Looper (2012) User Reviews

I wish the writer had finished the movie he started

[davejones · 7/10 · 29 September 2012]

Don't get me wrong; this movie is very well made. It was well acted, shot and directed. I was never bored.

But I started out watching a movie about a hit man who shoots mob victims sent back in time from the future, and knows that his final victim will be his older self. Interesting idea--even if it's not very plausible. But okay, let's just run with it. That's the movie I saw in the trailers, the one I expected to see.

So, when his future self comes back, present-day self hesitates for a moment and future self gets the drop on him and runs off. Now present-day self must hunt down and kill future self. Also interesting.

SPOILER FOLLOWS

But then, it's all about a telekinetic farm kid who will one day rule the world with an iron fist. . . er, brain. . . if he isn't stopped.

Huh. . . ? Where the hell did that come from? I know, I know, it's foreshadowed by showing us that 10% of the population has trivial telekinetic powers. They can make coins float above their hands.

But to me, this film starts one story and then switches in mid-stream to a story stemming from a second, unrelated science fiction premise.

While it was refreshing that the movie didn't just turn into a series of action sequences in which JGL tries to kill BW (which would have been a pretty one-sided conflict, admittedly) I found this shift in emphasis to be far more distracting than Joseph Gordon-Levitt's prosthetic nose. Which I never had a problem with.

Anyway, I appear to be the only one bothered by this so just go ahead and enjoy the movie.

Cause and effect

[Prismark10 · 7/10 · 26 April 2015]

Looper is a movie that certainly divides opinion. Its take on time travel and assassination is certainly flawed and has loopholes.

However its certainly an entertaining story and its nice to see a film where Bruce Willis makes an effort, he certainly must have liked the script.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is Joe a drug addicted assassin who kills and disposes bodies of victims sent 30 years back in time by a crime syndicate which runs time travel machines. One day these loopers will have to kill their older selves. Its called closing the loop.

However it emerges that in the future a person called The Rainmaker has unrivalled telekinetic powers and is sending loopers back in time to be killed.

Bruce Willis is an older version of Joe. He through the love of a woman cleaned himself up and found inner peace. However as he is taken to be sent back in time, his wife is killed and he vows to kill the child that will grow up to be The Rainmaker.

Younger Joe needs to kill older Joe before the mob in his present kills both of them. He meanwhile seeks refuge in a farmhouse where he discovers a boy with telekinetic powers.

Hence we have a chain of events that would go off and affect both Joes. Maybe somehow, younger Joe can close a loop.

Its a novel update and presentation of sci fi tropes that we have seen before in films like Terminator. The sci fi is not foolproof as the director would like it to be but the film is appealing and entertaining enough with a nice blend of action and thrills.

The kid playing the young Rainmaker was outstanding.

All The Time in the World

[patrickwigington · 8/10 · 30 September 2012]

Looper is an exciting and mentally stimulating science fiction movie that goes above and beyond in the realm of creativity. Original and thought provoking in its execution, this is a movie about time travel with a future that is gritty, plausible, and fantastic to absorb.

Taking its cues from hard hitting gangster movies, the story follows Joe, a young man living in 2044 America that is crippled with economic collapse. He works for the mafia as a "looper". This is a job that requires some explanation. You see, 30 years from 2044, time travel will be invented. It is highly illegal, but is used by the mob to dump bodies, because it is impossible to do so in the future-future. Loopers get set times and places where they wait for their victims to appear, bound, gagged, and with a mask over their head. Sometimes a looper ends up killing himself from the future. This begins happening quite often, and rumor has it that a man named the Rain Maker is ordering the killings of all loopers. Joe does not seem to think much of this until his future self arrives, without a mask on. His future self escapes, looking for the child who will one day become the Rain Maker. Young Joe finds a woman and her young, troubled boy who are one of the people on Old Joe's map. He decides to wait there to confront his older self, to try and make things right with the mob.

The movie twists and turns in unexpected ways that create a true feeling of suspense. Rian Johnson takes major influences from the likes of Martin Scorsese to craft a cold and calculating crime film. However, Johnson makes a movie that is so original and eclectic that it is obvious this is the work of a man who knows how to tell a story. There is plenty of action, but it never becomes more important than the story or the characters. Johnson also wrote the script, and he brings humanity to all of the players involved. The introduction of alternate timelines is only the beginning of the insane subplots that pop up, and all fit nicely together. The gritty and subdued style invokes a noir aspect that only serves to enhance the movie.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays young Joe. He is fantastic as the cool, calm, and collected gunman. His face is altered with makeup to make him look more like old Joe, played by Bruce Willis. Levitt even speaks like the action star. Willis is really great in a subdued and complicated performance, although it would have been nice for his character to have had a more expanded role; he seems to fall into the role of the antagonist too quickly. Emily Blunt plays the hardened and self reliant mother of the boy old Joe is hunting. Blunt's character is used well and she gives an excellent performance.

Looper is a bizarre movie, and that is a very good thing. Exciting, thoughtful, and at times disturbing, this film is mesmerizing to watch. It's not often that an action film is even half as good as this one, and rarely are movies so much fun to watch.

thatguythatlikesmovies.blogspot.com

Refreshingly original

[markdroulston · 8/10 · 27 September 2012]

Sitting here the day after viewing Rian Johnson's Looper, parts of it are still falling in to place. Standing out amongst this years crop of mostly underwhelming sequels and comic book adaptations, Looper thunders onto the screen, showing, much like Inception did two years ago, that there is a place in 2012 for fresh material and just how good it can be when it's done right.

The film tells the story of Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a hit-man for an organised crime syndicate tasked with assassinating targets sent from the future. After being confronted with his future self (Bruce Willis) and failing to perform, Young Joe is forced to track down Old Joe and finish the job before being tracked down himself by the nefarious mob led by Abe (Jeff Daniels). However there is much more to the story than the basic premise, and Johnson isn't afraid to keep details close to his chest until later in the film than most movies of this type, so I won't spoil them here.

While certainly paying subtle homage to its predecessors, Looper is a stunningly original sci-fi masterpiece, vastly superior to any of the higher profile action releases this year. While certainly made on a much larger playing field than Johnson's previous work (Brick, The Brothers Bloom), there is still a small-scale, independent feel to the film, and it benefits from clearly staying completely under the control of the young director. Delivering excitement sprinkled with thoughtful themes of personal sacrifice, he offers us much to chew on.

Johnson understands that a successful action film doesn't need an explosion every ten minutes, and allows ample time for developing character and story, something which will likely divide audiences. Looper is very deliberately constructed, and after the highly charged opening establishing the intricate time-travel premise and direction of the plot, Johnson scales back the action almost too much as he ambitiously juggles the many and varied story elements he has created. Thankfully, any weakness in the middle of the film is largely overshadowed as Johnson launches the third act with such ferocity that the stark change of pace leaves you breathless.

Despite the problems in the middle of the film, Looper overcomes its flaws purely by being that rare beast in Hollywood nowadays, the totally original script. Not an adaptation, not a sequel or remake, but a fresh idea from the mind of an immensely talented young film-maker. In a perfect world, Looper would be the game changer it deserves to be, slapping Hollywood studios across the face and announcing that not everything has to be a PG-13 franchise based on a comic book. It's unlikely that this will the case, and it remains to be seen whether or not the film will even be a success, but it's encouraging to see that there are young auteurs at work who are fighting to craft new and exciting stories, even if we only get to see the results every year or two.

tinribs27.wordpress.com

Parenthood and Self-Sacrifice

[yernelg · 8/10 · 27 December 2012]

i always approach a film especially when it is classified as scifi with liberal suspension of disbelief. because it is only through that that i was able to appreciate such scifi gems as Stargate and Fifth Element and many other that were otherwise written off by these so-called critics.

Looper is one of those films that should be appreciated by its message more than its genre. it uses the science fiction medium, complete with action stunts and wonders, as an apt and well-sculpted vehicle to a very beautiful message of self-sacrifice and positive reinforcement parenthood. the film goes to extra length to make the story plausible and solid and the actors, including the 'rainmaker' child, did a marvelous job of pulling it off.

i've always believed that the soul of any film, even as i appreciate great plot twists and great special fx and great acting and direction (yeah, i said great too many times!), is the message and/or portrait it intends to get across. Looper made a kill for it.

Despite the Paradoxes and Plot Holes, Looper is an Entertaining Adventure

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 17 February 2013]

In 2074, it is possible to travel in time but also forbidden. However, when the criminal organizations want to kill someone, they send their victims to thirty years in the past where well paid hit men called "loopers" kill them and get rid of their bodies. When the mobsters decide to call off a contract with any killer they send him back to be killed by himself and close the loop.

In 2044, in Kansas, Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is one looper addicted in drugs. He learns that the powerful Rainmaker has assumed control of the criminal organizations and is closing all the loops. Soon Joe has to kill the "old" Joe (Bruce Willis) but he is surprised and fails. Joe chases old Joe but the criminal Abe (Jeff Daniels) sends his killers to hunt him down.

Joe meets old Joe that tells him that his beloved wife was killed by the Rainmaker's gang. Old Joe also tells that he has found three possible children that might be the Rainmaker in the future and he will kill them to protect his wife. However they are found by the loopers and Joe flees and stumbles with Sara (Emily Blunt) in her farm. She helps him and soon Joe discovers that her son Cid (Pierce Gagnon) is the Rainmaker and he decides to protect them from the determined old Joe.

"Looper" is one of those fast paced action movies that do not give time for the viewer to think about. There are a great number of plot holes and paradoxes, especially in the relationship between Joe and old Joe, and if the viewer thinks a little, he or she will find many inconsistencies in the story. One question: wouldn't be easier if the mobster kill his victims and send their bodies to be disposed in the past? Despite of that, "Looper" is an entertaining adventure. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Looper: Assassinos do Futuro" ("Looper: Assassins from the Future")

Very clever, very original and very welcome.

[janus-20 · 10/10 · 29 September 2012]

I would have thought it doubtful that anyone could have anything new to add to the sci-fi sub category of time travel movies. After watching Looper yesterday, i'm happy to report that Rian Johnson has removed those doubts and given me hope that sci-fi in Hollywood can be more than just empty spectacle.

First off i would say, don't get discouraged from watching the film if you think its going to be too complex or difficult to follow. To follow the story and recognise characters motivations does require a little concentration, but not to the point that you wont enjoy the action beats and other more visceral elements.

The story is well constructed, information and plot points are presented at an entertaining and well judged pace. There are some nice little throw away visual references and metaphors which, if you catch them, add a nice texture to the story and stop it feeling too clinical in its plotting.

The script is tight, hard edged and very dry in its humour, the actors are fantastic. I think its fair to say that Joseph Gordon-Levitt is well on his way to being "one to watch", Bruce Willis pops back to life here, clearly enjoying himself again, (although i wouldn't say this is solely a Bruce Willis movie in that definition).

This is a brilliant movie experience, its an wholly original and entertaining idea, that the writer/director has managed to successfully transpose to film without, it would appear to a layman, pressure or interference from external sources.

No matter how much of a good time you will have watching this film (and you will), Hollywood could stand to learn much more from it.

We are entering a Loop 7/10

[saadanathan · 7/10 · 7 August 2021]

"Looper" by Rian Johnson is an impressive film with an original story. Centers in the future where assassins known as "Loopers" kill targets who are transported from the past by the mob. Joe, a skilled assassin discovers he has to kill his older self sent from the past and unveils a plot that will effect his life of both his and his older self. The movie is great and relies on the term of "cat and mouse" game between all characters. Joseph Gordon Leavitt is a great actor and portrays perfectly every role of his. As the main character he does a good job. Bruce Willis is amazing yet again, his performance reminded me of his role in "12 Monkeys": a traveler from time who is a skilled assassin and needs to stop a plot from happening. Emily Blunt is as always, Emily Blunt. I mean there's nothing wrong with her performance but her character is annoying and reminded me of her role in "Sicario". The film in general is good and has it's moments but I wouldn't watch it again or recommend it immediately after seeing the movie.

Unfortunate this movie is getting so many negative reviews and comments

[luckynumchris · 9/10 · 15 October 2012]

I've been reading many reviews and the discussion boards on this site, and after just coming back from enjoying it, I was very disappointing to see so many negative reviews and comments. I'm definitely going to be responding to some comments in the discussion boards from some specific details of the movie, but for now I will just write a review. And a positive review since there is so many haters out there.

Firstly I have to say I am a big fan of sci-fi and specifically time travel. And as a huge fan I can see how since you're doing a movie/story about something that doesn't exist, or something we don't understand, of course there will be some plot holes and always ask, "why didn't he do this" or, "why couldn't they do that" or "he could've just done this" but being a film with only so much time to tell this unique story I think it did a great job with it. It takes a black-noir sort of character and puts him in the year 2044, where time travel hasn't even been invented yet but eventually does and used by only secret criminal organizations. These organizations seem to gather future "trash" and are disposed by loopers who are told to wait at a specific time and wait to pull the trigger. Which so happens to be our protagonist (who suspiciously reminds me of Max Payne). Now the kind of people that are sent back in time to be killed by "loopers" (yes there is more than one), we are given no prior knowledge of who they were or what they have done. What I really enjoyed was the fact of, what they considered is bad? Who deserved to die?

Anyway we are given a few glimpses of how the rest of the city looks in this time and how a first world country in some parts, looks like a third world country in others. People thrive on scraps, constantly stealing from one another and just surviving. While the rich are comfortable and most probably criminals or in some way affiliated with the crime land. Now I know this can be considered very cheap and cliché, but clichés are clichés for a reason. It's supposed to show how the world is brought down by it being run by criminal minds. People from the future who come from the past to make the past "better" and how these people are ignored for rich people to think of themselves. Which was the point of the movie, because when you are talking about changing the future, do you want to change the future to make it better for you? Or for the rest of the world? This would make more sense to people who have seen this movie, but for those of you that haven't, I just hope you don't read a lot of these "reviews" and decide not to "waste your money." It talks about time travel, different dimensions and for being a time travel movie leaves very little holes (of course they are some but it's inevitable in a sci-fi).

I can't finish this review without saying how great the cinematography of this film was. At time you could just feel how the character was feeling, when he was giving narrating sections while showing all he did was murder faceless people, over and over. And he actually has plans, and start to care for who he is and what he becomes.

I could probably talk about this movie all day, but I don't want this review to be a novel, so I'll finish it here but my main objective of this review is for people not to miss out on this great movie, as the acting is top notch and at some part comical, with a great new actor who is no older than 10! How the director makes Joseph Levitt's character act like Bruce Willis and either Rian or Joseph does a great job depicting it, it's as if I was listening and watching Bruce Willis most of the film. My biggest complaint was the action sequences when it came to gun play. I found it lazy how everyone shot at Bruce Willis but the bullets flew all around him. There were times he took cover and I guess because his character is just smart enough he knows when to take cover and just shoot because the opponents he's dealing with are clumsy and inexperienced. Anyway small complaint for a very well done film. 9/10 Enjoy!

Good film, but left me cold

[DanLawson146 · 7/10 · 22 May 2020]

POSITIVES:

1) Bruce Willis gives his best performance in years, the best performance of the film for me 2) The diner conversation scene with Young Joe and Old Joe is the best scene in the film 3) It is an original idea, which is rare for a film nowadays 4) The film definitely kept me engaged enough to want to know what was going to happen at the end 5) The moral dilemma of whether or not to kill a child that you know is going to turn evil is very thought provoking; also it is very similar to when Rian Johnson did the same thing again with Luke thinking about killing Kylo in Last Jedi

NEGATIVES:

1) There are elements of the time travel dynamic that make no sense; so much so that at one point Bruce Willis actually says "forget about the time travel rules or we'll be here all day" 2) The film tries to feel very grounded in reality, but there are elements such as the flying cars and the telekinesis that are fantastical and don't quite fit with the otherwise grounded tone 3) Jeff Daniels (who I love) gives a very caricatured performance in what is otherwise a very serious film 4) Young Joe is positioned as the hero of the film but I struggled to like him because at the end of the day he is a junkie thug who almost runs over an innocent child at the start of the film whilst high on drugs 5) There is a scene where Young Joe is riding a flying motorbike through a cornfield and the CGI looked terrible

Intelligent Science Fiction Thriller

[tgooderson · 9/10 · 24 September 2012]

Looper is a film that goes to extraordinary lengths to leave every base covered in its quest to avoid plot holes and inconsistencies and in my mind it deals with the problems associated with time travel very well. One thing I liked is that the older Joe is aware of everything the younger Joe is about to do which gives him an edge if they were to do battle. I also liked that the older Joe in true Bruce Willis style bypasses the whole idea of trying to work out how and why what is happening is happening by saying he can't be bothered to work it all out. As well as the older Joe having the advantage of memory over the younger Joe, the younger Joe in turn has his own advantages which become apparent. There were several times when I thought I'd worked out what was going to happen or what a particular character's arc was going to be but the film cleverly manipulates its audience, leading them down alleyways only to jump out at them from behind and spin them around. There is a nice early twist which gave me a smile and plenty more to keep you guessing right the way to the end. In the end it turns out that time travel plays second fiddle to another phenomenon which I was pleased by as there was no mention of this in the trailer which I've been trying to avoid for several weeks. The plot is multifaceted with each character having their own reasons for being where they are, when they are and doing what they are doing. It is a dense plot which explores several different ideas and concepts both personal and scientific.

As well as confidently dealing with a complex script which would have been very easy to either make too complicated or too full of holes, Writer/Director Rian Johnson (Brick) also creates a very believable future and fills it with people and events which feel plausible. Cities have continued to expand upwards and outwards but they themselves are filled with tent cities in which a large vagrant class live. Life is cheap and hard in this world in which the have's and have not's are much more separated than today. There is enough in the film to make to world feel as though it is our near future and the technology on display feels as though it is a few logical steps along the road. I especially liked the ingenious solution to running cars after the inevitable the oil crisis and there's also a great line about China in there which had a lot of people laughing.

The writing and direction are superb but another strength are the acting performances. Joseph Gordon-Levitt wears heavy makeup and prosthetics to make him look more like Bruce Willis and although this is occasionally a little distracting, it looks unnervingly good at times, especially closer up which is odd. The effect is actually better in close up than when JG-L is in the middle distance. Underneath the prosthetics though Gordon-Levitt delivers a fine performance, adopting a few of Willis' telltale mannerisms and affectations but avoiding pure mimicry. He appears confident and at ease in the dense lead role, carrying off a mixture of hard edged killer and caring young man while switching from one to the other with ease. Bruce Willis equally is very good but we have seen this kind of performance from him many times before. Nevertheless he is on good form here. The chemistry between the two leads was great and really helped with the believability of them being one person. Emily Blunt was another actor who performed very well and in a departure from her more familiar roles. She adopts a convincing American accent, drops a few F-Bombs and looks comfortable holding a gun. She brings to the fore the feminine caring side when it matters though. Probably the standout actor though despite the three A Listers is Pierce Gagnon, a very young child actor who is incredible in a pivotal role. He and Gordon-Levitt have some funny and tense scenes together which work very well.

Overall there was little I didn't like about Looper and it has gone straight into my Top 10 films of the year so far as well as being probably my favourite Sci-Fi since 2009's Moon. It treats its audience with respect and isn't afraid to keep you them of the loop for a while as it teases them with false and sometimes seemingly false information. It is well designed and acted and features a wonderfully multifaceted and intelligent story which rewards patience and concentration with a fantastic ending.

www.attheback.blogspot.com

Could be a cult classic.

[JohnDeSando · 27 September 2012]

"This time travel crap just fries your brain like an egg." (Abe)

Not since Children of Men (2006) and Source Code (2011) have I been as jazzed up as I am now about Rian Johnson's Looper. Here's sci-fi that will happily fry your brain as you figure out the implications of changing the future by altering the present. Also throw in thoughts about Christopher Nolan's Memento and Inception to get the flavor of Looper.

But as Sinatra sings, "Regrets I've had a few, but then too few to really mention," this film challenges you to think of the implications of reversing those regrets or keeping the future the same because you kind of like the way things went.

Joseph Gordon Levitt's Joe is a "looper," an assassin who goes into the past to murder someone needed to be absent in the future, 2072. The Mob, headed by a very relaxed and dangerous Jeff Daniels as Abe, determines to eliminate all loopers, and Joe is next on the list to kill himself by flashing back. Yes, it's existentially a difficult task, and therein lies the drama of this satisfying sci-fi.

With less CGI and few glitzy machines (in fact most of the vehicles look shabby 2012 and the loopers' weapon is a sawed-off Steampunk shot gun—how's that for past and future?), this thriller relies to an effective degree on the excellent cast to relay the challenges inherent in altering any past.

Because it's an intelligent tale, the overall theme of responsibility for our actions (the existential part) flows quietly from the action, be it as simple as running from the bad guys to the complexity of deciding on the sacrifices willing to be made to alter the future.

A leitmotiv of this film is that no one is immune from the effects of the past, Sinatra notwithstanding in his apparent satisfaction with how things turned out. For Looper, cult status is its future.

A novel twist on time travel

[IndridC0ld · 7/10 · 3 January 2021]

There are some parts of this film I like SO MUCH. It's too bad there are many others that just drag on. The first 25 minutes are genuinely entertaining. This is where the movie sets up the plot, introduces the main character, (who gives a great performance) and exposes the movie's unique take on time travel. However, the rest of the film is just your average chase thriller. Not bad, but just not that good. I have watched and rewatched the first 25 minutes, and they are uniformly terrific. When I started watching it for the first time, I had to call my wife into the living room because those first 25 minutes TOTALLY drew me in. Unfortunately, like so many movies of today, it soon veers off into the trite and predictable. A shame.

Badly Conceived.

[smug2000 · 5/10 · 30 September 2012]

Looper was enjoyable enough but I really can't understand all the praise. Maybe I expected too much of this film, but I was looking forward to a slick piece of speculative sci-fi that was thought- provoking, realistic and fairly deep. Instead, I got a lazily strung together generic action movie with a splash of time travel and super- powers.

"I don't want to talk time travel sh*t" or something along those lines is commonly used in this film to breeze past any plot holes and presumably stop the narrative become too complex. This irked me as it was one of the main draws in my opinion.

I was very frustrated by the little amount of effort that was put in to creating a futuristic society. Forget the realistic near-future depicted spectacularly in films such as Children of Men. This world is more akin to the recent Dredd 3D film. Shallow and lacking in realism. Personally, I would love to have had more information on the state of government etc as the mobs seemed to be running everything but there really isn't any explanation given to this at all.

The dynamics of time travel in this film are completely unbelievable. The notion that you can chop someone leg or whatever off and their "future self" will lose it is completely absurd. You're clearly creating a brand new entity when you come back in time. Put it this way. If I created a copy of myself from 0.1 seconds ago next to me. Are we going to be magically linked? Probably not. It also presupposes some sort of multi-verse scenario, in which case, Bruce Willis's character shouldn't even exist in that eventuality. I don't want to rant about this too much but I thought of all the ways they could depict time travel. This was one of the worst.

And then there are the superpowers. Come on. Everyone has pretty much agreed biological evolution is basically over for us and it's all about technical augmentation now. The idea that in 33 years we'll be developing telekinesis is laughable to the point where the fact you're meant to accept this is almost offensive.

On top of this, the whole plot in general is very hard to swallow and lacks in verisimilitude. Again, I find myself being forced to accept these absurd scenarios such as the fact that the mob can't dispose of bodies, but can set up secret time machines?? Or that they have to send them 30 years back in time and not just 2 billion years or whatever.

And then there's the 30 year montage. Oh dear lord. I turned to my girlfriend and said. "Man, don't you just hate it when you get old and suddenly you're Bruce Willis". There was actually laughter in the cinema when Levitt morphs into Willis.

All in all, I really wouldn't agree with the reviews saying its clever etc. In my opinion the plot is extremely lazy and is secondary to the action. Which is fine. If you want to watch an action film. One of the main reason's I've even written this view is to counterbalance these reviews raving about this very mediocre film calling it a "masterpiece". I read reviews touting it's cleverness or how it goes to extra lengths to not leave plot holes and I think: am I even watching the same movie here?

Personally, I found myself rather disappointed.

High Concept Intrigue

[billygoat1071 · 10/10 · 18 October 2012]

Looper seems like it's inspired by Philip K. Dick's several works. It's a Sci-Fi story that is set in the future with a quite interesting concept. The ads shows this as a typical nonstop action film. Surprisingly, it's much better than anyone would expect. It's actually a mind blowing film that tells an unpredictable story and has a great amount of thrills. The performances are strong and the directing is solid. Unlike most modern Sci-Fi films they depend on the action and the explosions. Looper is all about letting the audience intrigue all the way on the concept.

The important thing you should expect in this film is the brilliance of the concept than the action. Yeah, there's fighting and gunfights but it's mostly about the idea. The film tells it in a stylish and mind boggling way which makes it compelling. The story development is clever. The first half lets the viewers root for the film's world until the plot twists. It's great when a scene suddenly becomes confusing then it all make sense afterwards. Aside of its storytelling, Joseph Gordon-Levitt did a great job playing the young version of Bruce Willis as he imitates Willis' accent and gruffness. He still plays the role with his own style. Gordon-Levitt is energetic and striking. The rest of the cast are excellent.

The production design is decent. Its futuristic world looks magnificent and their weaponry looks awesome. The camera-work is one of the merits of the film. It makes the action look stylish and brings cool vertigo to the trippy moments. Every shot of the film is impressive. The most interesting one is when Joe was in the fields, you prominently see a cloud trail on the sky remarking the scene. The script is smart enough for explaining its concept and making things gripping.

Looper is one of those films that would stuck in your head in a long time because it's plain brilliant. It's so different to popular modern Sci-Fi films. This film is not an action movie cookie-cutter that leaves the high concept as the background of the film. This film simply narrates, mind-bends, and intrigues which makes it amazingly interesting. The idea is original with some inspiration. Looper has the art, the heart, the tension, and the brains that any science fiction fans would love.

This time travel crap; just fries your brain like an egg "

[TheSquiss · 8/10 · 25 September 2012]

Time travel films open up all manner of questions because of the paradoxes every action and reaction produce. If X occurred, surely Y would happen, which means X wouldn't happen after all… And so it is with Looper.

Alas, to avoid dishing out hugely unpopular plot spoilers I need to skirt around the concerns, so you'll just have to come round with cake and we can discuss it in private. But there are some pretty substantial issues with Looper that cause questions to be asked and lead to more than a couple of possible explanations as to what exactly is going on. Don't see it alone; you'll need a friend around to discuss it on the journey home.

Equally, don't be put off. You don't need to be Einstein to enjoy Looper, as some of the audience proved…

In 2072, time travel is both possible and illegal and murder is more easily solved because corpses are harder to lose. However mobs and Mafiosi types are prevalent and have ingeniously devised a solution: tie your victim up and send him back in time to a location where a looper will be waiting to blow his/her brains out. However, when a looper's contract is up, they find themselves blowing the brains out of their older self. Except when looper Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) stares down the barrel at a version of himself that is thirty years older, Old Joe (Bruce Willis) outsmarts him and so begins a cat and mouse chase where there are multiples of each species and most of them aren't called Joe.

Confused? Good. Don't think any more or you'll confound yourself with your wondering and wandering along all the possible flows and tributaries that lead from them. Like, Is he actually... Dammit.

Along with the quirks, possibilities and matters left to interpretation, there are one or two clear boo-boos that cut against the rules writer/director Rian Johnson (Brick, The Brothers Bloom) has set himself. I'm sure you can work out from the subject matter that there are occasional murders so I'm giving nothing away by stating that a particular murder in 2027 cuts against the rules. It's not a major problem in terms of enjoyment but it does cast a shadow over everything if minor errors are not avoided.

There's only one way to watch Looper: suspend all disbelief, put your logic in stasis and get on with enjoying the romp. With that frame of mind employed, it's a superb film. No, it's not as intelligent a film as Inception, but it kicks the ass of Wanted and Gordon-Levitt is potentially a bigger star in the making than either Leonardo DiCaprio or James McAvoy.

I'm not sure that I buy Gordon-Levitt as a young Willis but the transition is simple and effectively executed and it needn't stand in the way of a couple of hours of great entertainment. He's matured as an actor and, though he's been stamping around Hollywood for a good couple of decades, it's the last five years or so that have really seen him ascend the ranks and there's no sign of his climb slowing with both Spielberg's Lincoln and Don Jon's Addiction (which he also wrote and directed) in the can and Premium Rush earning plaudits on both sides of the Atlantic.

As for Willis, it's good to see him earning his fee again in a film worthy of his presence rather than phoning it in for a fat wad in the truly awful The Expendables 2. Emily Blunt (Sara) and Jeff Daniels ably provide support, the former, sadly, barely stretched and the latter, as Abe, the loopers' boss, clearly enjoying himself. Equally, Paul Dano gives a wonderful, trademark sniveling wretch performance that is all too brief. But Looper belongs to Gordon-Levitt and One Tree Hill's Pierce Gagnon as the child, Cid, whose middle name is probably Damian. Unnerving is an understatement!

There is a very strong argument that the best person to direct a film is the writer because s/he knows it better than anyone. Clearly that wasn't the case with Maximum Overdrive (Stephen King being the fine writer who should never be allowed either in front of or behind a camera again) but with Looper it's a very strong case in point.

Johnson, though he bends his rules, has created a multi-layered, rapidly paced trip that is littered with bodies and to-die-for quips, to wit, "I cleaned you up. And put a gun in your hand." He juggles the time zones effortlessly and maintains the excitement while allowing sufficient moments for us to pause, cogitate and catch up before whipping us to the next sprint, jump or shoot-out. Though he has nothing (publicly) on the slate, there'll be plenty more from him in the next few years.

As is increasingly the case, my biggest complaint with last night's viewing has nothing to do with the film itself but with the screening, namely the blown speakers all along one side of the auditorium (big thumbs down to Cineworld) and the moron in front who played with his phone and gave muted shrieks of excitement every time there was a shot or splatter of blood, even taking the time to relive it with his friend. Who are these people? Why are they allowed to breathe? When will time travel come to my aid? Ah, but these are niggles and hopefully you won't be subjected to such when you watch Looper. And do see it. Maybe you'll absolutely hate the confusion it causes you, but if you don't mind giving a film some real thought and you enjoyed the possibilities of Inception, then Looper is for you.

Just don't think too hard. As Abe laments, "This time travel crap; just fries your brain like an egg…"

For more reviews subscribe to www.thesquiss.co.uk

Like the Facebook page: http://on.fb.me/RpitOG

Sci-Fi With a Brain

[Michael_Elliott · 14 January 2013]

Looper (2012)

*** 1/2 (out of 4)

I think to fully enjoy LOOPER it's best that you go in with very limited knowledge as to the story and the events that happen. If you've seen the trailer then you know all you need to know. The film takes place in the future where "loopers" kill people being sent back from the future. A loopers job is over when they send his older self back to be killed. LOOPER is a very rare type of science-fiction film meaning that it has a brain, which is something missing from most of these types of movies. I'm not typically a big fan of the genre but there's no question that when someone takes the time to come up with a great story then the result can be something special. Writer-director Rian Johnson deserves a lot of credit for not only making a smart film but he also deserves credit for keeping the viewer on the edge of their seat and not knowing what's going to happen next. I said it's best to view this film knowing very little about what happens and that's because there are so many twists and turns that it would be a real shame for someone to know what happens before actually seeing the film. Even a smart film will often times go off the rails because the twists become confusing and make no sense but that never happens here. The film flows beautifully in and out of every plot twist and in the end the viewer feels rewarded. The performances are another major plus with both Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon-Levitt doing good work on their own and especially when they're together. Emily Blunt and Paul Dano are also good in their supporting bits. LOOPER is certainly a film that manages to take a familiar plot (time travel) and do something originalwith it.

Not the ending I wanted but...

[bartkow · 7/10 · 23 April 2023]

I really expected Joe to get it all sorted, join the family and take the roles of Cid's father. It's really the ending I wanted too. I was annoyed it didn't happen. But, after thinking about it, it can be seen as refreshing that a film completely went with the opposite of the expected or even favourable ending. He could have easily just shot off a finger or hand and possibly had a positive outcome. Instead he took the 100% success option. Overall, good film, if not slightly above average. I don't know that it is worth a second viewing but it still was a unique and enjoyable film. 6.5 more so than 7.

Looper is a thrill ride that has a nice blend of thrilling action and matters of the heart.

[FlixChatter · 9/10 · 7 October 2012]

Time travel sci-fi movies are inherently intriguing to me, so when I first saw the trailer with THIS cast, I knew I wanted to see it.

As in the trailer, Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Joe, a specialized assassin, in an outfit called the Loopers. He lives in the year 2042 but the mob he works for lives 30 years ahead where time travel would've been invented. When his employer from the future wants to get rid of someone, they zap that person back 30 years where someone like Joe would be waiting with a big gun in hand, ready to blow them up to oblivion. The only rule is: never let your target escape... even if your target is you. The job seems easy enough, I mean, the targets are blindfolded, so it's not like they could really escape. That is, until one did, and that target happens to be his older self, in the form of Bruce Willis.

Now, before the action begins in full throttle, Director Rian Johnson sets up the story by introducing the Looper doing their jobs and how these junkies hit-men spend their lives in a dystopian future (is there any other kind in the movies??). "Loopers are well paid, they lead a good life..." Joe said in his narration, but what he means by 'good' doesn't mean a happy one and it's clear that Joe is disillusioned with his life.

Let me just say the less you know about the plot the better as I went in pretty much 'blind,' other than seeing the trailer weeks ago, and it's fun to see the story unravel in ways I didn't really expect. There's really a lot to chew on here, as do most time-travel movies, and I have to admit it was a bit mind-boggling to digest it all as I'm watching it, but now that I've processed the movie more, Johnson actually told the story well enough without an overly drawn-out exposition.

The strengths are in the performances, especially Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who seems to only get better and better as he grows to be a force to be reckoned with in Hollywood. Seems like every time I see him, even in minor roles like in 'Inception' or 'The Dark Knight Rises,' he never fails to impress. I've got to admit though, his prosthetic make-up to make him look like Bruce Willis is distracting at times, but once I get into the story, I got used to it. In fact, in some scenes Gordon-Levitt's mannerism and expressions really do remind me of Willis! Now, I've always been a fan of Bruce. He's a bad ass guy with a heart and I feel that he sold me on the emotional moments as well as on the action front, in which he channels his iconic John McClane in the 'Die Hard' franchise. In fact, I kept waiting for him to yell 'Yiippiikayee' during some of the shootout scenes! I'm also impressed with Emily Blunt and child actor Pierce Gagnon who plays her little boy. Both played two key roles that serve as the emotional center of the story. Their paths crossed with both the younger and older Joe in a way that not only affect their own lives but the lives of Joe's fellow Loopers. Their scenes with Gordon-Levitt are well-played, though it could perhaps be tightened a bit as it does feel dragging at times. Jeff Daniels and Paul Dano also lend memorable supporting performances, Daniels is sort of a comic relief as Joe's manager who happens to be sent by the mob from the future.

It's refreshing to see a movie based on an original script, not an adaptation nor a remake. Despite all the time travel elements, the film also doesn't feel too science-fiction-y. I'm also glad Johnson doesn't pile on one action set pieces after another, instead there are a lot of quiet moments to establish character development that help you get immersed in Joe's journey.

Final Thoughts: Looper is a thrill ride that has a nice blend of thrilling action and matters of the heart. There are brutal action and some totally-unnecessary nudity here, but fortunately not so much so that derails my overall appreciation for it. At the core of this movie lies a heartfelt love story between a man and a woman, and also between a mother and his son. Highly recommended.

The Past In The Future.

[c_me_here_at_home · 10/10 · 27 September 2012]

To begin, Looper is a sci-fi film set in the future, dealing with the implications of time-travel, although it is very much a film about the past. The film is all about the past, how it affects the present and the future and how it drives people with the majority of the film building characters and establishing plot.

Anyone looking for an action film will be sorely disappointed because this is first and foremost a writer's film, focusing on plot, character and dialogue. As mentioned above, the brunt of the film falls on development, more so than action set-pieces and CGI. The portions of the city and the near future Johnson has created, whilst some may see as unoriginal, I see as tributary. A lawless country split socially in half, poverty on one side, excess on the other, the world Johnson has manufactured carries an air similar to that of Alfonso Cuaron's Children of Men, a comparably important sci-fi film in the struggle to build the credibility of the genre in the realm of modern cinema.

Not only is the film intelligent, it also acts as a courier for Johnson, a director of hit (Brick) and miss (The Brothers Bloom) repute following his sophomore outing.

If you support intelligent science fiction in the intellectual vein of Inception and Primer, Looper is a film sitting firmly in the middle of the two. Break the box office with this film and bring intelligence back to film-making.

Not bad, but not as good as it thinks it is

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 7 May 2014]

LOOPER is the latest Hollywood movie to tackle the thorny topic of time travel. This one's a little bit like the Van Damme vehicle TIMECOP, although it strives to be less cheesy and more realistic thanks to the presence of former indie director Rian Johnson, who also made the high school murder mystery BRICK with Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Gordon-Levitt plays an assassin who executes criminals sent back from the future for spurious reasons, although inevitably he soon finds his life spiralling out of control when things take an unexpected twist.

I really wanted to like this film. It feels fresh and appealing in many ways, and visually it's a triumph. Gordon-Levitt's performance is fine, although that prosthetic make-up is distracting, and it's fair to say that Bruce Willis is pretty good too, as this is probably the best performance he's given in a while. The action sequences, when they come, are efficiently handled.

So what gives, then? Well, the truth is that LOOPER isn't quite as entertaining as it thinks it is. For once, the story doesn't really work under close scrutiny. All of the other time travel movies I've seen have made a point of not allowing the characters to encounter themselves in another time period, as this would cause a paradox. In this one, Willis and Gordon-Levitt share cups of coffee together, and it never quite gels.

In addition, the pacing is off, with long, boring and tension-free interludes spent sitting around in a farmhouse with the miscast Emily Blunt. Yet another twist involves characters who are telekinetic, which is all a little too much; wasn't the time travel plot enough? Although it's not bad for what it is, LOOPER doesn't hold a candle to the ultra-efficient low budget Spanish time travel movie, TIMECRIMES.

Speculative enterprise

[bkoganbing · 8/10 · 2 October 2012]

When one deals with time travel as the process has not been discovered everything written or filmed about is always speculative. For instance the Jean-Claude Van Damme film Time Cop shows something quite different when we meet our future and past selves as Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis do here in Looper.

Instead of the forces of law and latent fascism getting control of time travel in Time Cop, Looper has organized crime doing it and eliminating problems that Robert DeNiro in Casino remarked are usually swallowed up by the Nevada desert. Levitt is a Looper one who travels ahead to the future, specifically trained as an assassin and then goes back to his present origin and as targets come through a time portal, they get eliminated. Then at some point, the future selves are eliminated and the present selves just go on with normal lives as we define normal.

Bruce Willis is Levitt's future self only he doesn't like the idea of elimination. And the big boss Jeff Daniels doesn't like how Levitt screwed up the elimination of Willis. The chase is on.

Another question answered by Laurence Olivier in The Boys From Brazil said that we should not eliminate a cloned Hitler. Here a telekinesis gene has entered our gene pool and someone in the distant future has been harnessing its full potential to battle organized crime. That's an even bigger mission that the Levitt/Willis problem.

Looper is a nice and original take on time travel with an outstanding cast giving some standout performances. Note particularly Emily Blunt as the mother of young Pierce Gagnon who has powers and abilities far beyond those of other mortal beings. And young Gagnon is something to see as well.

Looper is definitely worth the price of admission.

The idea didn't fully materialize

[SoumikBanerjee1996 · 6/10 · 13 September 2022]

A fascinating theory, an intriguing concept that got let down by a set of inefficiencies in its script. Those of you who know me are also acquainted with the fact that I long for these subjects, anything remotely associated with Time, Space, or Paradoxes intrigues my conscience. I am somebody who is always on the lookout for such titles and that's exactly how I stumbled upon Rian Johnson's Looper.

As I said, this has got an incredible idea, and a compelling notion indeed, but the execution failed to match up to its ambitions. While the first act is adequately paced and kind of sets up the stage, the second act as well as a part of the third heavily struggles with pace and is fraught with inconsistencies! Even though the ending made conscious efforts for redemption, but it was already too late. (By the way, I had already guessed the twist by then).

As a direct consequence, the vision never fully materialized. Albeit make no mistake, this still was a fun watch and has a lot to showcase but I wish it had done better in supervising the complicatedness of the subject.

A disappointing let down from start to finish - caused by bad plot

[o1191108 · 1/10 · 6 October 2012]

!SPOILER ALERT! Contrary to the trailers, this is NOT a film about time travel. It IS a film about a telekinetic toddler (who is not in the trailers).

If you are expecting this film to be like Blade Runner, Primer or 13 Monkeys, then you may well be VERY disappointed.

Only about 5 minutes of the film seemed to actually involve time travel or Bruce Willis fighting his past self. When the story does attempt to explore these issues it does so embarrassingly badly. Half way through the film the plot changes AWAY from time travel and becomes a film about trying to kill a telekinetic little boy in the current day. A boy who has only a very weak connection to the initial plot about time travel.

This is really two entirely different plots badly mixed in to one. One plot is about time travel. The other plot is about the dangers of toddlers with uncontrollable telekinesis. Unfortunately the film does neither of these plots well, and ends up ruining both.

To make matters worse, the film moves very slowly in certain places. This just gives the audience time to think about how bad the plot it is.

There is virtually no action either - unless you count Bruce Willis's character shooting defenseless toddlers (for which the certificate should surely be more than 15), or needless torture and execution scenes. There is just a lot of running away from people taking badly aimed pot shots. (This happens a lot). Apparently nobody can shoot straight in the future. The only action scene worthy of the name comes in the last 5 minutes where Bruce Willis suddenly turns ninja and takes out ALL the bad guys in about 30 seconds, and then walks off. It's almost as if the writers got to the end of the story and then thought, "Oh yeah - we should probably have Bruce Willis firing some guns or something ..."

This film fails so pathetically to deal with time travel that it is frankly insulting to the audience. They don't give good explanations about why time travel exists, or how it works. Fair enough. There is a certain suspension of disbelief in any time travel movie. However, they DO establish certain rules about time travel during the film, which they then break, re-establish and break again whenever it is convenient for the writers.

Bruce Willis attempts to explain time travel, and give a justification for the writer's itinerant stance on the matter, only to then smash is hands on the table and angrily shout "It doesn't matter!". This makes it clear that the writers didn't even think they were being clever or original. They clearly knew the plot made no sense, and they were just making a pathetic excuse about time travel being "flaky" to justify their random plot lurches and inconsistencies.

The whole premise of a "Looper" was never satisfactorily explained: 1) Why did the mafia boss who supposedly "owned" the city live in a little basement? In his pajamas? 2) "It is almost impossible to get rid of a body in the future, because of tracking ... cough ... something ... cough-cough." So NATURALLY using time travel is the EASIEST of the available options to dispose of a body!? If a body disappears from the future, for example in a furnace, then surely it also disappears from the future in time travel? Same difference. 3) If mafia in the future are the sole owners and users of time travel, then why don't they just use it to take over the world so that they don't need to even worry about disposing of bodies? 4) Why didn't they just send the loopers back already dead when closing a loop, so that there was no possibility of failure? 5) Why did they always get THE SAME looper to close THEIR OWN loop? Asking for trouble. 6) Why even have more than one looper? Surely the job wasn't that strenuous that they needed to take shifts?

They broke their own rules on time travel, and made the ending of the film impossible and irrelevant given the events in the middle: As soon as the younger version shot himself at the end, then he couldn't have lived to meet the woman in China and eventually travel back in time, which means he couldn't have ever caused his past self to meet the rain man, and so the rain man would not be standing there in the corn field. Everything would have reverted back to how it was before - in exactly the same way that it DID DO EARLIER on in the film when he fell off the balcony and died and the bit where Bruce Willis traveled back in time got repeated. The rain man would have grown up and taken over the world in the same way he did before, and Bruce Willis's wife would still be dead.

They never actually explained WHY the first thing the rain man wanted to do was to kill the loopers in the future. Presumably it was because they were the only people who could go back in time and possibly stop him? So why didn't he just kill them with telekinesis like he did the rest of his enemies? Why did he chose to kill them in the ONLY method which would actually give them the opportunity to stop him in the past - namely, by sending them back to the past, alive.

The story never really addressed or capitalized on Bruce Willi's character being evil. This could have been a great angle to really explore, but instead they just washed over it.

This film was a dismal train wreck of ideas with great potential.

The is a perfect example of a science-fiction thriller movie!

[CharlieGreenCG · 10/10 · 25 September 2012]

"Time travel has not yet been invented. But thirty years from now, it will have been." I went to an advanced screening of this film last night, upon leaving the cinema I had a feeling that I had not got from a film for quite sometime. The film contains a balance of both intelligence and action, too much of either and the film risks failing, the is a perfect example of a science-fiction thriller movie. Looper is set in the year 2042, Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is one of several mafia-employed assassins known as 'loopers' who are tasked with 'taking out the future's garbage'. The targets are delivered from 30 years in the future to a waiting looper, who puts a bullet in their head, burns the body and collects their earnings. Loopers are well paid, but when the bosses decide it's time to 'close the loop' and they send back your own future self back for assassination, leaving you with only 30 years to live. Later in the film Joe's loop is to be closed, but his older self (Bruce Willis) escapes, which is very bad news, bringing the mafia on the hunt to kill both Joe's. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis both show strong acting performances throughout, you wouldn't of seen Willis this good since probably Die Hard as he full-fills his action man status once again. And even with Gordon-Levitts slightly distracting make-up (in order to make him look like Willis) he is definitely one of movies huge upcoming actors. Along side Joe, in the third act of the film introduces Emily Blunt's character Sara, her character is strong and independent and brings extra emotion and drama to the film. One of Loopers greatest strengths is that you are constantly surprised, being full of twists and turns the movies narrative is very original and leaves you not knowing what could happen next as both of the Joe's battle for different situations. With keeping up with the story and concentrating you are rewarded with a mindfull ending. Released in four days time, Looper is a sci-fi movie that you should definitely see!