Scarlett Johansson’s $463 million hit sci-fi movie, Lucy, was entirely built on a popular science misconception. Released in 2014, Lucy is a sci-fi action movie directed by Luc Besson which follows the life of Lucy (Scarlett Johansson), a woman who gains psychokinetic abilities after taking a psychedelic drug that unlocks the full potential of the human brain. Lucy was a box office success, although some criticized its scientific inaccuracy. Garnering a 67% score on Rotten Tomatoes, Lucy received positive reviews for its deep themes and brilliant visuals, as well as Scarlett Johansson’s performance in the sci-fi movie.

Lucy’s ending transformed the character beyond space and time, proving its philosophical hypothesis on the human brain’s potential. While there were hopes for a Lucy sequel, a spinoff series was reportedly in development in 2022 with Morgan Freeman in talks to star. However, there has been no news on the Lucy spinoff ever since. Regardless, Lucy works as a standalone movie and its box office demonstrates how successful the film was. Although many other sci-fi movies lack scientific accuracy, Lucy’s reception suffered when the science behind the movie’s premise was completely disproved shortly after its release.

Lucy’s Premise Is Based On The Myth That Humans Only Use 10% Of Their Brains

Science Disproved This Theory After Lucy’s Release

Lucy’s premise was based on the popular myth that humans only use 10% of their brains. When Lucy accidentally ingests a synthetic drug called CPH4 after being forced to become a drug mule, she gains enhanced physical and mental abilities. As a result of the belief in restricted brain usage, Lucy shows what might happen if the brain was to be fully utilized, as the drug unlocks Lucy’s brain and gives her abilities such as telepathy and telekinesis. However, the science behind Lucy is inaccurate, as explained by scientific articles in Journal Nature shortly after the film’s theatrical release.

While the notion that humans do not fully utilize or understand their cognitive potential is somewhat true, the specific percentage claim may have originated from a forward by Lowell Thomas in How to Win Friends and Influence People in 1936. The theory has since been debunked with various methods, such as imaging scans, damaging Lucy‘s core premise as a result. Athough Lucy is not one of Scarlett Johansson’s best movies, and its science has been disproven, it is still an entertaining film, and it was good enough to earn an impressive box office result.

Lucy Is Still An Interesting Sci-Fi Movie (If You Ignore Its Flawed Premise)

Lucy Earned A Strong Tomatometer Despite Its Audience Score

A large majority of sci-fi movies are based on entirely fictional concepts. If you ignore Lucy’s flawed premise, the movie is still an interesting watch, and Scarlett Johansson delivers a brilliant performance. Lucy ranked in Netflix’s Global Top 10 in 2024 with high viewership numbers, demonstrating that Luc Besson’s film still holds up a decade after its release. Lucy ranked eighth on Netflix’s chart for the week of August 19-25 with an impressive 4.4 million views, beating movies such as Night School and Kingsman: The Golden Circle.

Critics praised Lucy’s energetic tone and over-the-top excitement, earning it a strong 67% Tomatometer on Rotten Tomatoes. Interestingly, the movie was let down by its audiences as Lucy’s Popcornmeter sits at a disappointing 47%, showing a discontent for its illogical and mind-bending plot. With such divisive reviews, it looks ever more unlikely that the movie will get a sequel or spinoff series, especially as director Luc Besson has no intention of making one and Lucy 2 would need Scarlett Johansson to return. However, enjoying Lucy isn’t dependent on the film’s strict adherence to science.

Sources: Journal Nature