Looper

[Surlyboi]

See this.

That is all.

[Teleku]

See this.

That is all.

[murdoc]

This was excellent. Not quite what I was expecting, which was actually nice for a change.

'Looper' was REALLY good, but as with all time travel movies you can't start questioning the theory behind it too much. As Willis says in the movie '"I don't want to talk about time-travel shit because if we start, we're going to be here all day, making diagrams with straws."

[tazelbain]

Sci-fi noir worked well.

[angry.bob]

So what's the explanation for the practice of sending people back in time to get shot and presumably disposed of. Shooting people in the current time and disposing of them seems to have worked well enough for the Mob and many other people as well. It just seems like sending my dog back to 7am to eat the food I put out for him then instead of just putting another cup of food in his bowl at dinnertime.

[Surlyboi]

[Mattemeo]

I really enjoyed it, though the early explaination of the time travel workings rang immediate alarm bells for me, and the ending is a logic bomb; but as Mr Willis said so eloquently in the film and murdoc mentioned above, it's almost pointless trying to ruminate on the hows and whys. Fucking feat of magic from JGL to become a believable younger Bruce Willis; fantastic make-up and prosthetics too.

[MuffinMan]

Yep, I agree. Turn your brain off somewhat about the time-travel.

JGL was really great at being Willis. It went beyond the make-up and he was hitting facial expressions and mannerisms.

[Wasted]

Wow, that ending.

[Ubvman]

I really enjoyed it, though the early explaination of the time travel workings rang immediate alarm bells for me, and the ending is a logic bomb; but as Mr Willis said so eloquently in the film and murdoc mentioned above, it's almost pointless trying to ruminate on the hows and whys. Fucking feat of magic from JGL to become a believable younger Bruce Willis; fantastic make-up and prosthetics too.

I have to give props to the make-up people that they avoided the trap of making JGL (age 31) look like Bruce Willis circa 1986 (age 31). In 1986, Willis was already doing Moonlighting so the temptation must be there since his image reference is so easily available. If JGL was made to look like a total ringer of 86' Willis - the results would have been pretty hilarious in the wrong way.

As a thought experiment; If this film was made in 1986 (possible since it didn't really need all that much in special effects) - could Bruce Willis be able to do JGL's role in the hypothetical 1986 version of Looper? He could do it but it would be all Bruce Willis - completely different, just like the role is completely JGL's in 2012. What I am getting at is that, although JGL adopted the minor tics and mannerisms of modern 2012 Willis; JGL intepreted the role as his own, not as a bad impression of 1986 Willis.

[Tale]

Did you notice the filmmakers' own message delivered by Abe (the boss) early on, expressing frustration about the movies of their present all stealing from the past? I can't find it online but he finished it with "just make something new".

[angry.bob]

I want someone to do that now. I want a star in their early 30's to film parts of a movie at that age and then wait 20-25 years to film the other parts. Yes, it's stupid and and not really needed, but you know the artistic community would get swamp-panties over it.

[eldaec]

Did you notice the filmmakers' own message delivered by Abe (the boss) early on, expressing frustration about the movies of their present all stealing from the past? I can't find it online but he finished it with "just make something new".

I don't think it was their 'message' so much as a self-deferential wink at the audience given that so many of the plot mechanics, twists, and a large number of individual shots are a greatest hits of 20th century film making. This film could be an amazing spot-the-reference drinking game.

It's a great film but the plot does break down when it occasionally forces you to think about the time travel thing, particularly at the ending. Willis, JGL and Blunt are all awesome.

Bruce Willis' mission in the 'present' is brilliantly done - I love how it is introduced among ammoral characters and comes across as just another ridiculous hollywood plot, but they make it suitably icky when Willis is actually faced with what he has to do.

[eldaec]

Also, proviso is not pronounced that way.

[NowhereMan]

I want someone to do that now. I want a star in their early 30's to film parts of a movie at that age and then wait 20-25 years to film the other parts. Yes, it's stupid and and not really needed, but you know the artistic community would get swamp-panties over it.

There.

Although I was thinking the other day it would be really awesome to do something like a historical dramatisation like Rome where the filming takes place over 30 or 40 years with the actors involved ageing as the figures they are playing would have. I am aware the practical difficulties involved in this would make it a nightmare, without getting into keeping funding going for an utterly unnecessary project.

Also I saw the trailer for this and dismissed it as a really stupid premise. Is it actually worth watching? Bearing in mind I don't have any problem turning my nerd brain off for films that are happy to accept that there's no depth to them.

[pxib]

It's a nicely plotted film noir crime drama about who we are vs. who we were vs. who we become with cyberpunky trappings that allow those three to literally meet, cooperate, and fight with one another. It gets a little bogged down in the final act, but there's a lot of clever writing and ideas througout. The first trailer didn't do it justice.

[tazelbain]

many spoilers ahead http://io9.com/5949973/looper-director-rian-johnson-is-live-on-io9-and-taking-your-questions

Very cool stuff.  Hate how he declines to answer the Abe/Kid loop stuff.  

[Draegan]

They were just showing you what the original timeline was like.

[Teleku]

Just saw it tonight, and really enjoyed the hell out of it.  This is good classic Sci-fi right here.  Its not a movie about time travel, its a human story that happens to involve time travel.  This is the sort of movie I was hoping In Time would be (but it failed horribly at).  Can't really think of anything in particular I wanted them to do differently.

They were just showing you what the original timeline was like.

Yeah, that.

[eldaec]

Well clearly. It just needed to be clear they were doing that at the time.

[Draegan]

True, it confused the shit out of me when they did it.  But I'm not sure how they could of done it without making it look retarded or painfully long.

[tazelbain]

Easy the movie could have gone through the first timeline without going for the fake out.

Anyway, I think it would interesting to have a movie like this protagonist keeps getting reset because he keeps fucking up causality.  Add a thing where every reset breaks his mind and the universe a little bit more.  Like ultra-violet Groundhogs Day.

[MahrinSkel]

Easy the movie could have gone through the first timeline without going for the fake out.

Anyway, I think it would interesting to have a movie like this protagonist keeps getting reset because he keeps fucking up causality.  Add a thing where every reset breaks his mind and the universe a little bit more.  Like ultra-violet Groundhogs Day.

You just described The Butterfly Effect.

--Dave

[tazelbain]

I thought Kelso was just failing to get the causality he wanted not actually breaking causality.

[Der Helm]

Just saw this, excellent movie, but some of the time travel stuff made my head hurt.


Also, obligatory:

True, it confused the shit out of me when they did it.  But I'm not sure how they could of done it without making it look retarded or painfully long.

could HAVE

[Lakov_Sanite]

Just saw this, great movie. I'm going to just be spoilery since it's been out so long but I didn't see any real issues with the time travel.

[Tale]

I didn't see any real issues with the time travel.

Same. It works.

[schild]

Hated the last 20 minutes or so. Loved everything else.

[MahrinSkel]

I disliked that they left the gun on the mantle with the kid and the king-maker arc (which was a big part of why that last 20 minutes sucked).  Other than that, it was a good flick.

--Dave

[Teleku]

What didn't you guys like about the last 20 minutes?

[Sky]

Is this the one about Big Bird going to the grocery store?

[Lakov_Sanite]

The movie was about selfishness and the cycles we repeat, sort of violence begets violence except with greed.  Everyone is greedy in the film, mothers and their children, husbands and their wives etc etc. For this I thought the ending was fine, it was all about ending the cycle, not just of the future but doing so with the single selfless act of the film.  I suppose you could argue with how they set the ending up but I thought it happened in the right way.

My minor nitpick

[Typhon]

I couldn't get past why the future needed anyone in the past - just drop the mark in the middle of the pacific ocean.

[Lakov_Sanite]

That would make the time machine itself have to be put somewhere out in the ocean, I'm assuming that was not feasible for some reason, plus you do want control of what you sent back into the past.  Sure you an safely assuming sending someone back into the past 1000feet in the air would likely die but why take the chance?
One future person running loose can fuck your entire operation.

[Typhon]

So there is one in the future and one in the past that are linked?  Got it, from the trailer it just looks like he just appears in the middle of a field.