Looper

[Team Andino]

I didn't realize Looper came out today on Blu-Ray, obviously there hasn't been much attention here in awhile but does anyone know of any good exclusives from Target and/or Best Buy?

 

[<(o_o)>]

I didn't realize Looper came out today on Blu-Ray, obviously there hasn't been much attention here in awhile but does anyone know of any good exclusives from Target and/or Best Buy?

Didn't find Looper period on Target.com website & Best Buy didn't have any exclusive listed but did find this on futureshop.com Looper Steelbook with lenticular packaging.

 

[Team Andino]

Didn't find Looper period on Target.com website & Best Buy didn't have any exclusive listed but did find this on futureshop.com Looper Steelbook with lenticular packaging.

Ah very nice, thanks for the heads up.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

So I watched this today - I thought it was freaking awesome until the ending. At first when the ending came I was like "That's pretty awesome!" but then I realised, that it was pointless. The story organically grew to a point where the issues at hand were bigger than just the characters - similar to Terminator and Star Wars. The problem was that the ending they chose really only solved the character problems, but not the universal issue. Bit of a cop-out I feel.

It's a damn shame. A better thought-out ending would've had me giving this a 10/10 but I'm settling on a 7/10.

 

[Alien Anal]

How could you make a sequel to looper?

 

[skorponok]

While the pacing and some of the performances from minor characters REALLY hurt it for me (in particularly Noah Segan), what the film managed to pull off incredibly well is INSPIRING lots of interesting film conversation in regards to theories surrounding its plot, timelines...something which most films cannot do.

 

[Snow Queen]

Loved the movie and I got really lucky on the 30th, someone put it out a day early at Futureshop. Definitely regret not seeing it in theaters, absolutely loved it.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

This movie was ****ing awesome. JGL killed it. The little kid was really good too.

 

[MadVillainy]

Bought this n Blu Ray yesterday.

But f*** I wish I saw about that Target steelbook earlier. That's bad ass

 

[MadVillainy]

Just watch the Blu ray. Still one of my favorite movies of the year

The deleted scenes were cool too. I feel bad for the actor who play Kid Blue though. All the scenes that made him seem at least somewhat competent were cut out

 

[hammerhedd11]

So I watched this today - I thought it was freaking awesome until the ending. At first when the ending came I was like "That's pretty awesome!" but then I realised, that it was pointless. The story organically grew to a point where the issues at hand were bigger than just the characters - similar to Terminator and Star Wars. The problem was that the ending they chose really only solved the character problems, but not the universal issue. Bit of a cop-out I feel.

It's a damn shame. A better thought-out ending would've had me giving this a 10/10 but I'm settling on a 7/10.

How so?

 

[Asteroid-Man]

How so?

Spoiler

When the movie starts out, our main conflict is that of the Looper(s). As the story plays out we learn about this boy who grows up to have a firm grip over the future of the world. Similar to how Terminator starts off as a survival/chase film but we soon learn it's about saving the future of mankind - only in Terminator, they solve the small/original issue (killing the Terminator) and then the larger one (conceiving John Connor). Now with Looper, we get the problem of the Looper solved, but it's more likely that the kid is gonna grow up to be just as bad. Sure, we see him control himself for a second, but he could just as easily snap again. I mean, Joe didn't kill the kid's mom the first time anyway - she dies some other way somewhere down the road. It'll happen again. It was a cop-out on the writer's part. It would've been better (still a horrible idea) if "it was all just a dream". Had Old Joe killed the boy, the world would have been saved AND it would have made for a VERY interesting discussion.

In dirtying his hands, Old-Joe ensures that Young-Joe grows old with clean hands. He makes himself the villain so that he can still be innocent. And yet, Young-Joe still feels some guilt. Then we still get that memory that Old-Joe briefly experiences (trying to remember his "one love" and remembering the boy's mother) being true.

At this point, Old-Joe could kill himself or some ****. Young-Joe goes back to collect, and then we get an interesting relationship between Joe and the girl (does she resent him for the actions of a could-be-Joe?) The writers tried soooo hard to have an unconventional ending that they ended up with a meaningless self-sacrifice - a pretty big cliche in its own.

 

[Mastodon123]

How could you make a sequel to looper?

Maybe Someone goes back in time, so they can put Cid back on path to becoming the rainmaker?

 

[TheDreamMaster]

This movie is out already? Didn't it just leave theaters? I sure feel like it did.

 

[ThePhantasm]

How could you make a sequel to looper?

Make it about Cid and his powers.

 

[bubbadoom]

Now with Looper, we get the problem of the Looper solved, but it's more likely that the kid is gonna grow up to be just as bad. Sure, we see him control himself for a second, but he could just as easily snap again. I mean, Joe didn't kill the kid's mom the first time anyway - she dies some other way somewhere down the road. It'll happen again. It was a cop-out on the writer's part. It would've been better (still a horrible idea) if "it was all just a dream". Had Old Joe killed the boy, the world would have been saved AND it would have made for a VERY interesting discussion.

But wasn't the reason the Rainmaker was killing Loopers in the future was that one had killed his mom...? That's the way I took it.

 

[Octoberist]

Make it about Cid and his powers.

Ehh..It's best to leave that to our imaginations. Keep it ambiguous.

 

[misjuevos]

I was digging the movie. Then the rainmaker plot sort of made this just an ok movie for me. I was thinking

Spoiler

the rainmaker was the one who invented time travel. then used it for his own personal gain. Did they mention who created time travel? I just remember thinking it was the boy.

Also Jeff daniels character I thought was gonna go somewhere. I thought since he was from the future he would be working with his present self. I was thinking the reason that one guy was always trying to please him was because he was his younger self. But it makes no sense why he would put his younger self in danger.

On a side note. I thought of blackbolt when he made it "rain"

 

[Bruce Malone]

I'm sure this has been discussed a lot here but the make-up on jgl was a bit distracting in some instances. Now i know JGL was cast first in this movie so maybe they should have gone for an actor who looked more like him, as opposed to having him made to look like bruce willis. Who was fine but not integral to the movie.

They should have just left jgl alone and cast keanue reeves and made him look a bit older which would have been easier to do.

 

[Terminator]

[YT]_OWW6npb9k0[/YT]

They could really have sped things up if they wanted to.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

But wasn't the reason the Rainmaker was killing Loopers in the future was that one had killed his mom...? That's the way I took it.

Spoiler

I'm pretty sure he's supposed to have killed his mom. (I don't mean his aunt, I mean, I feel like it was hinted that he kills her too.)

 

[MadVillainy]

I'm sure this has been discussed a lot here but the make-up on jgl was a bit distracting in some instances. Now i know JGL was cast first in this movie so maybe they should have gone for an actor who looked more like him, as opposed to having him made to look like bruce willis. Who was fine but not integral to the movie.

They should have just left jgl alone and cast keanue reeves and made him look a bit older which would have been easier to do.

I thought Bruce Willis was great in the role. However, i do agree about the makeup. That's my biggest problem with the film, at no time did I believe that Bruce Willis was an older version of JGL.

Still a great movie though

 

[747]

I didn't mind the make-up at all.

 

[Dr. Manhatten]

I was digging the movie. Then the rainmaker plot sort of made this just an ok movie for me. I was thinking

Spoiler

the rainmaker was the one who invented time travel. then used it for his own personal gain. Did they mention who created time travel? I just remember thinking it was the boy.

Also Jeff daniels character I thought was gonna go somewhere. I thought since he was from the future he would be working with his present self. I was thinking the reason that one guy was always trying to please him was because he was his younger self. But it makes no sense why he would put his younger self in danger.

On a side note. I thought of blackbolt when he made it "rain"

Spoiler

They never say who invented time travel but I'd highly doubt it was the boy. They say it was invented and then immediately outlawed, so it seems to me that the world would know who invented it as it'd be one of the biggest pieces of news in history. A psychic criminal on the run wouldn't be inventing it and it wouldn't make sense if he did within the confines of the story. He was just using an invention already out there for his own ends.

You're talking about Kid Blue and that's a theory that's gone around that Blue's the younger version of Abe. Thing is, Abe goes to great lengths to talk about how they don't want any time travel people running loose and don't want to cause any contradictions with time itself. So the fact he was hiring Blue and putting him in all these dangerous situations would be proof they are NOT related since that would, in his words, "fry your brain like an egg." It's made a little clearer in the deleted scenes that they're not related but even in the regular movie, I don't think there's any main evidence that should point you in that direction. It's more of a metaphorical father/son relationship than a literal one

 

[Nemi]

Spoiler

When the movie starts out, our main conflict is that of the Looper(s). As the story plays out we learn about this boy who grows up to have a firm grip over the future of the world. Similar to how Terminator starts off as a survival/chase film but we soon learn it's about saving the future of mankind - only in Terminator, they solve the small/original issue (killing the Terminator) and then the larger one (conceiving John Connor). Now with Looper, we get the problem of the Looper solved, but it's more likely that the kid is gonna grow up to be just as bad. Sure, we see him control himself for a second, but he could just as easily snap again. I mean, Joe didn't kill the kid's mom the first time anyway - she dies some other way somewhere down the road. It'll happen again. It was a cop-out on the writer's part. It would've been better (still a horrible idea) if "it was all just a dream". Had Old Joe killed the boy, the world would have been saved AND it would have made for a VERY interesting discussion.

In dirtying his hands, Old-Joe ensures that Young-Joe grows old with clean hands. He makes himself the villain so that he can still be innocent. And yet, Young-Joe still feels some guilt. Then we still get that memory that Old-Joe briefly experiences (trying to remember his "one love" and remembering the boy's mother) being true.

At this point, Old-Joe could kill himself or some ****. Young-Joe goes back to collect, and then we get an interesting relationship between Joe and the girl (does she resent him for the actions of a could-be-Joe?) The writers tried soooo hard to have an unconventional ending that they ended up with a meaningless self-sacrifice - a pretty big cliche in its own.

I believe the idea is that the events of the film (especially the scene in the field) have gone a long way to repair his relationship with his mother. That is what will keep him from growing up to become the rainmaker.