Towards the beginning of his use of the drug, he gives this big speech about how F & P were huge empires that might have retained more of their power if they hadn’t tried to over reach and now they are just little countries, a pale shadow of their former selves. But he failed to live by his own example - he tried to get too rich too quick and quickly ran into problems and unwanted attention. If he had gone for slower gains he might have been able to avoid people taking notice and some of his troubles.
Ah, I see. I also liked that because, if he’s going to become President, he’s probably not going to become so drunk with power that he overreaches re: America’s role in the world.
I agree; for me the mark of a really good movie is if I can’t predict what’s going to happen next.
Saw it today. The reviews were mostly lukewarm at best, so I wasn’t prepared for how much I liked the movie.
The vast majority of movies that even hint at trying a tricky plot bludgeon me with scenes where I’m sitting in the theater thinking about implausibilities. Limitless should have been filled with those moments. It wasn’t. As jackdavinci wrote, they kept addressing those bad bits almost immediately. Wonderful.
What amazed me were that the special effects were spectacularly good, casually used, and enhanced the script. All the them: the several Coopers cleaning the apartment, the breaks in time, the swoops through windows and corridors. I’ll say it. Not only were the special effects better than in Inception, they were smarter and better used.
A few problems, of course.
The guy who notices everything and researches everything didn’t realize that his lawyer was the lawyer for the enemy in the merger, whose overnight popping up with just like his? That was almost unforgivable.
One thing that astounds me is that no one in any of the reviews or here has said that the drug is exactly like the Intersect II from Chuck, right down to the ability to have instant martial arts prowess. They took it in a completely different direction, rightly, and the book came out long before the TV show. I kept expecting the Chuck flash to appear.
Oh, and the ending had to be the way it is. Even in their original meetings I wanted Cooper to ask DeNiro why he should side with him, who is the past, and not with Atwater, who is the future. DeNiro’s clumsy attempt at blackmail at the end was properly brushed aside like the annoying mosquito that was all he could be. If the book didn’t end that way, then the movie’s a huge improvement.
**:sight resurrection: **
I just saw it with my wife. It was OK, but I actually expected it to be a bit smarter than it was. I also found it to be a bit boring in early stages. However, I liked the majority of it and I agree with Ebert:
Much smarter than most movies, but not amazing.
Nitpick - It was Portugal and “The Brits”. And the thrust of his argument was that there are no “built-in” safeguards because it’s human nature to overreach. But yeah, the overreaching thing was definitely an interesting plot point.
Yeah. Just one more way this movie is 'way smarter than most Hollywood stuff nowadays.
I wanna see it again!
One other thing worth mentioning is the scene where one of the “good guys” uses a child as a weapon. You know, we just don’t see enough of that these days. Cool.
Here’s Cecil on the old canard about using n% of your brain: Do we really use only 10 percent of our brains? - The Straight Dope
It had a concept I rather liked, but the drama and conflicts in the film are too contrived and depend on us buying that a guy with superintelligence nevertheless acts like a real moron at times, thus I ended up voting “dislike.”
Well, that plus the guy can’t get a cellphone signal while standing on a New York balcony, which struck me as patently absurd.
Supersmart people do act like morons at times. Which times specifically did you think he acted like a moron? I’m interested because I liked the film and didn’t really hit on any parts that made me stop buying the premise. But then again, I’m not one of those people who look for plot holes in movies, I tend to get sucked right in.
I don’t remember him trying to get a cellphone signal but failing, but then it’s been a while since I’ve seen it. When was that scene?
I enjoyed it.
Time to make more, improve the formula, and awareness of the side effects? The drug was pretty new. Maybe two years with 1 specific client, plus the pusher having tried a few other people like his own sister. It wasn’t immediately obvious there was a huge negative to quitting, and so no reason to focus on making a safer product. Plus the guy thought he had a supply, then it was hijacked and a new supply would have been too late, so he needed the supply that the protagonist had.
I don’t recall a resolution.
Beginning of the movie, he’s standing on the ledge about to jump. When we return to that scene later, I think he went out on the balcony to call for help because the criminals are trying to break in, but can’t get cell service. Then he contemplates jumping, because he is out of drugs and likely to die anyway.
I’m a little hazy in my memory, but wasn’t this because the apartment was a specially reinforced arms-dealer’s home, making it a Faraday cage?
Well, he borrows a large sum from a Russian loanshark as seed money for his day-trading. Within a week, he’s a millionaire. Wouldn’t it occur to him (or anyone really) to, y’know, settle that debt? Instead, the Russian becomes an antagonist, for no other reason than the movie needs one.
He’s living in his ridiculously expensive supposedly fortress-like apartment, and just sits there helplessly while the goons take a long, long, loooong time breaking in (and how they cut through the door is completely inconsistent with the door’s design, as shown by the realtor when the apartment is introduced, but no matter). The main character has a Blackberry and we are treated to a nice big close-up of him trying to use it and getting a “No Service” message - while standing in a New York City penthouse.
I can accept plotholes, I just object to blatant contrivances. That “no service” message took me right out of the movie and it never recovered.
Well, that and there was the whole subplot about the murdered blonde woman. That just kinda vanished somewhere along the way. So maybe the pills make him into a killer with amnesia? Who cares, let’s move on.
I dunno how many Faraday cages have balconies (well, maybe the Faraday luxury-resort cage), but the movie starts with him standing there on the ledge, contemplating jumping off to escape the Russians.
Hard to picture that not being in a real estate disclosure statement - “Yeah, the bathroom needs a fresh coat of paint, we had some loose tiles in the kitchen replaced, [sub]the entire apartment is an electromagnetic dead zone[/sub] and, uh, the bedroom light switch sticks sometimes.”
Even a supergenius should know to double-check whatever a NYC realtor tells him.
Come to think of it, that did slightly bug me at the time. I guess I thought 8.5 million doesn’t buy much of a “fortress” in NY these days. Or a building with a doorman. Or a security elevator. Or an alarm worth a damn. :smack:
Or a land line, I guess.
Semaphore? Aldis lamp? Smoke signals?
I guess you can explain away/fan-wank away a lot of the criticisms:
SPOILERS BELOW!
No landline - he’d only just moved in (boxes are still unpacked). Would that be a reasonable scenario in NYC? I don’t know.
Gennady’s easy entry - Gennady was on NZT, Eddie wasn’t (hence the need to drink Gennady’s blood). So we can assume Gennady was making smart moves and however he gained entry to the building, it was probably clever. This also explains Eddie’s complete lack of doing anything useful during the break-in. Your comments about the door’s construction may still stand - I haven’t re-watched it, but I’ll trust what you say.
Failure to pay back Gennady - That was dumb but, then again, people who are way over-the-top smart and obsessed often forget the little details, like paying bills on time, eating enough, sleeping, paying attention to traffic signals etc. Also, we’re not sure of the details of the loan are we? Was there a specific deadline for payment? Probably was, but I don’t remember. And, Gennady did say before handing over the cash (paraphrase) “you take this, you’re mine”. Not “you take this, you’re mine until it’s payed back with the vig”. I think we were meant to get the idea that once you make a deal with the devil, you are never rid of him - which happens in the film because even after he is payed back, Gennady still has Eddie on the hook, not for any actual ‘debt’ just ‘give me what I want or I’ll kill you’.
Of course, the no cell-phone signal is, as you say, unbelievable. But I wonder if an explanation was left on the editing room floor. Maybe Gennady has a (major fanwank here!) signal blocker?