story beyond the realm of true entertainment value and into the territory of muddled confusion and occasional boredom.

Virgin cinematic territory is definitely approached here where the scientific fact that human beings only utilize ten percent of their brain capacity and what would happen if they used more than that is explored. Once the drug has been removed from Lucy's body, it is revealed that her brain is working at 20% capacity and that the growth has not stopped so she seeks help from a renowned scientist who specializes in the study of the brain (Morgan Freeman).

This film alienates the viewer from jump by setting the story in Taiwan and forcing the viewer to deal with a lot of characters who don't speak English, which adds an appropriate tension to Lucy's story in some places, making her seem more alone in this, but most of the time, it was just an annoyance that added to the confusion of what was going on. The story offers connection to evolution and what is happening to Lucy that seem to slow down the story and though a connection is eventually provided, it just takes a little too long to get there. Johanssen presents an initially interesting character who eventually disappears in a cloud of fancy editing and visual effects. There's a lot of technical expertise involved in the execution of this story, sadly the story and its entertainment value are sacrificed in the process.