Looper

[Asteroid-Man]

Next time that kid has a spaz-attack, he's gonna kill her and grow up to me the rainmaker.

 

[Holiday]

If I remember the film right, that's incorrect because The Rainmaker knows his mother was killed by a looper. Hence why begins killing them off.

 

[the last son]

Halfway through this. I can't finish this. This has got to be one of the most boring movies I ever witnessed. I give this movie a F. Worse than In Time.

 

[redhawk23]

Next time that kid has a spaz-attack, he's gonna kill her and grow up to me the rainmaker.

A) No guarantee that will happen, she's able to calm him down now.

B) He finally realizes who she is and that he is loved so even if she does get killed he wouldn't necessarily be as damaged and evil.

 

[redhawk23]

Halfway through this. I can't finish this. This has got to be one of the most boring movies I ever witnessed. I give this movie a F. Worse than In Time.

Wow congratulations you have the attentions span of a 3 year old. Why even bother expressing an opinion of something you basically haven't seen?

 

[the last son]

I saw enough. Why finish a movie if it sucks just to say I did it. The movie was terrible. My attention span is very short when it comes to crap movies. Movies that drag, has awful dialogue, a story that has terrible pacing and a story that is all over the place. I got to around the part where he meets himself in the diner and say that's it I really don't care what happens going forward. It was that bad. When it first started you think looping sounds very cool. But the execution is terrible. There is no depth behind it. Sort of like In Time which was better than this. This movie got lazy simple as that.

 

[-JKR-]

Well, yeah. Sad that lots of depth comes after the diner meeting. And I'd say it's just you having a short attention span (without the "with crap movies").

 

[the last son]

You all are acting like I'm the only one who has complained of this.

 

[Tanin]

I liked the movie a lot, the last son is right though... this movie's pacing is all over the place.

 

[redhawk23]

You all are acting like I'm the only one who has complained of this.

Its a pretty well regarded movie.

And even most people that weren't into it at least bothered to finish the film before complaining about it.

 

[Infinity9999x]

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.

Actually....

Spoiler

Joe definitely DID kill the kid's Mom the first time. Hence why the Rainmaker has a vendetta against Loopers AND a prosthetic jaw. We don't know if he grew up to be in the Rainmaker in other "loops" of time so to speak, since obviously loops can change (hence why the old Joe that Willis plays actually killed his older self, while the younger Joe we see obviously doesn't, creating a new "loop.")

That instance right there shows that loops are obviously changable. I don't think the Rainmaker grew up to be th "Rainmaker" until that new loop somehow started. Remember that old Joe talked about the Rainmaker as someone he hadn't heard about until he grew older, but our young Joe heard about the Rainmaker from his friend before his friend was killed. So I think it's fair to say the Rainmaker didn't originally exist in that capacity.

Now, when the new "loop" that included the Rainmaker actually began, well that's anyone's guess. But then, that's always what happens when you deal with time travel stuff.

Anyways though, the original point is that the Rainmaker only ever became the Rainmaker if Joe shot his Mom. That much is sure.

 

[Brother Jack]

Halfway through this. I can't finish this. This has got to be one of the most boring movies I ever witnessed. I give this movie a F. Worse than In Time.

You should get into comedy.

 

[Snow Queen]

I saw enough. Why finish a movie if it sucks just to say I did it. The movie was terrible. My attention span is very short when it comes to crap movies. Movies that drag, has awful dialogue, a story that has terrible pacing and a story that is all over the place. I got to around the part where he meets himself in the diner and say that's it I really don't care what happens going forward. It was that bad. When it first started you think looping sounds very cool. But the execution is terrible. There is no depth behind it. Sort of like In Time which was better than this. This movie got lazy simple as that.

I recommend going back to Transformers 3, might not be as boring for you.

 

[moviedoors]

I fell asleep rewatching this last night. It's a damn fine film, and Levitt is even better than I remember. But Paul Dano? I'm glad he has such limited screen time. He overacts from his first line to his last.

 

[jacobed]

Yeah he does, big time

 

[vanson]

I recommend going back to Transformers 3, might not be as boring for you.

 

[MOVIELORD101]

As much as I loved the movie, and I really did, I have a question to pose about the ending:

Spoiler

While I thought the ending was great, I'm just curious: couldn't Joe have still shot his future self instead of committing suicide? Think about this. The little boy that "Future Joe" went back to kill would've become the evil head of the Looper society in the future if his mom was killed. If Joe"had shot "Future Joe" like he was going to to begin with, the mom would've still lived anyway, and she and her son would've still gotten a happy ending. PLUS, "Future Joe" had killed all the other Looper head-honchos and cronies in the "present day" time point anyway, so he wouldn't have to worry about them coming for him for "closing his loop" BECAUSE THE LOOP-CLOSING TECHNICALLY WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. Thus, Joe could've chosen to live his life in peace for the rest of his days and not worry about his past coming back to bite him in the arse!

What do you guys think?

 

[ThePhantasm]

As much as I loved the movie, and I really did, I have a question to pose about the ending:

Spoiler

While I thought the ending was great, I'm just curious: couldn't Joe have still shot his future self instead of committing suicide? Think about this. The little boy that "Future Joe" went back to kill would've become the evil head of the Looper society in the future if his mom was killed. If Joe"had shot "Future Joe" like he was going to to begin with, the mom would've still lived anyway, and she and her son would've still gotten a happy ending. PLUS, "Future Joe" had killed all the other Looper head-honchos and cronies in the "present day" time point anyway, so he wouldn't have to worry about them coming for him for "closing his loop" BECAUSE THE LOOP-CLOSING TECHNICALLY WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. Thus, Joe could've chosen to live his life in peace for the rest of his days and not worry about his past coming back to bite him in the arse!

What do you guys think?

No, he couldn't.

Spoiler

The blunderbuss is a short range weapon. This was mentioned several times in the film. Young Joe was too far away from Future Joe to shoot him in time.

 

[MOVIELORD101]

No, he couldn't.

Spoiler

The blunderbuss is a short range weapon. This was mentioned several times in the film. Young Joe was too far away from Future Joe to shoot him in time.

Oh, yeah. Forgot about that. Blast.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Oh, yeah. Forgot about that. Blast.

Though one thing that could have worked...

Spoiler

Would have been if he had blown off his own hand, rendering old Joe unable to shoot the gun for a moment, until he got closer and could kill old joe. But considering the short amount of time he had to react, it would have been kind of hard to think of that. Not only that, but it wouldn't have garunteed him enough time to get to old Joe before old Joe picked up the gun and tried to shoot with his other hand.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Though one thing that could have worked...

Spoiler

Would have been if he had blown off his own hand, rendering old Joe unable to shoot the gun for a moment, until he got closer and could kill old joe. But considering the short amount of time he had to react, it would have been kind of hard to think of that. Not only that, but it wouldn't have garunteed him enough time to get to old Joe before old Joe picked up the gun and tried to shoot with his other hand.

Spoiler

Actually old Joe would have been able to react to losing his hand faster, as he'd feel no pain. Young Joe, however, would have to react to the pain AND run.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Spoiler

Actually old Joe would have been able to react to losing his hand faster, as he'd feel no pain. Young Joe, however, would have to react to the pain AND run.

Yep. What he did was really the only sure fire thing that would have worked.

 

[THANOSRULES]

So here is my BIG question of the film:

Spoiler

Why were the conditions of old joe returning to be killed in the field different between the two Joes? It seems clear old joe, in his youth killed his older self who was hooded and shackled. Why did this end up being different for the film young joe with a different situation? Abd yes i realize the flash forward explained his getting the break on the guys...but it didnt really explain why he would have been secured in the old joes past

I guess there are several ways to explain this , but really nothing coherent.

Loved the movie!

 

[the last son]

I recommend going back to Transformers 3, might not be as boring for you.

Not a fan of transformers but ok. How was looper any different? It got lazy with the story writing. I have no problem with a lot of talking. But bad dialogue I do. F bombs a bunch of yelling and screaming. Overly loud in general. Bad acting as well. JGL was ok though.

 

[THANOSRULES]

I also had this beef, and forgive me if this has been already discussed.

Spoiler

How Joe killing himself would actually effect the old joe..IE make him vanish.. because clearly the movie would have never took place if the timeline's were truly connected..the movie really would have never took place, so essentially we would blink back to the point of the films start -1 sec to new joe failing to kill himself. SO the fact that young joe can kill himself and make the old joe vanish, yet young joe is still in the field and dead..still creates a massive nonsensical paradox.

The film seems to suggest that one can impact the future, but the real impact of what they were suggesting should have taken the memory, the impact and was executed as dumbed down in scope.

I guess it would have clearly worked if the prevailing view on time travel, that separate and alternate realities are created by traveling back in time..but since you cannot effect your actual timeline this way, it would take some of the purpose and motivation out of the film.

In the end, it seems like the result of all the time travel was an amalgam of the "alternate timeline theory" but the film clearly had a priority that what happened in the past could effect the future characters dramatically...IE they contradict themselves and don't do it that well.

I'm not really suggesting there is an explanation to this plot whole..I think it was something that just doesnt make sense and the directors thought it would just be something most people wouldnt be smart enough to catch...in effect it works out, because I still think it was an excellent film.