Looper

[The Toymaker]

I have to give Qing Xu some praise. She's not an international star and doesn't have great acting experience, other than on TV in China I believe, but she handled her role (albeit a small one) greatly. She did what was expected of her in that she was Bruce's driving force. She is beautiful, and I suspect all older men watching this will understand Bruce's motives more than younger people who wanted to just see some action.

[The Toymaker]

After the off screen sex screen, with the rambling going on by Sara, I couldn't help it, but I just spoke out loud how boring this movie was getting. Everybody around me agreed. The action picked up a little after that, but still, I left disappointed. The Terminator movies are still the best when it comes to action/time travel flicks.

The Terminator movies play the time-travel thing too safe, in my opinion. The best thing about those movies is everything, but Looper's time-travel element was better.I agree with you about Blunt, though. I hate her too. But she was ok in this. But I did want her to get shot. Just in the arm, or the shoulder, just something to make her be less annoying. Edited October 1, 2012 by The Toymaker

[ecstasy]

I thought it was an interesting twist that JGL bonded with the villain instead of with Bruce and screwed over Bruce to give the villain a chance to become the superhero they all expected when TK appeared among 10% of population. I`ve been reading some dislike for the ending and second half (TK) but it ties with what JGL said about TK when Dano was showing off, that they expected TK to save the world but it became one big ol` nothing. So now Cid has a chance to be that savior TK person they all hoped for, instead of the opposite.

It did feel like there were 2 movies in one - a time travel sci fi and Carrie/Scanners-like supernatural horror.

Yes it did. When the kid first did his bit I was thinking firestarter for some reason, then I was thinking baby Carrie, then the fury. When they were all in the field I started thinking about children of the corn, lol. It was still good though. Edited October 1, 2012 by ECSTASY

[MrPink]

Pretty good. Maybe a tad overrated currently. I was floored by Bruce Willis' performance, haven't seen him act like that in years (Have not seen Moonrise Kingdom though). I think the 2nd act started dragging a bit, and then it suddenly ramps up and the conclusion hits so fast that the dust didn't even settle from Bruce Willis' badass massacre scene. I sort of felt unsatisfied in terms of how the Kid died....he just appears, and is offed in a sort of lame manner. Thought his incompetence was amusing throughout though. Jeff Daniels needed a more active part as well.I wouldn't look too much into the logistics of the time traveling. In the words of Willis, 'It doesn't fucking matter.' What is, is.

Edited October 1, 2012 by MrPink

[lab276]

Not necessarily. He was trying to save his wife.

Except he creates the Rainmaker which sets the rest of the story in motion.

[The Toymaker]

Except he creates the Rainmaker which sets the rest of the story in motion.

You can say that JGL is also the villain then. He will also create the Rainmaker, just in 30 years time. That's what I was talking about earlier when I said they're both villains or none of them are at all. I prefer the latter option.Plus, the Rainmaker cannot be fully exempt of responsibility here. He is villainous in his adult years because a looper mistake killed his mum, but that doesn't give him the right to kill thousands of people. He is still the villain, and killing him is the right thing to do, so Bruce, in my opinion, is definitely not the bad guy. All the characters are selfish, that's as far as I will go with it.

[Hatebox]

I wouldn't look too much into the logistics of the time traveling. In the words of Willis, 'It doesn't fucking matter.' What is, is.

As the reviewer Mark kermode correctly pointed out, that was the Austin Powers moment of the film where Basil Exposition says 'I suggest you don't worry about it and just have fun... [turns to the audience] ... and that goes for you too!'.

[75Live]

As the reviewer Mark kermode correctly pointed out, that was the Austin Powers moment of the film where Basil Exposition says 'I suggest you don't worry about it and just have fun... [turns to the audience] ... and that goes for you too!'.

Agreed. That's exactly how I took that scene. It was a nod to the audience to basically not worry about the time travel stuff and just go along with the story.

[The Toymaker]

Ugh, Mark Kermode, such a stuck up twat.

[Hatebox]

Ugh, Mark Kermode, such a stuck up twat.

The guy likes the Twilight franchise. 'Stuck up' is not a term I'd associate with him.

[The Toymaker]

Really, does he?Ok, I instantly like him.I had always seen him as rather stuck up, but if he likes Twilight, then he's just like me and can like movies regardless of reputation and credibility.

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

While I thought the movie was awesome, I found the time traveling elements to be a bit inconsistent. Maybe someone would be willing to shed some light on what I found uneven? Like:

While the ending was a masterful use of a time travel loop, at the beginning of the film, Johnson establishes that as Paul Dano's character was being tortured and mutilated, his future version was changing due to the scars left by the mutilation. His nose disappears, then his arms and legs, etc. But this creates a paradox since his future self never would have been able to reach that point without his legs.Now that's all fine and dandy, if that's the rule he wanted to create for this world, but to go back at the end and say that any changes made by the the future selves were a part of a loop, then he's changing the rules as he goes, IMO.And this goes even further if you think about...say the "Beatrix" scar. His past self sends a message to his future self by cutting a message into his forearm, but that message would have been with him from that point on and he wouldn't just now be noticing it. Or even watching it being written...again, take out logic and it's fun to watch, but then go for the logical ending and it just makes the film feel uneven.

A lot of leaps of logic in the film, but it grabbed me from beginning to end and I loved the ending.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Accursed Arachnid!™

[CoolioD1]

^Doesn't really matter. The movie even says a couple times with Jeff Daniels and Bruce Willis pretty much explicitly stating that you shouldn't think too hard about all this time travel business and paradoxes and what not.

[Kevin Bacon]

I love Emily Blunt. She's like a tier below Regina Spektor, Zooey Deschanel, Maria Kanellis, and AJ Lee in my celebrity crushes.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Kevin Bacon

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

^Doesn't really matter. The movie even says a couple times with Jeff Daniels and Bruce Willis pretty much explicitly stating that you shouldn't think too hard about all this time travel business and paradoxes and what not.

That's a bit of a cop out, but I liked the movie so much, I'll go ahead and buy it.

[Deep Wang]

While I thought the movie was awesome, I found the time traveling elements to be a bit inconsistent. Maybe someone would be willing to shed some light on what I found uneven? Like:

While the ending was a masterful use of a time travel loop, at the beginning of the film, Johnson establishes that as Paul Dano's character was being tortured and mutilated, his future version was changing due to the scars left by the mutilation. His nose disappears, then his arms and legs, etc. But this creates a paradox since his future self never would have been able to reach that point without his legs.

And this goes even further if you think about...say the "Beatrix" scar. His past self sends a message to his future self by cutting a message into his forearm, but that message would have been with him from that point on and he wouldn't just now be noticing it. Or even watching it being written...again, take out logic and it's fun to watch, but then go for the logical ending and it just makes the film feel uneven.

Both old/young versions are now existing in the same timeline. So what happens to one, happens to the other instantaneously.

We also see this with how Old Joe "remembers" as soon as Young Joe does something.

Now that's all fine and dandy, if that's the rule he wanted to create for this world, but to go back at the end and say that any changes made by the the future selves were a part of a loop, then he's changing the rules as he goes, IMO.

He established that things can be changed because it went one loop to get to the point where Old Joe gets sent back and killed the first time. He was able to then change it another time through the loop where he goes through without the hood and stops Young Joe from killing himself.

A lot of leaps of logic in the film, but it grabbed me from beginning to end and I loved the ending.

I am pretty sure that it is impossible to have time travel movies without loop/plot holes. There are just too many things going on not too. Remember, The Terminator is technically impossible, but that doesn't stop it from being a great movie.

If it grabbed you, then plot holes don't matter at all in my opinion.

[Michael Gary Scott]

Best sci fi film since inception. 5/5

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

Both old/young versions are now existing in the same timeline. So what happens to one, happens to the other instantaneously.

We also see this with how Old Joe "remembers" as soon as Young Joe does something.

He established that things can be changed because it went one loop to get to the point where Old Joe gets sent back and killed the first time. He was able to then change it another time through the loop where he goes through without the hood and stops Young Joe from killing himself.

I am pretty sure that it is impossible to have time travel movies without loop/plot holes. There are just too many things going on not too. Remember, The Terminator is technically impossible, but that doesn't stop it from being a great movie.

If it grabbed you, then plot holes don't matter at all in my opinion.

Yeah, my problem was that it sorta took me out of the film at first, because I was hoping for very ingenious time loop film(which I eventually got), but the rest of the movie more than made up for that first impression.

[The Toymaker]

AA brings up some good points, but for me it was fine as I see it as different because if the older guy hadn't have come back, the bad guys would never have taken his nose off, and his legs etc. History was changed because of the future self coming back, so for me, all the changes that happen in the past time will only affect the older guy in that time and not in the future.

[Hatebox]

The obvious paradox is that if JGL shot himself, Bruce Willis would never have existed, even/especially within the internal logic of a loop. But it's fine, you go with it if the emotional core of the scene resonates.