djgenesis

Writing this review while still in the cinema watching this movie. A less than mediocre performance by all main characters, lame dialogues, exposition for 5 year olds, OK...... Just.....OK fights, and what's with the 15 year old boy looking security advisor? What was marvel thinking of when they casted a 150cm actor to side Cap. Too much talking, oh my god, sooooo many words, so much backstory, but almost no essence!

A person cannot immerse in the movie cause the story is so boring!! There go two hours I'll never get back, but hey, at least dinner before the movie was good (and more interesting).

Throughout watching Lucy, I face-palmed so many times that my forehead turned red. I started counting the the money I spent to buy this DVD in cents so that I too, can plug into another dimension and forget I ever bought it. The movie is based on the most wide-spread urban legend since the Loch-Ness monster. The fact that 100% of your brain is used (maybe not the director's) is the most classic example of debunking scientific misconception and I am surprised that there are still quite a few thousand people who still believe it. I pushed myself to watch it because I thought that it would be a "Limitless" copy but it turned out to be a lot less than that.

Defying the basic rules of the universe is a job for a superhero, and I tried to see this like watching another superhero movie. But the problem is that even superheros have a special ability that arises from exploiting unknown scientific concepts. Whether it is a humanoid for another planet, or a chemical reaction to an uncharted material, or even a smart-eccentric millionaire geek. All of the above have an unreasonable, yet a quite far fetched "believability" because they are based on facts you DON'T KNOW. Not on the De'facto KNOW it's not true. Even so, to be able to show a character defy the very laws of nature, there must, in my opinion, be some sort of a far fetched explanation, exploiting the unknown variable.

They might as well replace Scarlet with a talking CGI tree and remake the whole movie. It will make the same sense.

When I watched The Wedding Pact I knew from the start that it wouldn't be a blockbuster but I didn't think it would be so bad.

Truth be told, the lead actors actually seem quite talented and both Haylie and Chris gave a great overall performance considering the awful plot. They demonstrate good chemistry, seem experienced and show a lot of potential. Scott Michael on the other hand looks a bit unconvincing at times but, hey, this was not Shakespeare.

What I really disliked was the poor, predictable, boring and somewhat unintelligent scenario.

I do not know much about directing a movie but quite a few of the takes reminded me of amateur movie scenes. There are others. quite a few of them actually, which are unrelated to the plot and just exist as time fillers, which is fine, even the best movies have them, but they were so random and obvious I thought the director thinks that the viewer is unintelligent. This is what urged me to write this review.

There is no imagination in the storyline whatsoever; it just feels like it's a product of a 9 year old girl's summary of a single Archie's comic book of 15 pages.

Overall I would say that if you have an hour and a half to spend, better watch something else unless you're 10 and play with Barbie dolls.