Limitless

Si intelligent, mais ne faites pas cette erreur des gens intelligents qui pensent que personne ne peut être plus intelligent. Allez-y avec Limitless comme un thriller discret de mars ordinaire qui ne peut pas se permettre une plus grande star que Bradley Cooper, et vous obtiendrez une détente rafraîchissante avec de bons dialogues, des idées dans le scénario et la conception visuelle (les gars de Google Streetview ont de quoi améliorer) et surtout, avec le formidable Cooper, qui mène ce long métrage de manière convaincante et sans hésitation. De plus, si vous développez une faiblesse pour la jeune Nicole Kidman nommée Abbie Cornish, vous n'avez rien à résoudre. (23/03/2011)

An incredibly inventive and technically-strong camera (those seamless vertigo "falls" through the city are the biggest treat I've seen since Enter The Void), the excellent Bradley Cooper, who shows the breadth of his acting portfolio, and a very interesting premise about a drug that unlocks the hidden potential of your brain. Thriller of the year? I'm afraid not. The script is only interesting until the opening scene is connected with retrospective storytelling, and from that moment on it is stretched, dull and completely devoid of the "dark side of power". If some pharmaceutical company's logo with the slogan "If you don’t take it you are missing out" lit up behind the dull resolution, I wouldn't be surprised. Unfortunately, the endgame messes up the whole thing and explains why Limitless can never step out of the circle and be truly riveting. The film is horribly modified, and instead of slashing into the living, it runs away through the screenwriting to trouble-free ends. I enjoyed it, but in this form, it's one of many... Despite the fact that Burger is undoubtedly a very handy craftsman. [65%] (22/03/2011)

Limitless grows more stupid as the screenwriter runs out of pills. The idea on which the film is based is used skilfully at first and Burger succeeds in filling the holes in the logic (and in the chosen form of the narrative) with a boatload of optical effects. As the minutes pile up, the very simple initial situation begins to show signs of wearing thin until the people behind the camera seriously have no idea what else they can squeeze out of it (in the climax, they basically take a blind shot in the dark), at which point the film ends. The underused potential of the central premise is revealed by the cautious stab at politics just before the closing credits roll. If the plot had unfolded in this direction from the beginning, without the cheap subplot involving an Eastern European taxidermist desperately passed off as the main plot, Neil could have given us a nicely biting satire for our hour and forty minutes instead of another toothless thriller. 60% (26/03/2013)

I wouldn't have expected such stylish and inventive entertainment from the author of the schematic The Illusionist. And in the case of Bradley Cooper, all I can say is that he has worked his way up from an extremely unlikable jock in Wedding Crashers to a dependable lead. Charisma combined with acting talent, I have no fear for Bradley’s future. (27/07/2011)

A watchable film with entertaining formal tricks, but the script has a lot of problems. I was very annoyed by the main character behaving like an asshole all the time (and even more with the smart pill). Of course that made up drug can work in any way the creators see fit, so it’s pointless to look for any logic in its effect, but it still prevented me from fully enjoying the film. And either I didn’t understand its meaning, or the ending is utterly stupid. (21/05/2011)