Prayer Focus
Click here to watch THE HOPE on-line!
Movie Review

Lucy

MPAA Rating: R for strong violence, disturbing images, and sexuality.

Reviewed by: Pamela Gardner
CONTRIBUTOR

Extremely Offensive
Add to your list?
View your list
Moviemaking Quality:

Primary Audience:
Adults
Genre:
Sci-Fi Action Thriller
Length:
1 hr. 29 min.
Year of Release:
2014
USA Release:
July 25, 2014 (wide—3,200+ theaters)
DVD: January 20, 2015
Copyright, Universal Pictures click photos to ENLARGE Copyright, Universal Pictures Copyright, Universal Pictures Copyright, Universal Pictures Copyright, Universal Pictures Copyright, Universal Pictures Copyright, Universal Pictures
Relevant Issues
Copyright, Universal Pictures

getting revenge

Is it really true that humans only actively use 10% of their brains? Answer

Is everything possible when you open your mind?

FILM VIOLENCE—How does viewing violence in movies affect families? Answer

true wisdom

Featuring: Scarlett JohanssonLucy
Morgan FreemanProfessor Norman
Analeigh Tipton … Actress
Min-sik Choi … Kang
Amr Waked … Actor
Pilou Asbæk … Richard
more »
Director: Luc Besson
Producer: EuropaCorp
TF1 Films Production
Distributor: Universal Pictures

“Life was given to us a billion years ago, what have we done with it?”

“Lucy” opens with this line and shows an alleged pre-human ape-like creature (Lucy) drinking water from a stream. We then travel forward “billions” of years to modern day China and meet the present-day Professor Norman (Morgan Freeman), talking about Darwinian evolutionary theory. He expounds on the “fact” of Darwin’s theory and states how we are merely cosmic accidents, no different than earthworms and time and passing on our genes is our only purpose. He then talks about his own pet theory regarding humans’ usage of our cerebral capacity. He then claims that dolphins use more than humans and their ability to use more is because they developed it over alleged millions of years. Professor Norman then puts forth the question of the hour “How can human access more of our cerebral capacity?”

Introduce the modern day Lucy (Scarlett Johansson), arguing with her boyfriend about a case. He wants her to deliver a mysterious case into a building. He cuffs it to her; she then has no choice but to make the drop. She is then surrounded by some very intimidating and dangerous men. They take her to meet the boss, and we learn that the case contains a new synthetic drug. The boss then turns Lucy into a drug mule by surgically implanting the drugs in her lower abdomen.

Before being sent, she is placed in a holding cell where the criminals beat up Lucy and with a swift kick to the lower abdomen and the drug bag leaks and the drug make its way through her blood stream. She goes through a pseudo-exorcism style trip. She then emerges enlightened and now has begun to access secret knowledge as untapped regions of her brain are now open to her.

If you watch the trailer, none of this is new. I firmly believe movies are sermons with pictures, and this movie definitely preaches “Evolution.”

The acting is lame to average. The star of the film is not any of the actors. The star is the Evolution plot and the idea that with enough secret knowledge humans can be become like God. The lie is as old as time itself, Genesis in the Garden of Eden to be exact. Like it says in Ecclesiastes 1:9, what has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

The entire film is objectionable—from the opening line to closing credits. I’ll move from least to most. There is alcohol use, and drugs are portrayed as a gateway to further your own enlightenment, as shown in the film “Limitless.”

The language is moderate to heavy with OMGs (3), hell (2), damn (1), sh** (4), a** (4), and a possible f-word. Next is the sex/nudity, they show animals and humans having sex with no distinction between animals and humans. The film presents Darwin’s theory as unquestionable fact. Humans are just animals, not special, not created; God and religion are created by man. Life has no meaning outside of reproduction, and through accessing more of our cerebral capacity (self evolving). The big bang, “goo to you via the zoo” or frog to prince evolutionary story is played as the humanistic version of the origin of man, it’s all presented in a religious fashion.

Now for the truth, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the Earth” (Genesis 1:1). Creation took place in the beginning and was finished and complete. Creation was not spread out over a major portion of the supposed evolutionary vast time history of the universe. Creation was by the word of the Creator. The Creator spoke things into existence. In Genesis 1, we read a series of “And God said” statements. Also, we read in Psalm 33:6 and 33:9, “By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.” Biblical creation is also creation ex nihilo. First there was nothing and then there was something. No time was involved. Thus the concept of an actual, historical creation identifies the Creator.

The second point is that Creation identifies man. Man is not just a body—not just a stack of chemicals that arrived by natural processes. Yes, man does have a body, but he also has a mind and a spirit (Genesis 1:26–27 says,

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”

Genesis 1 states that God specially created the first male and female in His own image. Jesus Christ restated that the first couple were created “at the beginning,” not from apes. Despite some anatomical similarities among all mammals, it is easy to distinguish humans. Perhaps the most offensive feature of evolutionism to Bible-believing Christians is the belief that humans have evolved by natural processes from apes. In the evolutionary view, moreover, man was not the goal of Evolution but a mere happenstance. This stands in startling contrast to the biblical declaration that humans were specially created in the image of God—see: www.answersingenesis.org

Is there fossil evidence of “missing links” between humans and apes? Answer

Click to learn about ADAM, the first manWhat was Adam, the first man, really like? Discover the fascinating facts about this unique man from whom we are all descended! Answer

I do not recommend film, however I do challenge Christians to inform themselves on the Creation vs. Evolution debate, and learn to defend the Bible from the very first verse.

Violence: Extreme—bloody shootings, punching woman till unconscious, repeatedly kicking woman’s surgical abdominal wound shown both externally and internally, digging out a bullet from shoulder wound, bloody surgeries, impalements, etc. / Profanity: Moderate / Sex/Nudity: Heavy—animals and people mating, man puts hand into woman’s bra sexually, lascivious scenes and talk (without nudity), women in bras, cleavage, classic painting of fully nude man

Creation SuperLibrary.comTop choice for accurate, in-depth information on Creation/Evolution. The SuperLibrary is provided by a top team of experts from various respected creationist organizations who answer your questions on a wide variety of topics. Multilingual.

See list of Relevant Issues—questions-and-answers.


Viewer CommentsSend your comments
Comments below:
Positive
Positive—I wasn’t sure about seeing this after the reviews here. But I seen it anyways and must say I was very much entertained. I don’t think it’s as terrible as it’s being said it is. I can agree that obviously it’s not a Christian movie, going by the fact evolution is a big factor throughout it. I’ll explain at the end of this review, since I will have to post spoilers (I’ll warn you first). There is violence since it’s an action movie. Nothing extremely graphic. However, bullet wounds are shown, and you do see a surgical cut a few times. There was some swearing. And, in one case, Lucy’s breast is groped (you don’t literally see the breast), but you see a man’s hand down her shirt.

As a Christian, I wasn’t to offended since the movie wasn’t too bad for a R rated movie. The movie was good for being as short as it was, but the ending was really confusing for some people I noticed. I understood it and everything that was shown. And while a lot of the movie was comedic, some may find the talking scenes a bit confusing or boring, since it feels like you’re listening to someone who’s a rocket scientist. I enjoyed the movie also because it was by Luc Benson, the guy who made “The Fifth Element.” more »
My Ratings: Moral rating: Very Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 4½
—Mat, age 32 (USA)
Positive— Agree that a lot of what is happening to Lucy in the film is left untold. But there are explanations that can be drawn as to what is happening in end and through the latter half of the movie. Some of the ideas seem to come from Asian philosophies—Dvaitam, Advaitam, etc. …
My Ratings: Moral rating: Average / Moviemaking quality: 3½
—Tivep, age 35 (Singapore)
Neutral
Neutral—…This movie portrays the biological mind as so powerful that it literally overwhelms Lucy’s soul. My advice: Sit back, try to ignore the graphic violence that has become so much the film-making fashion these days, and enjoy the intellectual stimulation provided by the story. And remember, in the end, your soul controls your brain, not the other way around.
My Ratings: Moral rating: Average / Moviemaking quality: 4½
—Ian, age 45 (USA)
Neutral—“Lucy” stands for “Lucifer.” This movie is, as most movies are these days, made by the Satanists who run this Devil’s world. This one talks about the supposed power of Satan. It tries to prove that Satan, or Lucifer, is all powerful, is everywhere, and is all-knowing. We all know this is a lie. Only God is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. But the Satanists put a lot of effort into selling this idea, because they worship Lucifer. There’s no future in that. One thing the luciferians are good at is lying, and they are obviously lying about the human race starting out as apes or monkeys or the like. That’s been disproven.

The movie reminded me of “Pulp Fiction,” and there was the same kind of macabre humor. The effects were fantastic, and I liked Scarlet Johansson in the lead role. If you get squeamish at bloody or gross things, prepare to momentarily turn away. These types of parts don’t last to long, as compared to a lot of the moves out these days (e.g., “Man of Steel”). more »
My Ratings: Moral rating: Average / Moviemaking quality: 4½
—Alex, age 29 (USA)
Negative
Negative—I was disappointed with this film. I like Luc Besson and enjoyed “La Femme Nikita” and “The Professional” is one of my favorites. This one was lacking. It was reminiscent of “The Professional” with the slow motion full on onslaught in the final battle between the opposing sides. Even as they walked in, it just struck me in the similarities between “Lucy” and “The Professional.” Yet it lacked the human element that “The Professional” had—where you care and have a vested interest in the characters. Where love and compassion and family are key.

One aspect that was very disappointing was the evolutionary point of view. The ideology of billions of years and man evolving from animal and the big bang. I didn't care for the interspersed shots of animals (especially animals mating) that gave it a documentary feel during those shots. I got the point—the link to animalistic behavior, evolutionary beginnings, etc., I just didn't care for it.

The ending was a let down and an easy way out in the story telling. Where you can see Luc Besson's style, it wasn't enough for this film. I preferred the movie “Limitless,” also a film about a drug that enhances the capabilities of the human mind. Or if you prefer to stick with a Luc Besson film, “The Professional,” while an older film, and in spite of it's violence, is a much better film with more of an endearing message.
My Ratings: Moral rating: Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 3
—Andrea, age 41 (USA)
Negative—One word, Silly! Apart from the violence and gore which the main review already mentioned, the evolutionary propaganda is off the charts! The name “Lucy” is clearly meant to be a contrast between Lucy the ape, that evolutionists believe is the “missing link” to humans and the “Lucy” that humans could become if/when we learn to use 100% of our brain; in essence “God!” Yes, we would become God! Does this remind you of a certain scripture in the Bible? (Hint: Genesis 3:5). The oldest, musty, dusty lie from Satan that he has been selling since the beginning.

***SPOILER*** According to the movie, if/when humans learn to use 100% of our brain we will be able to manipulate matter, including our own and that of other people such that we can control everything and everyone around us, and even disappear into cosmic nothingness and become omnipresent and omniscient! ***END SPOILER***

I don’t think that the makers of this movie thought the premise through however; if everyone were like God then who would ultimately be God? I guess the strongest God would win; Survival of the fittest God I suppose! As Ricky Ricardo would say, “Lucy, you have some splaining to do!” As another commentator mentioned, the premise sounded good and sounded a lot like the movie “Limitless,” which was a little more believable regarding what humans could do if we would just use a little more grey matter!

Save your money on this one, it’s just silly!
My Ratings: Moral rating: Very Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 4
—RD, age 45 (USA)
Negative—There is violence, brutality—it is not a happy movie. It is like “Payback” meets “The Matrix” meets “Limitless” with a little “Akira” mixed in. The ending punchline was uninspired… it is like a two year old counting “one” “two” “three” “infinity”.

The introduction to the movie requires drug smuggling, murder, kidnapping, implicit sexual trade, surgically turning unwilling people into drug mules, and gross, heartless violence by both the bad guys and the main character. The main character goes through what is arguably a demonic transformation—losing the capacity for compassion and empathy while gaining increasing levels of superhuman supernatural powers.

The things that most characteristically define the nature of the work of God—love, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness… —things that are meaningless outside the context of community—are what she loses first, and most completely. Her character is lionized for it.

The entire movie is self-focused. This is great marketing to a culture that is pathologically narcissistic. The entire focus of the movie is about her powers, her abilities, her actions, her powers.

I STRONGLY recommend AGAINST bringing young women under 15 to this movie. This movie, while not X-rated, requires substantial emotional maturity to handle the abuse and violence shown. I would not be comfortable seeing it again, and I would recommend against my wife or daughters ever seeing it. This is a rough movie. It is one of the hardest shows to endure that I have seen in my life.
My Ratings: Moral rating: Extremely Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 4
—Michael Munroe, age 40 (USA)
Negative—The movie served its purpose as what it was meant to be: entertainment. With that said, however, I would agree that the film pushed Darwinist theory. Perhaps the most offensive part of the movie was the punchline, where Lucy exclaims, “I’m Everywhere.” I would hope that this would be extremely offensive to those who celebrate Christianity, as I do. There is only One Deity who is omnipresent, and that is God/Christ.
My Ratings: Moral rating: Extremely Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 4
—Joe, age 59 (USA)
Negative—This is an “The Emperor’s New Clothes” movie. If you say you don’t like it, then you must be an anti-evolution, religious fanatic. I’ll chance it. The movie started as a cross between “Kill Bill, ” “The 5th Element, ” and one of the Bourne movies. The R-rating is more for violence and bloodshed, and there is quite a bit. I thought the lead did a very good job of being a scared person in a bad situation. But as she felt less emotion, there was no real point. The whole evolution side bar seemed so forced and more a way to get the movie to be long enough to charge you $10 to see it. So I wasn’t offended at the content, I was offended at how bad it was.
My Ratings: Moral rating: Very Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 2
—Bob, age 50 (USA)
Negative—Overall, I didn’t like this movie very much. The plot made little sense, nothing was explained… and yes, as others have pointed out, it preaches Evolution like it’s going out of style. But here, let me summarize in… three sentences what was wrong with this movie.

1. Lucy is a girl who ends up getting kidnapped, and a bag of drugs sown inside her, making her an unwitting mule.
2. When she gets kicked in the stomach a few times, the drugs rupture, she becomes able to access more of her brain, and immediately becomes smart enough to take on James Bond—being able to formulate plans, kill everyone in a room with a few pistol shots through a door, read Chinese automatically, diagnose advanced medical conditions by looking at an MRI…
3. ***SPOILER*** And yet she’s not smart enough to kill the brutal crime lord who had her kidnapped when she confronts him in his apartment.
My Ratings: Moral rating: Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 3½
—Andrew, age 23 (USA)
Negative—To be completely honest, this movie disappointed me. In the beginning, when Mr. Norman was explaining the idea of accessing certain percentages of your brain, I found the idea completely illogical, but quite different. However, as the movie continued, no logic behind the idea was explained, and I started to realize that the movie became less and less original. Psychological thrillers, drugs, magic, time travel—everything mashed together and made the story seem like a copy of every other famous movie I’ve seen.

About the acting: boring, too. Scarlett Johansson was a fierce, hot lady without facial expressions, whose role could have been acted by anyone else, and Morgan Freeman was a wise, old man, just like in every other movie he has ever done. This is my opinion, but if you liked the movie, I totally respect that.
My Ratings: Moral rating: Extremely Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 3
—Josh, age 26 (USA)
Movie Critics

Eye candy can't distract from idiotic execution of a fun idea.
—John DeFore, The Hollywood Reporter

…shiny, silly film …Ridiculous, incoherent but pretty entertaining… Given what she’s working with, Johansson does an amazing job of providing a centre to all these fevered montages and half-cooked ideas. [2½/4]
—Liam Lacey, The Globe and Mail

“Lucy” lets Darwinism run amok… Although Besson… indulges in some operatic violence, the film is more spacey than pacey. He cherry-picks elements from “The Tree of Life” and “The Lawnmower Man” and mashes them into a macabre concoction that looks cool but isn’t meant to be digested…
—Joe Williams, St. Louis Post-Dispatch

…In the end, “Lucy” is gobbledygook. …Action lost amid pseudoscience… the movie chops up so many images that it looks like an educational film gone berserk. [2/4]
—Rafer Guzmán, Long Island Newsday

…a fast, furious 90 minutes of dumb summer fun… It's ultra-violent, though heavily stylized… The film even goes so far as to recreate the image from the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, but with Lucy and a hominid in the place of God and Adam.
—Christian Hamaker, Crosswalk

…Packing in 90 minutes of evolutionary apologetics and bullet-to-the-head brutality, Lucy may well leave viewers with a brain ache all their own.
—Bob Hoose, Plugged In

…a silly, action packed, and ultimately Gnostic and hopeless, movie with extreme violence…
—Ted Baehr, Movieguide

Sorry, no other viewer comments received yet. If you have seen this movie, PLEASE share your observations and insights with others to be posted here. GO