Charlize theron: sie ist auf der suche nach mr. right

Wählen Sie Ihre Cookie-Einstellungen

Wir verwenden Cookies und ähnliche Tools, die erforderlich sind, um Ihnen Einkäufe zu ermöglichen, Ihr Einkaufserlebnis zu verbessern und unsere Dienste bereitzustellen. Dies wird auch in unseren Cookie-Bestimmungen beschrieben. Wir verwenden diese Cookies auch, um nachzuvollziehen, wie Kunden unsere Dienste nutzen (z. B. durch Messung der Websiteaufrufe), damit wir Verbesserungen vornehmen können.

Wenn Sie damit einverstanden sind, verwenden wir auch Cookies, um Ihr Einkaufserlebnis in den Stores zu ergänzen. Dies wird auch in unseren Cookie-Bestimmungen beschrieben. Dies beinhaltet die Verwendung von Cookies von Erst- und Drittanbietern, die Standardgeräteinformationen wie eine eindeutige Kennzeichnung speichern oder darauf zugreifen. Drittanbieter verwenden Cookies, um personalisierte Anzeigen zu schalten, deren Wirksamkeit zu messen, Erkenntnisse über Zielgruppen zu generieren und Produkte zu entwickeln und zu verbessern. Klicken Sie auf „Cookies anpassen“, um diese Cookies abzulehnen, detailliertere Einstellungen vorzunehmen oder mehr zu erfahren. Sie können Ihre Auswahl jederzeit ändern, indem Sie die Cookie-Einstellungen, wie in den Cookie-Bestimmungen beschrieben, aufrufen. Um mehr darüber zu erfahren, wie und zu welchen Zwecken Amazon personenbezogene Daten (z. B. den Bestellverlauf im Amazon Store) verwendet, lesen Sie bitte unsere Datenschutzerklärung.

5.0 out of 5 stars How far can the next generation of mankind be above us?
Reviewed in the United States on March 26, 2015

She's smart; she's a good actress, and she is very beautiful, even without make-up. The script is good; the plot is good; and it portrays a good story. I've played it several times, coming away with a bit more each time. Special Effects were outstanding. Special Effects Make-up was superb.I suggest you go with where the story takes you, get involved. Cut scenes are fast and often you'll miss what they showed you. But they did show you and even if you didn't dwell on each scene, you subconscious mind saw it and that's why the movie works so well and effects you at a primal level, as it was intended to effect you.If I could have given it a 6 star I would have, with no reservations

Reviews with images

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on January 21, 2015

First, I gave it 5 stars, to counteract all the crappy ratings it was getting.

Second, 4 stars is how I truly feel about it. I liked it.

I think the reason that it has received such low ratings, is that people do not understand what the movie is trying to say; ie what the movie is about.

To a degree, that was probably due to the way it was marketed: "A woman is done wrong and goes balistic with super human abilities and kicks butt." WRONG.

The movie mainly has a SPIRITUAL message. It combines a little science, and religious teaching from several religions to try to posit a reason for our creation, our existence. When you look at it THAT way, it becomes intriguing..mainly because so few people try to do this in films.

BUT, the ideas are much higher than most people reach. Like total body fitness is more than most people attempt to achieve. SO most people only have a vague idea of what the ..little bits of philosophy are leading to...just like most people only have a vague idea of what they need to do to get and stay fit.( Even though the filmmaker put a ton of symbolism in the visuals, and a dab of science in the commentaries.)

This movie is about explaining why were we created. It takes it's clue to the path that it suggests is the reason of our creation by saying,
"Hey look, we have this huge brain, but most of us use less than 10% of it. Dolphins use more and have developed sonar. What would happen if we could use more?
Were we supposed to use more?
When we were first made, as animals did we use less? Yes.
And as we evolved, did we use more? Yes.
So if we evolve further will we use more of our brains? Probably.
So if we did, what would we be able to do then? (the movie makes some suggestions in the enhanced abilities of Lucy.)

Then the movie asks: Why put this use unused portion of our brains in us, why didn't we just grow it as we evolved, like most animals?
Here's where the movie gets spiritual/ religious....
And it is probably because the writers were not clearer in their understanding that the movie was not clearer
For instance they named the main character "Lucy" after the first identified ancestor of humanity
It might have been a better clue for the audience if they had named her "Eve."

Because they are sort of connecting to this and that in both science and religion. Eve might have been more appropriate because it was she that ate of the Tree of Good and Evil, prompting God to expel she and Adam...in the "allegory", so that they would not ALSO eat of the tree of Knowledge, and gain ALL knowledge so that they understood what God understood.

In the "story of Eden"...(a story written in the Bible for children to explain on a level they might understand on) it explains to man that they were made in God's image. (thus the movie suggests...the huge brain, with huge capacity) And were removed from Eden to prevent them from accessing the total capability of the brain by eating of the Tree of Knowledge (in the movie represented by the chemical CPH4 -- supposedly a compound manufactured by the mother in the 6th week of the fetus's life in a very minute quantity, that causes the fetus to rapidly develop and grow)

So essentially, in the movie you see the heroine be given the Tree of Knowledge and what happens to her.

Like many religious writers have noted, that as you progress along the path of knowledge about God, your consciousness becomes higher and the feelings...both good and bad...of normal humans become much less. So that love, and hate, fear and pain; are much less. You see this reflected in Lucy.

BUT though the movie uses understandings that many religious writers have come to understand...it also tries to create it's own new ideas of why we were made, what it all means. AND here is why it only gets a 4 and not a 5 from me. They were lazy.

For instance they suggest that the purpose of creating man was that the purpose of knowledge is to expand. In their conception, God is knowledge.

Then they say something along the lines that Time is everything. Time interprets everything.

I think study of God, and spiritual teachings, and even philosophy show that time is an artificial construct.
Philosophy argues, that what changes is not real, because what is real is permanent, and unchangeable.
I am not a scientist, but I think along those lines, science may argue that Time is simply a measure that humans use to try to understand the world around them.
The Bible tells us that God is present in the past, the present, and the future ALL at the same time. So this negates time as something that is real.
That it seems real to humans is that our bodies have a limited existence as we are currently experiencing them on a physical plain. But spirituality has always indicated that the physical world is illusion and only the spiritual world that continues on forever, the reality.

So in the movie, Lucy attempt to explain this as "None of us ever really dies." Basically what Jesus tried to tell us, and show us, with his life and teachings.

So this is mainly a spiritual movie, marketed as a scary, sci-fi, slasher movie. Which it is not even that.

There are NO nude scenes. Only a few sexually suggestive scenes. The violence is there, but serves a purpose more than not, and is not gratuitous, and not grossly bloody...like in Robo Cop.

It tries for artistic qualities, and maybe it does OK with that for instance there is a woman giving a manicure? to the head of the oriental bad guy group...and she has on her back a tattoo of what appears to be Mary (mother of G) but where Mary would be there is only a skeleton. Then we see Lucy come striding down the hall in a surgery gown, billowing out like the tattooed picture. She is caring guns, and shoots through a closed door (this was confusing to me initially, because the movie expects you to just understand that Lucy by this time can see through objects, since she can also see the living energy in beings...) As the door opens you notice she has accurately shot all the mob's hench men and one is dying as as he does it looks like he is making observance to her as he bows down to the floor in death. (Thus Mary portrayed as death...get it...I know, sort of a stretch...sort of offensive) There were many more and varied instances of symbolism, trying to slip in little comments on what the movie was about, or what was about to happen.

The movie also tries to get you up to scientific speed by interspersing a lecture by a neuroscience about the capacity of the brain.

I think the movie could have done better without all the violence. I am wondering if maybe some of that was upped and marketed to sell the film to people that like that. IF so, the message is going to be largely wasted, as it was by the low ratings.

The acting was good=points. The movie flowed well=points, and seldom lost interest=points, except initially while Lucy argued with the man that wanted her to take a case in to the oriental group..but is attention getting enough so you could watch it a few more times. Where it probably lost points for most people was in confusion. Confusion of those there for blood and guts ...why it was not more of that and sex...and confusion of the sci fi group trying to understand the science...and irritation of the spiritual at some just lazy thinking. Where it picked up points, is that for many movies,ANY attempt at thinking is rare.

Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on November 17, 2022

I have read a bunch of reviews complaining about how this is not accurate to science or some other moronic statement. It's a movie and it was a fun watch which is all you can expect a movie to be. if you think you are getting facts out of a movie or documentary well I pity you because you are not. If you want facts read your history and try to remember that history is written by the winners not the fact takers

Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on February 5, 2015

How can a film be witty, intelligent, and fun yet so, stupid and mundane? Well director acclaimed action writer, producer and director Luc Besson has found a way to bring combine both in Besson's Lucy.

Luc Besson's best years are decades behind him with his last great directorial effort in 1997's The Fifth Element, and his best script effort since probably way back in 2002 with the original Transporter mixed in plenty of mediocre or subpar directorial and writing efforts. Yet Luc Besson is a master at crafting strong independent women who overcome hardships and violence, and continues the trend he started with Anne Parillaud in Nikita, and continues with Scarlett Johansson in Lucy. Though the film Lucy evolves and transforms thanks to a new designer drug that opens a pathway in her brain so that Lucy can assess more than ten percent of her brain that the average human has access that Lucy gains access to parts of her mind she has never been able to use before being able to learn near instantly, having access to all technology, and eventually being able to control time becoming god leading a strange moment where question is Scarlett Johansson god, and yes she is, and Lucy struggles with this realization about human limitation, her loss of her own humanity, and her death, Lucy comes to a decision about herself and perhaps the future of the human race.

Lucy certainly has a lot going on with the plot that Luc Besson wrote, and there were a lot of problems with it that I'll get to in a moment. Besson wrote is script base on the idea and myth that humans only use about ten percent of our brains. It's a myth created some time in the late 19th or early 20th centuries and that I believe growing up and spread through mass media like the most recent film Limitless.

Still Besson's script is still is decently well done as Besson takes it step further than Limitless asking what would happen if we as humans had access to one hundred percent of our brain, and using all of it at the same time not just using a small percent while the rest of the brain rests until it is needed. Besson also has fun with the script mixing humor and imagery to advance an idea or visualize a plot moment even further especially in the early part of the film like animals matting or a Cheetah stalking a Gazelle, but Besson's overly uses these moments as a plot device taking away from the overall plot and action of the film. The screenplay also seemed to have been heavily edited has Luc Besson had said he had written a whole back story for Lucy. Whether it was Besson's ideas or the studio editors the script seems to have been tripped to meet a specific running time of about an hour and twenty five minutes taking away from any real character development outside of Lucy. I think Luc Besson wanted the film to stand on the idea for the script about humans and the access we have to our brains, and the question of what would happen to use as humans we had access to one hundred percent our brains, and could use it all at once, which if true ends up being a detriment to the quality of the film.

With the edited script and director Luc Besson's decision to focus on his overall concept of the film actors like Morgan Freeman playing Professor Norman, Amr Waked as a French police captain Pierre Del Rio, and Choi Min-sik as Kang are short changed with the edits or it could be that the script was so bad that re-drafts, and edits had to be done. The script wasn't the only thing that was hurt by the edited script the action was as well. Lucy certainly does have its intense and fun moments, but they're more to do with showing off Lucy's new found powers like putting to sleep a whole hallway of police officers in a hospital, single handling taking down a hallway full of Hong Kong gang members, watching as her body begins to literally fall to pieces on a plane, and a trippy moment when Lucy meets and early primate that was awesome that leaves the action with a major room for improvement especially two scenes late in the film. One scene takes place in the streets of Paris as Lucy, and Pierre Del Rio are rushing to a hospital to stop some gang members. The scene is obviously edited especially if you go back and watch the trailer, and the scene isn't even a car chase scene it's essentially moving characters from point A to point B just with a few car flips and wrecks. The action scene was poorly conceived, and filmed. Another scene is the climax that has a showdown with the Paris police and the Hong Kong mob inside a university, and again the drawn out scene seems to have been edited for time, poorly conceived and filmed taking away from the drama and suspense of the scene.

The negative seems to outweigh the positive with Lucy except we're forgetting one factor in the talented and gorgeous actress who like in Captain American: Winter Soldier displays her acting talent, and action ability to once again show Scarlett can lead an action film, and deserves solo Black Widow film. Thanks to Johansson's many talents that she has displayed many times this year and throughout her career bring acting ability, charm, personality, electricity, and humanity to Lucy that helps save the film from failure.

Luc Besson was once a true favorite of mine when it came to action able to bring a good script, unique, strong and independent women who were equal or even surpassed their male counter parts, and electrifying heart stopping action sequences, but those days are long behind him, and it may be time for the once influential action director to retire. Thankfully Scarlett Johansson and a few cool script concepts, decent action scenes that make Lucy a fun and decent action film, and save Lucy from being a bad action film filled with a mediocre script, many poorly done action sequences, and bad editing.

Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on November 15, 2022

I don't think this will be a spoiler, but the gangsters who made the drug would have made MUCH more money if they marketed it legally, with 'Big Pharma' and all. Putting it on the black market, or whatever intention they had, would have been a waste. Sharing it with the medical community at large would have made them billionaires several times over.

Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on September 25, 2022

Admittedly, Lucy has a silly premise: what could someone do if they use 100% of their brain? This movie is an exciting exploration of that idea. It's not for uptight people too steeped in science, but it's an exciting superhero movie with a bittersweet ending that will make your jaw drop in astonishment. It takes the best of the Matrix and 2001: A Space Odyssey with a liberal dash of the X-Men to get an exciting movie that moves along at a wild pace. When it's over you kind of wish it could have been just a bit longer. As they say, always leave them wanting more, and Lucy does that. I don't say this often but Scarlett Johansson makes Lucy one of the best science fiction/superhero movies ever. made.

Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on November 7, 2022