A billion years of life and now you know what to do with it. Do drugs? Well, I’d assume that’s what the writer would tell us because you know he’s on some. Oh wait here’s another one: A billion years of life and now you know what to do with it. Yeah, not waste another moment watching this piece of shit. Eh, yeah I know that one’s just ok, plus she says that line at the end of the movie so it’s kind of deflated in potency. But that’s this movie in a nutshell: over the top vapid essentially meaningless lines that get the most basic points of scientific knowledge wrong. Life has been on this planet for more than a billion years. But this movie thinks we only use 10% of our brain, so maybe they like reducing everything to scientific notation without the science. This is honestly the worst Sci-fi movie I’ve ever seen.
The first third of the movie more-or-less is done competently. The rest fails in-terms of science, plot and even action considering we don’t give a damn about the Yakuza once we know that Scarlett Jo Hanson is essentially a god or on her way to being one. The science in this movie is almost too stupid to explain; but the movie doesn’t really even try so why should I? Do they explain how SJH can essentially use Force Push on Chinese mobsters? Nope. Do they explain why she can put herself on a television screen across the globe but can’t kill off people she doesn’t have to read any minds to know want to kill her? Nope. Do they reduce the intangible radio waves, micro waves and various other forms of energy we cannot perceive as information to be swiped and dragged about her field of vision like playing a game of Angry Birds Bull Shit Physics Edition? Yep. And yes, apparently computers “evolve” with this girl because only at “20%” she can instantly access billions of words of information, memorize and incorporate it into her brain instantaneously.
The dialogue is worse than some of the worst M. Night Shamalyn movies. Yes, just passingly say, “we never die” and never explain this both ridiculous opinion and something that could potentially be very enlightening and thought-provoking if expressed in a valid and intelligent way, we don’t mind. We also don’t mind that you essentially become a synthesis of Neo and the Borg from Star Trek during the climax of the movie – also add a little Tree of Life on this shit sandwich while you’re at it; go ahead. Also never explain why the junky snorting the drug didn’t seem to be getting a brain boost like Lucy (though to be fair he was shot before any effects of the drug could be noticed or taken effect) but she does when the drug is released into her stomach. And just rip-off the first kill of Nightmare on Elm St. Really, go ahead. It’s not as if I had to suffer enough blatant plagiarism of one of my favorite horror films when it was recreated and butchered simultaneously.
Though it is the worst Sci-fi film I’ve ever seen it isn’t one of the worst films solely because it is unlike The Road or Paranormal Activity fun to make fun of. Also it shows how patently absurd Hegel’s Theory of Historical Development is while overlaying it to evolution – and drastically misunderstanding evolution as a process of improvement in the process. Considering Lucy essentially is Hegel’s pantheistic yet somewhat personal god that becomes the absolute epitome of all existence reflecting upon its self for all time.
The movie does effectively function however (without intending it in the slightest) of contrasting a Platonic/Hegelian/ Liberal view of change with a Marxist and Anarchist version. Essentially positing that “reason” in some pure abstract form or knowledge ignoring the correct social conditions of using it can essentially save mankind. Lucy clearly is supposed to have noble intents and doesn’t seem to have much “self” left to motivate selfish impulses. And yet she doesn’t change any governments, bankrupt any corrupt corporations or do any significant improvements of mankind in any way. This is similar to the “Uber-rationalism” of Platonism, Hegelianism and Objectivism where Reason somehow conveys reality or in the case of Objectivism what we should do with our lives that aren’t “whim worship” as she calls it. Obviously Kantianism is a far more successful epistemology in outlining how human beings use and “know” in the skeptical sense (in the sense of nothing being certain) the abstract models that we understand to be or rather is the limitation of our understanding of the universe and all of reality if multiple universes exist.
It also highlights a flaw of Liberalism, because it is a major error of Liberalism that as long as you allow children to have an education (which of course if full of propaganda due-to religions, governments, corporations, etc) then they can be expected to make rational decisions to improve mankind and better themselves. Though education is invaluable in numerous ways obviously, to simply gloss at the injustices of Capitalism and Government because supposedly an education does away with all those wrongs, or that an education alone can stave off the ignorance of religion (though it certainly helps, however Atheists need to insert themselves into their surroundings more culturally and attack the ignorance, soft-bigotry and psychological weaknesses – namely poor reasoning and a justification for force to secure their faith and ego – and not simply purport that secular education itself will solve the world’s problems) when clearly social change and cultural revolution – revolt in both the way people view the world, think in their daily activity and more importantly fail to think at-all – is necessary in the form of meaningful education and civil disobedience to force and evil. Knowledge and understanding without action or change is causal impotence.
It is the refusal to repeat the cycle of Virtue, wisdom, justice and freedom while the ranks of the religious, corporate and Government are more than eager but dying to have humanities collective soul die under the vicious cycle of force, ignorance and poverty. Without others, without social efforts as understood through Anarchism and Marxism the intellect has validity only through reflection and the greatest of artistic and intellectual achievements (e.g. great works of literature, art, science, philosophy, etc) but is impotent in bringing about justice or material improvement without others. Lucy and other movies of her kind, such as The Matrix, those who purport a “savior” complex and methodology for Mankind’s realization of the ideal are pandering to the Individual’s Ego (by giving them a small taste of what they utterly lack in their day-to-day existences) and the religions that systematically destroy the individual. A great paradox truly, is the desire to not change the world, but through the cinematic creation of one-man revolutions (usually against card-board cut-outs of villains rather than actual threats to humanity either psychologically or materially) regurgitate what is in the modern world the empty-words of principles such-as “justice” “freedom” and “individuality” to the audience and stultify with them with the belief that they, the common, are incapable of changing or being significant in the world and therefore must resort to Party Politics, Churches, God, or Commerce to change the world – when it is these very forces of despotism, greed and corruption of Man’s soul that is what makes the world the grueling place it is.