Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Saw the trailer a couple days ago and loved it. I've had my eye on Rian Johnson's next projects ever since I saw his phenomenal film Brick. This looks like a great flick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great trailer...but that's a horrible poster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great trailer...but that's a horrible poster.

Here you go, I found you a more user friendly time-travel poster. Look, he's even checking his watch to see the... time. :p

Back_to_the_future.jpg

As for LOOPER, it looks awesome.

Will be there!

Edited by PetarB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really care about how anything looks at this point. My brain is tripping out on the concept alone. And I love it. :p

How do you kill your future self, when he already knows everything you did to try to kill him, as well as whether or not you actually succeeded? The only way it will happen is if he lets you.

Plus, what if you throw in a third self from further down the timeline into the mix? Then you obviously didn't succeed at killing yourself, so you'd better just stop trying, and settle for killing the third version of you, and hope he is still young enough to remember everything, and not try to kill you in self defense. :lol:

The bad thing about getting so into these time travel stories.. I probably already know where this is going, because it's too simple, and the title is an obvious hint.

The reason they sent his future self back in time to be killed by his past self? Obviously, he failed to finish the job, and has been on the run for 30 years. When they finally catch him, they decide to use this new-fangled time travel hit-man service to do the dirty work...and away we go! :lol:

I hope I'm wrong, because I'd love to see something new and ridiculous added to the standard repertoire of paradoxes that pop up in time travel stories. Even if they don't though, stable time loops are a blast anyway. Worst case, even if the movie sucks, I'll still enjoy having a new time travel plot to attempt to make sense of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, apparently this is supposed to be pretty darn good.

I still think JGL looks like Gigolo Joe, though.

Thats quite the complement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw this last night. It was awesome. I went in to it cold - ie, knowing as little as possible. I advise anyone to do the same.

My only problem with it is that I think the story needed a little more money thrown at it in terms of production. But the real strength was in the performances. Everyone was fantastic.

As for JGL's look - there is a very specific reason for it. That, and the car he drives. Made me smile!

Edited by PetarB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw it last night as well (date night with the wife), was definitely a good movie. I agree that budget permitting it could have been a bit more stellar, the plot points were very predictable but it didn't distract from the enjoyment of the film. Without spoiling anything, it was a fun movie that throws out some of the preconceived ideals of time travel (i'm sure nerds will rage, but let's be honest and agree that time travel isn't a perfect science... fiction).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People don't seem to be picking up on this

Sid is Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People don't seem to be picking up on this

Sid is Joe

wait... what? You'll need to explain this one to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have become a bit of a movie curmudgeon lately, but that said:

Saw it, loved it.

The very ending seemed a bit forced, but that's my only issue.

People don't seem to be picking up on this

Sid is Joe

I'm thinking that isn't so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here it goes

The rules to the laws of space/time and time travel in the movie are a mess. Time is neither linear or branching and they play pretty fast and loose with things, leading to the creation of a paradox (which invalidates all sorts of things).

Anyway:

Sid's mother knows about time travel

She abandoned her child when she was young to live a different life

It's hinted at that she has a past with drug use

Joe's vision of Sid on the train, just as it happened to him when he was young

She touches Joe's hair like Joe's mother does in his memories

The close-up of Joe's face at the end is directly followed up by a close-up of Sid's

Essentially what I am saying is that time has been altered in other ways not shown to the viewer, leading to a different life for the mother and the child who could be Sid or Joe. The hints are there.

Unfortauntely, the flow of time is handled so poorly in the movie that you could argue this 500 ways to Sunday and never be right or wrong. It's still a good movie, don't get me wrong.

Edited by Duke Togo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here it goes

I see where you're coming from but here's my own thoughts...

The rules to the laws of space/time and time travel in the movie are a mess. Time is neither linear or branching and they play pretty fast and loose with things, leading to the creation of a paradox (which invalidates all sorts of things).

Anyway:

Sid's mother knows about time travel

- everyone knows about time travel, loopers weren't a secret, so I don't think that can be used as evidence for or against.

She abandoned her child when she was young to live a different life

It's hinted at that she has a past with drug use

She touches Joe's hair like Joe's mother does in his memories

- I believe this was done to show the difference between Joe's relationship with Sara and with Suzie (the stripper/prostitute). Joe, at the beginning of the movie is selfish and self obsessed, he wants intimacy but doesn't care how he gets it and can't tell the difference between genuine and fake. So he pays Suzie to be intimate with him which she rejects and simply goes through the motions, the movie shows this as her touching joe the way he wants but staring at the clock. Sara runs her fingers through Joe's hair because Joe has earned her affection by sacrificing his own life for her and Cid's.

The close-up of Joe's face at the end is directly followed up by a close-up of Sid's

- I took this as showing that through Joe's self sacrifice, he made it possible for Cid to have a different shot at life, one where Sara is there to guide him and teach him love.

Essentially what I am saying is that time has been altered in other ways not shown to the viewer, leading to a different life for the mother and the child who could be Sid or Joe. The hints are there.

Unfortauntely, the flow of time is handled so poorly in the movie that you could argue this 500 ways to Sunday and never be right or wrong. It's still a good movie, don't get me wrong.

- I think symbolically you're on to something. Joe and Cid come from similar backgrounds and both lose the women important to them. Joe loses his wife and Cid loses his mom, both these acts causes them to become monsters. Joe murders children in order to save his wife and Cid murders vagrants and loopers, the people he blames for the death of sara. Redemption comes to both of them through young Joe who sees the paradox that it's through Old Joe's actions that Cid becomes Rainmaker and in that realization, young Joe is able to break the loop, creating a completely new future.

But I don't think that Joe and Cid are supposed to be the same person... besides, Joe and Cid both remembered their own mothers, I think Joe would have remembered Sara and Joe was in plenty of life and death situations and never manifested any TK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what you are saying, Eug; I just thought it seemed a little too obvious.

The alternate take is that Joe is seeing the mirror of his life in Sid's. He wanted to give the kid a chance he never had. But, if that is the case, it seems a little too heavy-handed to me.

I really enjoyed the movie, but I have a real issue with how the handled the matter of time travel. I believe the director is quoted as saying something along the lines of "you have to believe in the magic of it"; I just think that's laziness.

Edited by Duke Togo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what you are saying, Eug; I just thought it seemed a little too obvious.

The alternate take is that Joe is seeing the mirror of his life in Sid's. He wanted to give the kid a chance he never had. But, if that is the case, it seems a little too heavy-handed to me.

I really enjoyed the movie, but I have a real issue with how the handled the matter of time travel. I believe the director is quoted as saying something along the lines of "you have to believe in the magic of it"; I just think that's laziness.

yeah, the movie contradicts itself pretty directly with how it handles old Joe and old Seth... time travel is just the gimmick to tell the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, the time travel conventions are abandoned in favor of story telling and character development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anbody else wonder if

Kid Blue was the younger version of Abe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well 2012 was already one of the best years for film in recent memory just based on what was released before this weekend. Now that I've just returned from watching Looper, this may turn out to be THE best year for movies ever. What can I praise about Looper that hasn't already been written? The cast is great, the story is amazing, the cinematography is incredible, meow, meow, meow... Another hit film that easily cements Rian Johnson as one of the best directors currently working. I'll post a bit more when I'm not so tired, but trust me, this is yet another must-see movie. Watch it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anbody else wonder if

Kid Blue was the younger version of Abe?

Whilst I think that is correct, there's no way S* is J*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely loved "Looper".

One of the best movies of the year, in a year filled with amazing movies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here it goes

The rules to the laws of space/time and time travel in the movie are a mess. Time is neither linear or branching and they play pretty fast and loose with things, leading to the creation of a paradox (which invalidates all sorts of things).

Anyway:

Sid's mother knows about time travel

She abandoned her child when she was young to live a different life

It's hinted at that she has a past with drug use

Joe's vision of Sid on the train, just as it happened to him when he was young

She touches Joe's hair like Joe's mother does in his memories

The close-up of Joe's face at the end is directly followed up by a close-up of Sid's

Essentially what I am saying is that time has been altered in other ways not shown to the viewer, leading to a different life for the mother and the child who could be Sid or Joe. The hints are there.

Unfortauntely, the flow of time is handled so poorly in the movie that you could argue this 500 ways to Sunday and never be right or wrong. It's still a good movie, don't get me wrong.

OK, so then...

He made out with his mom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anbody else wonder if

Kid Blue was the younger version of Abe?

Unlikely.... else Abe would have a bad leg and would have more reservation breaking Kid's fingers with a hammer :p

About the weapons, i'm not sure if i missed something but....

why was everyone in the mob using fsking revolvers when they have an armoury full of automatic weapons that bruce willis dishes out 2 P90s and takes out the whole mob? Did kid blue explained something like gats were sure kills or something? I must've missed something cause a band full of revolver wielding cowboys vs bruce willis with akimbo P90s is just .... silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sid and Joe have essentially the same backstories, with the exception that Sid's mother came back.

I was entertained by this movie, there is no denying that, but the more I dig into the story the less impressed I am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sid and Joe have essentially the same backstories, with the exception that Sid's mother came back.

I was entertained by this movie, there is no denying that, but the more I dig into the story the less impressed I am.

Er, Sid's mom got TK blown up. Sarah is his aunt. I think without looking too deep into it, the only relation between Joe and Sid is, they both would've lived very different lives if their childhood wasn't f-ed up by some person or other.

Not sure what's the significance of the similarity in how Old Joe gets woken up by chinese girl vs Sid who gets woken up by Sarah. That soft grab on the foot. Probably to prove they were both at peace at that point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...