Looper

[mattmav45]

An enjoyable piece of sci-fi entertainment.

I really wanted to love it, but there are parts I thought were weak and others that were awesome. A bit too uneven to be a classic, but still definitely one of the year's stronger films. I honestly felt that the Willis storyline kind of detracted from any momentum built up before, as I really enjoyed the interactions between the characters on the farm. The movie really came into its own at this point, and it was kind of like, "Oh, by the way, here's what Bruce is up to right now" whenever they took you into the other storyline.

Still, it has a really great beginning and ending, and just a so-so middle. The kid was pretty fantastic, and the whole Rainmaker sub-plot was handled really well. Can't ask for much more than an above average sci-fi film.

B+

Edited October 11, 2012 by mattmav45

[4815162342]

A

Pretty much anything worth saying has already been said in this thread.

[CJohn]

The best movie of the year. Everyone already said what was needed to be said.A+

[4815162342]

Actually one thing I could say:I sorta felt bad for Kid Blue. Sure he was incompetent when it came to anything involving using a gun/fighting, but he's actually pretty sharp as he was able to track JGL to the diner, then lay a trap for Bruce Willis at Piper Perabo's apartment. If he'd been on the business side of things he would have done pretty well for himself, but aforementioned lack of skill at being a gunman and his ego did him in.

[DeeCee]

It adopts the Back to the Future version of time travel. Still, a very good film.

[rahvinn87]

Just got back from seeing this and really enjoyed it.

A few negatives (since the positives have been so well expounded earlier in this thread):

The time travel shenanigans were a bit much for me, and occasionally broke my immersion in the film. However this was far from a deal breaker, and I essentially ended up going with Willis: "It doesn't fucking matter!"

I never really got emotionally invested with the JGL or the Emily blunt characters. As such the ending didn't do as much for me as it could have done. I still liked it though. In terms of emotional investment I think they did by far the best job with Willis' character (I really felt for him losing his wife, and then killing that kid thinking he had too).

My rating: 8.0/10

[Crusader]

Excellent Best sci fi movie since Inception ... Bruce Willis now has two awesome films about time travel this and Twelve Monkeys 9/10

[Adm56]

Gave it a B . Main takeaways: Emily Blunt has an awesome body and prolonged scenes on farms should be outlawed at this point (They drag this film down a bit and pretty much killed Season 2 of the Walking Dead).

[Kvikk Lunsj]

I did not think it was that emotional. I liked JGL character but i never felt him, older Joe, or Emily blunt.I liked it a lot it by far better then Prometheus which huge disappointment. I thought some stuff was great but at times I felt the film was uneven during the 2nd act. 7/10still in the top 10 of the year.

[Deep Wang]

I guess I am crazy, because I have seen it three times now and the 2nd half is by far my favorite part.

[glassfairy]

B+ or A-I saw it today and I haven't quite made my mind up. Time travel in fiction in general make my head hurt if I think too much about it but I think it was handled just about as well as it could have been. As for the ending, I don't know what to think but I like that. Once a movie makes me think I can't complain.Oh, and A+ for the little kid's acting.

[Water Bottle]

Timeline A: This is the original timeline. In this timeline, Joe kills his older self and lives his thirty years. In this time, he goes to China and meets his wife. The Rainmaker's crime organization finds him and kills his wife. They send him back in time (what they do with the wife's body is unexplained even though they've stated it's impossible to get rid of the body in the future-heck that's the whole purpose of the film). So he goes back time to cause Timeline B

Timeline B: The events of the movie. Joe decides to find the Rainmaker in order to avenge his wife. He hunts down two kids. Meanwhile Present Joe finds one of the houses and starts to bond with the future Rainmaker. Joe is able to find the Rainmaker but circumstances dictate that the kid's mother is in the way. This would "create a loop" in which the kid, seeing his mom killed, apparently becomes the Rainmaker. Present Joe kills himself in order to stop Joe. This does create the question of why his best friend wasn't killed by the mob rather than them cutting off his body parts and such but okay. So there's this loop right and you think the film did something good. Oh wait, it makes no fucking sense.

First:

Joe remembers all the events. That means that even if he chooses to recreate the events up to the point where he comes back in time, he now knows who the kid is and where he is. This means he doesn't have to print a map that his younger version can find. He can knock out his past self, go to the farmhouse, and kill the kid before his present self even wakes up. This supposedly sends him back to the present or saves the life of his wife. Heck, he can chose to find the kid and mentor him in a way that he doesn't become evil. There's literally an infinite ways that Present Joe can act that killing himself becomes a stupid option. It isn't a loop because there's too much he can do differently.

Second: Timeline B creates a "loop", right? Actually no. Timeline B's events don't make any sense in Timeline A. Why does the Rainmaker rise in Timeline A? It can't be because his mom was killed by a former looper-because that looper died in this timeline when he went through. There is NO LOOP. The ending therefore doesn't make any sense, doesn't explain the events of Timeline A, and leaves huge plot holes.

So there isn't any loop. The big ending where he sacrifices himself feels empty and void because logic dictates that it literally makes no sense. Heck, the entire movie starts to fall apart when you start to analyze it critically and logically. Yes, it's a fun movie to watch-but it's certainly not the brilliant film some members seem to think.

B-

[Crusader]

I don't have as many complaints as you but I got one that I think is very important and kinda bugs me When young Joe realizes what will happen in the end of the movie isn't the older Joe supposed to have the same realization thus putting down the gun and they can both live free in this timeline and kid can grow up with his mother ... I mean older Joe did kill the mobster so there was no one after them right ? older Joe does get reflection of what young Joe sees and such correct ?

[Gopher]

The time travel isn't meant to be analyzed. The movie doesn't even focus on it... all it needed to do was set up this world and not be distracting. The story and themes and emotion are there, and that's why I found Looper to be so great.

[John Marston]

this movie was decent, but nothing spectacular, no where near as good as it was hyped up to be in my opinion. No surprise to me it is only doing average numbers at the BO

[Deep Wang]

Timeline A: This is the original timeline. In this timeline, Joe kills his older self and lives his thirty years. In this time, he goes to China and meets his wife. The Rainmaker's crime organization finds him and kills his wife. They send him back in time (what they do with the wife's body is unexplained even though they've stated it's impossible to get rid of the body in the future-heck that's the whole purpose of the film). So he goes back time to cause Timeline B

The wife was an accident, which is why you see the house being burned down. That was them trying to cover up the body in whatever messy fashion they could because they fucked up.

Timeline B: The events of the movie. Joe decides to find the Rainmaker in order to avenge his wife. He hunts down two kids. Meanwhile Present Joe finds one of the houses and starts to bond with the future Rainmaker. Joe is able to find the Rainmaker but circumstances dictate that the kid's mother is in the way. This would "create a loop" in which the kid, seeing his mom killed, apparently becomes the Rainmaker. Present Joe kills himself in order to stop Joe. This does create the question of why his best friend wasn't killed by the mob rather than them cutting off his body parts and such but okay. So there's this loop right and you think the film did something good. Oh wait, it makes no fucking sense.

They didn't want to kill Young Seth if they didn't have to because of any time paradoxes that may occur. They tortured and mutilated Young Seth to make Old Seth find them so they could kill him first, thus closing the loop.

First:

Joe remembers all the events. That means that even if he chooses to recreate the events up to the point where he comes back in time, he now knows who the kid is and where he is. This means he doesn't have to print a map that his younger version can find. He can knock out his past self, go to the farmhouse, and kill the kid before his present self even wakes up. This supposedly sends him back to the present or saves the life of his wife. Heck, he can chose to find the kid and mentor him in a way that he doesn't become evil. There's literally an infinite ways that Present Joe can act that killing himself becomes a stupid option. It isn't a loop because there's too much he can do differently.

He doesn't remember all the events. He specifically states that it's a fog that slowly becomes more or less clear the more likely they are to happen. Then depending on what Young Joe does, Old Joe "remembers" that as a memory. That's why, when Old Joe is going after the second kid just as Cid is exploding the Gat Man. He didn't know which kid it was, because Young Joe didn't know either. It was at that precise time that it happened, therefore he "remembers" Cid is the Rainmaker just as he gets tased by Kid Blue.

Second: Timeline B creates a "loop", right? Actually no. Timeline B's events don't make any sense in Timeline A. Why does the Rainmaker rise in Timeline A? It can't be because his mom was killed by a former looper-because that looper died in this timeline when he went through. There is NO LOOP. The ending therefore doesn't make any sense, doesn't explain the events of Timeline A, and leaves huge plot holes.

So there isn't any loop. The big ending where he sacrifices himself feels empty and void because logic dictates that it literally makes no sense. Heck, the entire movie starts to fall apart when you start to analyze it critically and logically. Yes, it's a fun movie to watch-but it's certainly not the brilliant film some members seem to think.

It is a loop. Young Joe killed his older self the first time, then on the next loop, he gets away. There has to be one loop through for there to be anything at all to happen.

So therefore, Cid became the Rainmaker during one of the loops. Yes, this is the hardest pill to swallow, but I said it before, and I'll say it again, time travel movies will never be plausible. There will always be some kind of paradox that is inescapable.

The entire plot of the entire Terminator series is completely impossible. Back to the Future 2 cannot happen, because again, it is impossible.

This movie is incredibly well thought out and works in the universe it created.

I am glad you enjoyed it, but I feel like it just clicks with me, so I will defend it until the day I die!

[Water Bottle]

The time travel isn't meant to be analyzed. The movie doesn't even focus on it... all it needed to do was set up this world and not be distracting. The story and themes and emotion are there, and that's why I found Looper to be so great.

So let me get this straight:You state that the story is there and that's why it's greatThe time travel is a huge part of the storyBut I can't analyze the time travel?And my problem with this movie isn't so much as the time travel but the actual story.

The wife was an accident, which is why you see the house being burned down. That was them trying to cover up the body in whatever messy fashion they could because they fucked up.

Then why don't they just kill the loopers and set their houses on fire? Or make it look like a murder-suicide kind of situation?

They didn't want to kill Young Seth if they didn't have to because of any time paradoxes that may occur. They tortured and mutilated Young Seth to make Old Seth find them so they could kill him first, thus closing the loop.

And a mutilated Seth wouldn't cause any time paradoxes?

He doesn't remember all the events. He specifically states that it's a fog that slowly becomes more or less clear the more likely they are to happen. Then depending on what Young Joe does, Old Joe "remembers" that as a memory. That's why, when Old Joe is going after the second kid just as Cid is exploding the Gat Man. He didn't know which kid it was, because Young Joe didn't know either. It was at that precise time that it happened, therefore he "remembers" Cid is the Rainmaker just as he gets tased by Kid Blue.

I'm referring that Young Joe remembers everything that happened. He knows what's up. He'll have remembered that the young kid is the Rainmaker and he'll remember what went wrong. I'm not talking about Old Joe here-I'm talking about Young Joe because he's the one who can easily break this so-called loop by doing a million tings. Old Joe's memory might be a fog because he never met the kid in his timeline. Young Joe will because he did meet the kid in his timeline.

It is a loop. Young Joe killed his older self the first time, then on the next loop, he gets away. There has to be one loop through for there to be anything at all to happen.

That's not what I meant and you know it. The ending was talking about the cycle of what creates the Rainmaker and what causes Joe to eventually want revenge. That's the "loop" the ending was trying to create.

So therefore, Cid became the Rainmaker during one of the loops. Yes, this is the hardest pill to swallow, but I said it before, and I'll say it again, time travel movies will never be plausible. There will always be some kind of paradox that is inescapable.

How did he become the Rainmaker in one of the loops? The movie's explanation doesn't hold up-and not it's not because it's a tough pill to swallow. This isn't a time paradox at all-this is literally just impossible. I'm glad the movie clicked with you and you can defend it all you want-but this is what happens:Timeline A:Young Joe kills Old JoeRainmaker rises to powerOld Joe is found, wife accidentally killedOld Joe goes back in time and creates:Timeline B:Old Joe stops Young Joe from killing himOld Joe finds RainmakerExplanation for Rainmaker's rise: Old Joe killed Rainmaker's motherYoung Joe kills himself as he sees a cycleOh wait, that can't be why the Rainmaker rose in tImeline A. It simply can't because there is no Old Joe. This isn't a time paradox issue at all since the time travel to create this paradox hasn't happened. And even so it isn't a paradox. It is literally just shoddy storytelling.

[Gopher]

So let me get this straight:You state that the story is there and that's why it's greatThe time travel is a huge part of the storyBut I can't analyze the time travel?

It's really not. The time travel is world-building that sets up the second half of the movie. All the logistics could be understood on a pure visceral level and that's all that mattered. You can assess it all you want, but I haven't seen a time travel movie that makes complete sense. Have you? Looper doesn't care to be that movie. Remember Bruce Willis' line? We can sit here all day making diagrams with straws, or we can move on to something more relevant and interesting. I don't watch movies to see where the 'believability meter' falls as long as I'm drawn into what Old/Young Joe are doing. Edited October 29, 2012 by Gopher

[Water Bottle]

You seem to fail to get my point entirely: my problem really isn't with the time travel problems. It isn't with the believability meter. It's with the basic story itself. When the movie states that the reason the Rainman rose to power in the first place is one reason but that reason couldn't have existed in the first place without the time travel, then that's when you have a problem with the actual core of the story.Strip away the entire time travel that occurred during the movie: why did the Rainman rise to power? According to the movie, it's because his mom was killed by a looper from the future. And yet that looper was killed when he came back the first time instantly. So no, this isn't a question about time travel paradoxes. This is a question on: did this movie even pay attention to earlier pages of the script?

[A Marvel Fanboy]

This one is ridiculously overrated.