" 

 ::::Most Wikipedia film article put through WP:Peer review do not have a Themes section. There are many examples of WP:Good articles and WP:Featured film articles that don't have a Themes section. Often, such a section is not needed because the film was not deep enough or the themes are clearly noted in the Critical reception section. I'm very tempted to remove the The Telegraph bit from the Critical reception section and make that section back into five paragraphs. I don't see why the The Telegraph part you added is needed. The Besson part fits best in the Critical reception section, where similar comparisons are being made, and, in that source, he does not call those matters (his intention of blending the aforementioned three films) as themes of Lucy. The Critical reception section is not ""rapidly becoming an overly large Critical reception""; it has been stable for weeks, and it covers just about all that needs to be covered regarding critical reception to the film. Furthermore, various Wikipedia film articles have a Critical reception section that is of five or six paragraphs long, including Avatar (2009 film)#Critical reception. Some even have subsections. The Telegraph bit is currently cutting into a paragraph that is about comparing the film to other films and characters; so it's a little misplaced as it is, though Betty did a decent job of fitting it in that section. I might make a Themes section, if I come across WP:Reliable sources (as in more than one) noting that they are discussing the themes. But there is no rush, which is another reason why I am likely to remove the The Telegraph piece. And I did not suggest that the box office response will likely fuel many more reviews; where did you understand me to imply that?   "