Looper

6

ZilcellOct 1, 2012

The overall movie is fantastic, excellent acting, special effects, and story all-around. The dissappointing ending was the only drawback, which made me subtract from the score.

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

6

TyranianAug 20, 2019

Pretty cool SciFi film that starts really well though the ending isn't as clever as it thinks it is.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

lasttimeisawOct 21, 2012

Rian Johnson

0 of 19 users found this helpful019

All this user's reviews

6

beingryanjudeSep 1, 2014

It's a thrilling piece of futuristic mayhem! An original and mind-blowing creation from newcomer Rian Johnson. Unfortunately, several of its performances fell short of the film's brilliance.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

PalenoireOct 7, 2012

It's definitely not a bad movie. I see what they tried to do with all time stuff and for casual consumer it may be a lot to comprehend and it will take time to think this movie through. The thing is I watch Doctor Who a lot and I got used toIt's definitely not a bad movie. I see what they tried to do with all time stuff and for casual consumer it may be a lot to comprehend and it will take time to think this movie through. The thing is I watch Doctor Who a lot and I got used to all the time travel stuff and in Doctor Who this things a lot deeper and confusing. Can't rate performance of Levitt or Willis because i saw this movie in translation. As i said it's not a bad movie. In fact it may be very good but my familiarity with Doctor Who kinda ruins movie for me. It gets 6 out of 10. If it wasn't for Doctor Who this movie would probably got 8 or 9 out of 10… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

6

raulpcNov 3, 2012

Good point but have neglected entertainment.
The two actors do not look like each other.
Should have included some persecution for some more excitement to the movie.

0 of 12 users found this helpful012

All this user's reviews

6

LonePiperMay 21, 2013

The first negative thing any critic will mention about this film is the plotholes. But you just have to remember that it is a time travel film and there is no escaping it, so you may as well embrace it. Was the Back to the Future franchiseThe first negative thing any critic will mention about this film is the plotholes. But you just have to remember that it is a time travel film and there is no escaping it, so you may as well embrace it. Was the Back to the Future franchise any less of a prodigy because of its gaping plotholes?
That being said, this film is far from perfect while clever in a lot of respects (in many instances it does seem like there was a lot of thought put into it), it often comes off as thinking it's cleverer than it is.
The whole thing is one big Terminator reference, and it seems to think that simply being self aware of the fact is justification enough. The pacing is also somewhat off-target and messy, as well as the plot as a whole.
That in mind, it actually manages to provide an experience that is not totally forgettable. The occasional interesting plot device and hidden gem of insight mixed with some attention-grabbing, if somewhat jarring, pacing actually managed to make me take notice of this movie.
In the end this movie won't change your life, but it will keep you entertained and maybe you'll even remember a thing or two about it in a year's time.… Expand

0 of 10 users found this helpful010

All this user's reviews

6

ryan_radioheadFeb 11, 2013

Vastly overrated. The film never lives up to its first 20 minutes. (which is high in spectacle and hyper stylish direction)
The deliberately slow burning second half on the other hand, is standard science fiction time travel yarn with aVastly overrated. The film never lives up to its first 20 minutes. (which is high in spectacle and hyper stylish direction)
The deliberately slow burning second half on the other hand, is standard science fiction time travel yarn with a creepy telepathic kid. Watch "Twelve Monkeys" or "Source Code" instead.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

Maverick2013Jul 1, 2013

The time travel paradox is glaringly obvious in this one. But it has to be. The movie itself would cease to exist otherwise :)

Summary - Short on Zzzzz's before watching? You might find a lengthy spot to catch up on them. - Brilliant.The time travel paradox is glaringly obvious in this one. But it has to be. The movie itself would cease to exist otherwise :)

Summary
- Short on Zzzzz's before watching? You might find a lengthy spot to catch up on them.
- Brilliant. NO. (bit of no-brainer after-the-fact)
- Clever. MOSTLY.
- Good acting. SOME OF IT VERY GOOD.
- Worth it. YES. (well... it's not a drink coaster anyway.....)

Would I watch it again. I don't know. Did I?… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

KivaJun 22, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This film is ok. It has an interesting plot and i liked the futuristic action and all this stuff. However there was something missing in that film. Maybe the actors, or the ending or the 'power' of that kid. I don't know. I enjoyed it but I knew that something was missing from Looper… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

YorkshiremanJun 28, 2013

The idea of this film I found to be absolutely fantastic. However, I feel it could have been executed better. I'd heard rave reviews about the film, reading them and from friends so I gave the film a try and found it to be very anti-climaticThe idea of this film I found to be absolutely fantastic. However, I feel it could have been executed better. I'd heard rave reviews about the film, reading them and from friends so I gave the film a try and found it to be very anti-climatic compared to the plot. To me, it seems like they thought the plot was good enough to make a hit film and not fill it with the right content.

I enjoyed it, just not as much as I thought I would.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

amheretojudgeFeb 18, 2019

It Goes On And On And On.

Looper Johnson might as well be cheating and you wouldn't know the difference. Now, is that good or bad? Definitely good in this case. If the razzle dazzle that he offers comes with a prize to strain your brain andIt Goes On And On And On.

Looper

Johnson might as well be cheating and you wouldn't know the difference. Now, is that good or bad? Definitely good in this case. If the razzle dazzle that he offers comes with a prize to strain your brain and reach for the star, there is very little wrong in that. The brain straining, unfortunately, isn't challenging but a homework. He isn't raising questions, he is answering them, just not briefly, and that meticulous overly-brimmed paper on screen is a double edge sword. It helps him a lot, to get in on your mind but also gets too much inside of it. This frequent fluctuation of the tone could have easily been off putting, but this is where Johnson's skillful vocab comes in and save the day.

His material may not be thoroughly original but is undeniably refreshing, this eerie mixture of sci-fi genre blend in with indie filmmaking is a delight to look at. Joe, (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) the time traveller, is the perfect guide to this journey, he speaks street uncouth language through his deeds that puts him on trial on ethical margin leaving a wondrous arc on the screen. Blunt, Segan and Daniels as the supporting cast delivers decently with creating few good chemistry on screen.

Disappointingly, Willis (Old Joe) isn't justifying his character through his performance, the sequence where Johnson recreates a scene from "The Heat" where, only once in the film, Joe and Old Joe goes head to head on screen and Willis is clearly not helping. Another powerful scene where Willis, after assassinating an innocent being, fails to color his performance with remorse. To be fair, Johnson seems rushed in there, often in the film, the emotional aspects of the characters are skipped over by the adrenaline rush the script contains. Looper does have an end of line, it makes sure that the end was worth the start.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

MovieChrisDec 9, 2019

It’s an excellent movie, but just didn’t quite do it for me. Dragged on quite a bit, and they tried to make a weird side plot with telekinetic people that didn’t really play a role. Classic future time traveling ending that I’ve seen before.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

Zac03Aug 8, 2021

I have mixed feelings toward this movie. Looper was well edited, and suspenseful. The acting was solid, and I enjoyed the futuristic/dystopian world they created. The music fit the mood perfectly, the cinematography was also great. TheI have mixed feelings toward this movie. Looper was well edited, and suspenseful. The acting was solid, and I enjoyed the futuristic/dystopian world they created. The music fit the mood perfectly, the cinematography was also great. The problems start with the movie's plot. There are some plot holes and inconsistencies in the story, because the way time traveling was portrayed. It was impossible even on a theoretical level. I wish they didn't ruin up the time travel, because that part was meant to be a key element, but it just made the plot confusing and senseless at some points. Other than that, the movie was quite well made.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

TVJerryOct 3, 2012

This is one of those scifi flix with a cool concept that falls flat in execution. Joseph Gordon-Levitt kills people who are sent back from the future to be executed. Complication arise when his older self (played by Bruce Willis) is sent backThis is one of those scifi flix with a cool concept that falls flat in execution. Joseph Gordon-Levitt kills people who are sent back from the future to be executed. Complication arise when his older self (played by Bruce Willis) is sent back to be offed. This takes place in one of those futuristic worlds where much is rundown and little is neat and modern. It starts off well with some solid action and interesting dialogue, but bog down to a standstill with too much talk and not enough action. There are a few worthwhile moments, but the best performance goes to the kid.… Expand

7 of 22 users found this helpful715

All this user's reviews

5

UnsoundHypeDec 22, 2012

This movie is an example of a bathos at it's very best. It showed promise, but it just ended up being another predictable, action-blockbuster cash cow. There's nothing impressive about this movie; it's just disappointingly average. I'd put itThis movie is an example of a bathos at it's very best. It showed promise, but it just ended up being another predictable, action-blockbuster cash cow. There's nothing impressive about this movie; it's just disappointingly average. I'd put it on the same level as Total Recall, honestly. The whole "TK" concept seemed so clumsy and ill-suited and the writing was just lousier and lousier as the movie progressed.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

EludiumQ36Feb 7, 2013

I reviewed this 4 yrs ago and that's what follows this updated one from Oct 2017. Basing a movie on time travel is fraught with peril. The main problem is plausibility and that's very tough with time travel since it's so easy to fall into theI reviewed this 4 yrs ago and that's what follows this updated one from Oct 2017. Basing a movie on time travel is fraught with peril. The main problem is plausibility and that's very tough with time travel since it's so easy to fall into the paradox trap, and "Looper" is no different. Time travel also has to carefully address who's affected by it and whether your characters are in an alternate timeline or not. It gets complex and that's why it shouldn't be done unless it's prepared to put forth a really good effort and "Looper" doesn't. The film is pretty interesting and entertaining but that's not saying much. It's like saying a horror film with ghosts that can talk, that are dressed with nice hairstyles, etc is good when clearly that's all Hollywood fantasy. I just wish someone here in the 21st century could put together a well thought out time travel scenario without tripping on a paradox in the first 15-minutes. I'd do it myself but Hollywood wouldn't pick it up. I'd have to produce and distribute myself and that's way too expensive. But maybe Amzn, Hulu, ... (Prior review from 2013 --> Decent enough story but this still doesn't make time travel believable, not sure that can ever be done the plausibility of it, that is. But I'm pretty sure people just appearing and disappearing isn't how it'll look. Same kind of thing with telekinesis, let alone being exhibited by a 10 yo kid. The quality of this movie is like a very good steak served with ketchup as sauce.)… Expand

0 of 5 users found this helpful05

All this user's reviews

5

jball359Oct 6, 2012

I expected a twist to come at some point in the movie because everything had been so predicable. Even during the final minutes of the movie I was hoping for something to happen other than the ending I had predicted about 30 minutes into theI expected a twist to come at some point in the movie because everything had been so predicable. Even during the final minutes of the movie I was hoping for something to happen other than the ending I had predicted about 30 minutes into the movie. I was sorely disappointed by another derivative Hollywood cut-and-paste sci-fi.… Expand

9 of 16 users found this helpful97

All this user's reviews

5

Mazmorrero47Oct 16, 2012

Truth to be told, I don't get why everyone thinks Looper is so great. Joseph Gordon Levitt's makeup to try to look like Bruce Willis is awful and makes him look like a wax figure and that's the smallest of Looper's problems. The premise isTruth to be told, I don't get why everyone thinks Looper is so great. Joseph Gordon Levitt's makeup to try to look like Bruce Willis is awful and makes him look like a wax figure and that's the smallest of Looper's problems. The premise is good but never fully explored. In the end, it just falls into the cliches of sci-fi, like the fake kid who talks like an adult. The boy who performs that character promises to become the new Nicholas Cage with his over-the-top acting. Emily Blunt is great as usual, but her character's relationship with Joseph Gordon Levitt's was terribly contrived. The villains are cardboard characters which you know are bad guys because they wear black clothes and are dumber than an Adam Sandler character. Joseph Gordon Levitt, Bruce Willis, Emily Blunt and the few action there is are what made Looper a barely passable movie.… Expand

7 of 15 users found this helpful78

All this user's reviews

5

oliver1hFeb 8, 2013

I have mixed feelings toward this movie. Looper was well edited, and suspenseful. The acting was solid, and I enjoyed the futuristic/dystopian world they created. The music fit the mood perfectly, the cinematography was also great. TheI have mixed feelings toward this movie. Looper was well edited, and suspenseful. The acting was solid, and I enjoyed the futuristic/dystopian world they created. The music fit the mood perfectly, the cinematography was also great. The problems start with the movie's plot. There are some plot holes and inconsistencies in the story, because the way time traveling was portrayed. It was impossible even on a theoretical level (I could write an essay about the problems, there are so many). I wish they would not screw up the time travel part, because that part meant to be a key element, but it just made the plot confusing and senseless at some points. Otherwise technically the movie was really well made.… Expand

6 of 9 users found this helpful63

All this user's reviews

5

htimreimerApr 5, 2013

I went in to this movie with high expectations because of the reviews, than i watch the movie and i was bored by it, this movie is clearly made for fans of time travel and science fiction and no one else, the plot is vary complicated andI went in to this movie with high expectations because of the reviews, than i watch the movie and i was bored by it, this movie is clearly made for fans of time travel and science fiction and no one else, the plot is vary complicated and requires a lot of thinking and concentration, i got bored by this movie because i'm not a big fan of time travel movies, if you are not a fan of time travel,science fiction or vary complicated movies, i would say avoid this movie because you will probably not like it

5/10… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

benjiboiNov 17, 2012

Looper was a disappointing film that, having promised so much in its trailer, did not satisfy in both its uncompelling storyline, cliched acting and futuristic (borderline annoying) cinematography.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

guiffreSep 29, 2012

In short, this is not a bad film it is just not a very good one. The first twenty minutes of the film had me completely engorged by it's style, understated tone and intriguing if not completely original plot line. By it's second act, however,In short, this is not a bad film it is just not a very good one. The first twenty minutes of the film had me completely engorged by it's style, understated tone and intriguing if not completely original plot line. By it's second act, however, it begins to run out of steam. It becomes distracted by sub plots that are never realized and characters that lose their initial promise of depth. By the end of the film I felt like I was deprived of the breath of fresh air it could have been had it managed to focus more on its core characters, central story lines and themes. Instead it asks the audience for the all to generous courtesy of ignoring its plot holes, shallow characters and abrupt and underwhelming ending. Given the critics and audience response especially, I was mostly unimpressed. Save it for a rainy day when your Netflix queue feels stale.… Expand

4 of 15 users found this helpful411

All this user's reviews

5

lenny68Oct 6, 2012

This movie is very hard to score out of 10, as the first half was as brilliant as the second half was disappointing, so I've opted for a 5.

In my opinion, it would have been far more satisfying without the inclusion of the "Rainmaker"This movie is very hard to score out of 10, as the first half was as brilliant as the second half was disappointing, so I've opted for a 5.

In my opinion, it would have been far more satisfying without the inclusion of the "Rainmaker" subplot, which bogged it down and stretched the limits of credibility to breaking point.… Expand

9 of 17 users found this helpful98

All this user's reviews

5

oblique15May 18, 2013

I like the idea of time traveling, and this movie had it`s own unique style, but I can`t say I enjoyed it as much as I was hoping to. I`t was really hard to care for any of the characters. I`t didn`t matter who died, and would care less ifI like the idea of time traveling, and this movie had it`s own unique style, but I can`t say I enjoyed it as much as I was hoping to. I`t was really hard to care for any of the characters. I`t didn`t matter who died, and would care less if those that lived died. The ending did get really interesting, I won`t say why but the movie goes up a notch, and almost makes it worth staying until the end.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

RotondiJan 7, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Life seems to have a clear beginning and end, but I don't see why almost every movieplot needs to follow the same format. Not saying that all movieplots litteraly begin with the birth of a character and end with their death, but instead I'm suggesting they begin with the so-called "Hollywood Beginning" and end with its short-bus brother the "Hollywood Ending." I define the "Hollywood Beginning" as any plot that force feeds milk down our throats until we understand what's going on, while its counterpart the "Hollywood Ending" ensure's us that the plot is over and not continuing on secretly after you leave the theater. What I like about Looper is the beginning. Without any leadup, it drops you into the middle of the main characters somewhat unique situation (Just watch the trailer and you'll find out what that is). A dangerous move for most far-fetched plots, but Looper is paced well and acted clear enough so the we naturally get on board with what's going on and even start to feel for the main character and the people around him. Brilliant. What I don't like about Looper is the latter half and the god awful ending. It takes everything that was semi-unique and compelling about the first 30 minutes and tosses it out the window with a lit molotov **** in its mouth. The only shred that remained was a "It's me against a brigade of unfair big cocks" plot, or in other words, the "Minority Report" plot.. So, to the same effect of sticking your mom in the ring to fight Mike Tyson, we have to watch our main character put up with his future brainless, professional death machine self, who wields uzzies like he's on the set of the next Die Hard installment. The beginning of the movie was so good because the daily life of a looper sounds so enticing, of course you'd inevitably have to think about the possibitly of killing your future self. A movie based around this idea alone is doomed to follow a path that leads to a big pile or already been used toilet paper. But a movie based around the life of one looper who has to deal with drug addiction, daily executions and the disposal of such victimes, coping with co-workers who shot their future self, or even didn't shoot their future self, is already enough character-plot crap to jam into a 2-hour flick.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

CainessFeb 5, 2013

This could have been so much better, and that's the biggest disappointment. The idea (given we've had the likes of The Terminator series and Minority Report beforehand) is fine, but at no stage do you ever get to the point of CARING about theThis could have been so much better, and that's the biggest disappointment. The idea (given we've had the likes of The Terminator series and Minority Report beforehand) is fine, but at no stage do you ever get to the point of CARING about the characters enough to want them not to get killed.... I cannot fathom why so many critics rate this film so highly- it's bubblegum for a new generation, content to suspend any form of reality for a couple of hours and 'veg out'.

Save wasting your life watching this and rent 'Bourne Legacy' instead- at least you'll see a movie that leaves you feeling happy that you watched it at the end- the same cannot be said of 'Looper'- it left me feeling empty.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

MrMovieBuffOct 30, 2015

'Looper' was a movie I was pretty excited about when it was first released. I even saw it the day it opened hoping to see an exciting science-fiction action thriller.

I got a science fiction action thriller, it's just the exciting part'Looper' was a movie I was pretty excited about when it was first released. I even saw it the day it opened hoping to see an exciting science-fiction action thriller.

I got a science fiction action thriller, it's just the exciting part that was absent.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Joe whose job is to kill the people from the future who are sent to the past, he kills them which subsequently "closes the loop". He then runs into an older version of himself (played by Bruce Willis) who runs away and tries to explain to his younger self what he does and what he should avoid doing.

The film is directed by Rian Johnson and it's pretty clear that he must have been inspired by the likes of the "Star Wars" franchise and possibly the Christopher Nolan movies, mostly 'Inception' (2010). He does some inspired direction here and it's clear to see how well made this movie is. There just isn't any excitement to keep me gripped, there is little suspense and hardly any joy.

This is a dull and dreary movie that is mostly downbeat a lot of the times.

Emily Blunt also does a good job with her performance, she has proven in recent years what she is as an action star.

I felt no joy in this movie, this was a dull experience, not very fun with an interesting premise. I've seen it the first time and wasn't a fan, so far, nothing has changed.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

reviewerd1Apr 18, 2016

Having watched this film twice now I have come to the conclusion that there is something missing. I think this film had the potential to be really good but to be honest after a strong start to the film it got really boring. The plot kind ofHaving watched this film twice now I have come to the conclusion that there is something missing. I think this film had the potential to be really good but to be honest after a strong start to the film it got really boring. The plot kind of faded away and had to many flaws. Certainly not the worst film Iv'e seen but just not for me.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

DawdlingPoetNov 27, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie isn't entirely dissimilar to Inception, in that it has a fairly ocmplicated plotline and sub-plots occuring at the same time. It also uses the slow freeze frame technique that was first made famous by the Matrix Trilogy movies.

This is very much a sci-fi movie, which starts off with a fair amount of action and drama, the viewer trying to figure out whats going on, how looping works, the characters and their standing etc. the pace slows down mid way through, with more emphasis on the characters background and your left wondering how things will pan out. There are some pretty haunting scenes towards the end of the movie when one particular character shows a menacing side. There are some quite good special effects and the score really helps make it seem quite sinister and futuristic in parts. Its quite an atmospheric movie, one with a few plot twists which I doubt are entirely original but are played out well enough. One gripe I had with this is that I found it hard to believe Bruce Willis was the same character as Joseph Gordon Levitt. I find it a bit hard to take Willis seriously in serious action roles such as this, although the movie is still pretty watchable and entertaining to an extent - if you don't like sci-fi movies then this won't be for you as its all taken quite seriously, although I reckon it takes a bit of a stretch of the imagination to go along with it all, not to mention the eventual outcome which certainly left me with some questions afterwards, while having quite an impact but I'd guess some people who are good at thinking ahead could see it coming (I tend to not think ahead too much and take movies at face value, I suppose. Enjoy the action and visuals and see how things pan out).

The movie has a decent cast including obviously Joseph Gordon Levitt and Bruce Willis but also Emily Blunt and Jeff Daniels. The only issue I had with the cast was with Willis, which I've already mentioned. Joseph Gordon Levitt gives a pretty good performance, seeming both cocky and self assured at times as well as desperate and forward thinking at other times - very much in a similar vein to his portrayal in the movie Inception.

The movie runs for just under an hour and 50 minutes (it claims to run for almost 2 hours but when I watched it, it finished after just under or around 1 hour 50 minutes), which is a good length as I feel if it continued too much longer then it would have really felt like it was dragging mid way through and I probably would have been bored and lost interest in it. It doesn't take too much for me to lose interest in sci-fi type movies and I found myself getting a bit mired in the story and finding it a bit hard to take seriously (while finding one or two aspects a bit confusing) but I did stick with it and I felt that towards the end, it redeemed itself somewhat, yet it still doesn't really stand out a great deal overall.

I found this to be a watchable, mostly entertaining movie, although I don't feel, at the end of the day, that it covers any new ground and so I'm not sure if it would disappoint or bore sci-fi fans (which its probably mostly aimed at, being a sci-fi action movie, I'd say), so presuming that to be the case then I'd say overall I wouldn't recommend it. It could be worse but its not a movie I could see myself thinking about or wanting to re-watch in the future really (which seems ironic but hey!).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

Skull-o-maniaJan 5, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The movie gets a 4 effort but that's about it. My main problem with movies like this, is time travel is in all respects impossible. The mind boggling physics of it make it such a sticky subject that only really good movies who attempt it, seldom get it right. Most only on the grounds that the movie is making fun of time travel, Back to the Future comes to mind. The only serious movie that comes to mind that tackles it well, is 12 Monkeys. In that movie the "circle of events" are left to unfold like an infinite loop, old bruce willis is unable to stop the spread of plague, while young bruce willis watches unaware; ad infinitum. But in this movie the plot hole keeps me from really caring about the movie at all, according to the films logic. Here is my best shot at explaining it. In the future, 2074 time travel is created. Also in the future everyone is "tagged" so it's impossible to hide a body that has been murdered. So in order for criminals to hide bodies they seize control of time travel. They do this in order to send people 30 years, to be murdered. Even though " Old Joe's" (Bruce Willis) wife is killed in the future. I wonder what they will do with that body? Now, the thugs who murder these people who are sent back are called loopers (Jason GL), they wait in designated locations to kill those wanted by the "evil higher ups" and dispose of the bodies. That is until they themselves are to be terminated. The loopers are given a bunch of gold and this lets them know they just killed there future self and that is their last kill. The problem arises in the fact that knowing this would inevitably change the future. Knowing that in thirty years you will be taken away to be sent back to the future to be killed by yourself would make any self surviving human prepare for the day when they are to be taken or get out the looper business altogether. The central theme of this movie is that there is mysterious rainmaker who is terminating all the loopers in the future. This person ends up being a kid that old joe tries to kill in order to save himself. But the rainmakers reason for terminating all loopers is because his mother/guardian is killed by old joe. This cannot happened is young joe either kills old joe or kills himself. The logic goes that if young joe kills himself, old joe disappears giving no motivation for the rainmaker to become the rainmaker. Which ends the movie from the beginning. Where the logic breakdowns is that if young joe kills himself, their is no old joe to run amok. Therefore old joe is killed in the beginning alternate scene that explains how old joe, gets old and runs amok's already seen himself get killed. He never has a chance to run amok because in this time line he killed himself. Basically the movie makers wanted to make a circle, square. By giving the movie a happy ending it ruins logic the world is based around. Thus don't waste your time trying to watch this movie, it will make you try to understand time travel, which for me has been a waste of time. Points for every-other aspect of the movie.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

namelessSep 28, 2012

Disappointing. Great opening, great ending... yet half way through it turns into a boring talk festival for 50 minutes until the action starts up again. I feel sorry for the actors because the action stalls and you stop seeing the charactersDisappointing. Great opening, great ending... yet half way through it turns into a boring talk festival for 50 minutes until the action starts up again. I feel sorry for the actors because the action stalls and you stop seeing the characters on the screen but actors reciting their lines. I couldn't figure out why so many film critics love this movie unless the script idea reminds them of what they would have written in school. It is a great idea but the execution seems like something out of a studio committee. The cinematography and editing is straight out of the 80s. I can not recommend it even though the trailer is fanstatic.… Expand

2 of 14 users found this helpful212

All this user's reviews

4

shellviewDec 2, 2013

"Looper" was fine as mindless entertainment but if you think too much all the holes show up. Considering all the positive reviews I was very disappointed. The ending alone was tough to swallow and left me feeling "had". Futuristic movies"Looper" was fine as mindless entertainment but if you think too much all the holes show up. Considering all the positive reviews I was very disappointed. The ending alone was tough to swallow and left me feeling "had". Futuristic movies can stretch the imagination as long as the story lines make sense within itself. "Looper" just makes no sense. An 8 for Garret Dillahunt of whom I have been a fan since "Deadwood". Other than that just an okay movie.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

SpankySep 30, 2012

Good idea, lousy execution. Needed a couple of more rewrites. If you think you're getting an exciting action movie, you're not. A depressing bloody film. Why is it that Hollywood always has the future depicted as dirty, depressing andGood idea, lousy execution. Needed a couple of more rewrites. If you think you're getting an exciting action movie, you're not. A depressing bloody film. Why is it that Hollywood always has the future depicted as dirty, depressing and crime-ridden? The interesting concept makes it a fair DVD rental. Save the big movie theatre bucks for something else.… Expand

5 of 11 users found this helpful56

All this user's reviews

4

crazywaffle124Oct 6, 2012

I am writing this review 30 minutes after I saw this movie. This movie started ok, it had a few plot holes but otherwise the first third the movie went smooth. Then it was destroyed. The rest was a mix of mass confusion that didnt add up atI am writing this review 30 minutes after I saw this movie. This movie started ok, it had a few plot holes but otherwise the first third the movie went smooth. Then it was destroyed. The rest was a mix of mass confusion that didnt add up at all. It had magic 10 year olds, and became rediculous. None of the characters were connecting with me. The entire movie I was thinking, "I dont even care what happens to these people". The movie was funny at times, but only due to the ridiculous scenes. This movie couldve been more like Inception or The Matrix, but instead of being thought-provoking, it was a bad action movie. Definitely skip this.… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

4

jado818Dec 10, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Mildly entertaining premise that wasn't executed well. The movie's ending was terrible.

The main character just happens to end up on the very farm as the kid he is looking for after running from the diner? He didn't even know what that information on the note was until the farm owner explained it to him.

The story seemed to grow more and more inconsistent after the farm culminating with this hardened killer sacrificing himself for some kid he barely knew.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

CharlysonNov 7, 2012

Well... What to say... I think they really tried to make an intelligent movie but they kind of fail. That's too bad because the idea wasn't bad but too many things are out of place. The actors, they're not bad but not really good either, noneWell... What to say... I think they really tried to make an intelligent movie but they kind of fail. That's too bad because the idea wasn't bad but too many things are out of place. The actors, they're not bad but not really good either, none of them is really engaging.
I'd say go see this movie if you don't think too much and you are a bit bored because still the action scenes are not that bad.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

BKMFeb 20, 2013

Kudos to Rian Johnson for a creative and tricky screenplay, but the problem with Looper is that's all there is to the movie. The pacing is agonizingly slow, the performances are uninspired and there is little for viewers to grasp onto inKudos to Rian Johnson for a creative and tricky screenplay, but the problem with Looper is that's all there is to the movie. The pacing is agonizingly slow, the performances are uninspired and there is little for viewers to grasp onto in order to connect with the film. There are lots of ideas but nothing to really think about. Perhaps a different director would have yielded more satisfying results.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

3

kris2furFeb 3, 2013

Good movie, horrible unnecessary ending so many other possibilities that should have been explored. This movie has it's own time travel rules. I really don't know what else to say.

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

3

Jhaft703Oct 9, 2012

This was not a very good movie. I've already wasted too much of my time on it, so I won't write a lengthy review, but suffice it to say that SebDangerfield hit it on the head, it's a movie without an identity. Alternating between genre's andThis was not a very good movie. I've already wasted too much of my time on it, so I won't write a lengthy review, but suffice it to say that SebDangerfield hit it on the head, it's a movie without an identity. Alternating between genre's and pace at the same time is a very BAD idea, it's one thing to intermix a thriller with a drama, but not if one scene of fast paced (and confusing) action is followed by several scenes of boring dialogue that do not satisfactorily explain many questions raised by the 'action,' or adequately explore the world around them. This could have been an interesting 'Blade Runner' style Sci-Fi Drama, however it fails in that regard, and as a Bruce Willis Action movie. First movie I've seen at or above 75 on Metacritic (user since 2006, this is being charitable, I probably could have gone with a 70 or even 65) that I've thoroughly disliked, I tried to convince myself after the film that it wasn't that bad, but that is a lie. Wasted talent, incredibly overrated.… Expand

7 of 19 users found this helpful712

All this user's reviews

3

MargateExpertOct 12, 2012

Looper is the most overrated film I've seen since Inception. (I thought Nolan's Batman trilogy and Memento were great, by the way). Not much happens in Looper, and what does follows from the stupid premise (never explained) that bodiesLooper is the most overrated film I've seen since Inception. (I thought Nolan's Batman trilogy and Memento were great, by the way). Not much happens in Looper, and what does follows from the stupid premise (never explained) that bodies produced by hit-style executions in a future 30 years hence cannot be buried "then." Under the circumstances, the ruthlessness, persistence and sheer number of bad guys seems unnecessary and poorly motivated. As for the action, it's is just a lot of gratuitous shoot-and-miss, chase 'em-around-some-more, try to shoot-'em-again emptiness. The fact that Looper has been rated so highly by both critics and audiences suggests that, in the era of the suburban multiplex, viewers who honed their critical faculties in the 50s and 60s have been leached from the vetting process. I'm no snob and like "good junk," but Looper is just bad junk.… Expand

8 of 21 users found this helpful813

All this user's reviews

3

jon44Oct 15, 2012

I thought this was a pretty bad movie overall. Everything is derivative of stuff you've seen before, and even if this is deliberate, the riffing on familiar themes and plot points isn't clever enough to hold your interest.

And the overallI thought this was a pretty bad movie overall. Everything is derivative of stuff you've seen before, and even if this is deliberate, the riffing on familiar themes and plot points isn't clever enough to hold your interest.

And the overall concept sounds cool initially, but makes no sense. If they wanted to make no sense, the whole movie shouldn't have taken itself so seriously and been more cartoonish. As it is, there's really no reason to have the loopers in the first place--why didn't the bad guys of the future just send their victims into some volcano of the past?… Expand

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

All this user's reviews

3

VulcanNov 9, 2012

Slightly Interesting story - a bit confused at times mixing too much diverse sci-fi into the same story. Good acting and direction. HORRIBLE violence -- its way to excessive and gory at times and un-necessarily so. It makes Tarentino lookSlightly Interesting story - a bit confused at times mixing too much diverse sci-fi into the same story. Good acting and direction. HORRIBLE violence -- its way to excessive and gory at times and un-necessarily so. It makes Tarentino look like a sissy. And that's not easy to do, neither is it a good thing to achieve.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

3

upiJan 13, 2013

Action thrillers generally require the willing suspension of disbelief. You have to *want* to believe that it is possible to shoot people while running, survive explosions "just outside the fireball", jump through windows with barely aAction thrillers generally require the willing suspension of disbelief. You have to *want* to believe that it is possible to shoot people while running, survive explosions "just outside the fireball", jump through windows with barely a scratch, etc. These are established patterns of the genre, and we, as an audience, have come to accept them (even though none of these are very likely). The point I am trying to make is that when you go to an action movie, you are willing to overlook a bunch of glaringly impossible stuff, and will be actively trying to accept the plot "as-is" without looking too close. this is why it is to jarring when a movie is so full of internal inconsistencies and the sheer number plot holes make the script look like swiss cheese. These people are professionals, and they can apparently turn any weird idea into a marketable film, which makes me question even more why they had to go with this B-plot that made the otherwise seamless visuals simply not entertain anymore. I'm not even going into the onedimensional characters that can be completely described in one short sentence each. This is an action flic after all, we have come to accept that. Haven't we?… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

3

dogman25Sep 28, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Looper has a fantastic start but soon collapses under a weak combination of different storylines and a somewhat random plot element that has too much contrast with the Rian Johnson's "realistic approach".
I was enjoying the film profusely in the beginning - and then Johnson brought up "telekinesis". Yes, being able to move things with your mind. Up until that point, "Looper" has been depicted as a semirealistic movie that focuses on the gangster influenced youth. Bringing telekinesis in for about ten seconds, Johnson then abruptly drops it until it appears in a major plot point. The problem: telekinesis simply has too weak of a context to be actually taken seriously at this point in the movie, making it just seem like a cheap gimmick.
There was also a huge issue in the way the characters were portrayed. At first, I really admired the way Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon Levitt tackled the whole "one being, future vs present" issue: one of them is a naive hothead, while the other is a slightly sadistic but mature old man. Both have great traits that enable us to sympathize with both of them, and the whole first third or so of the movie really plays this development out. And then, Johnson introduces the stupid kid, Sid. Why is Sarah not his mom? Why does that even matter? Why is he so annoying? Why is he such an obnoxious child? Johnson wants us to sympathize with this superkid, yet he makes him as annoying as possible. He also adds an extraneous tension with his mom, Sarah. Apparently she's not his real mom...or is she? Why does it matter, why does Sid have to hate his mother? Willis already suggests that he saw his mom die, so why can't that mom be Sarah and not her sister?
Johnson then wants the audience to feel for Sid by giving him...super telekinetic powers. Yes, a little brat who treats his pretty awesome guardian like crap also causes **** to fly around when he gets mad. Is this Looper or "It's a Good Life"? Instead of the highly anticipated, and heavily emphasized game of cat vs mouse between Willis and Levitt, we get two separate simultaneous story lines that show Willis being cool and Levitt learning to open his heart to women and children. I understand the need to keep plot details to a minimum in trailers, but jesus christ what a misleading bunch of teasers. I wouldn't even mind if the unshown twist was well done and clever; instead we get the same old "kid and mom warm up a killer's heart".
There are plenty of other issues. Every single **** Sid freak out scene is just done so poorly...it's supposed to be serious and emotional, not some guy floating in mid air dancing. Also, Johnson makes us sympathize with Jesse the hired gun: he **** puts his gun down when he sees Sid fall, and then he gets ripped apart by telekinesis? How are we supposed to **** sympathize with that super brat?
I really wanted to like Looper, and I still do. Rian Johnson made a fantastic movie with Brick, and Joseph Gordon Levitt is one of THE best actors today. And who could forget Bruce Willis - one of the most overly typecast and underrated actors of movie history. Unfortunately, there are simply too many flaws with both character development, plot devices, and just plain old "not supposed to be funny but **** hilarious scenes" (Jesse flying and looking like an idiot before getting ripped apart). Unrelated nudity, too many characters...Looper was a great big letdown.… Expand

13 of 42 users found this helpful1329

All this user's reviews

3

SebDangerfieldOct 5, 2012

To even begin watching Looper one has to discount the glaring plot hole which should make the film redundant. Then once you have gotten over this, you must suspend your disbelief once again and just accept the ride (less a rollercoaster, moreTo even begin watching Looper one has to discount the glaring plot hole which should make the film redundant. Then once you have gotten over this, you must suspend your disbelief once again and just accept the ride (less a rollercoaster, more a long boring motorway in a spluttering old volkswagen golf) without questioning further the plot as the director has quite cleverly written the film in such a way that any bizarrities that might pop up throughout can be never fully explained; only through vague guesses can one try to make sense of whats happening. The film itself is paced so unevenly that it made me uncomfortable, sometimes moving so fast as it aims to confuse, at other times crawling at a pace that makes snails look like time travellers. The world that is created is as one-dimensional as the characters. The director has a chance to delve deeper into the decaying society of the future, yet we know practically nothing; all we are given is about 30 seconds worth of lazy city shots and some extreme poverty, which is enough to get one interested but is inexplicably never expanded on. JGL is the stereotypical young reckless man, Bruce the stereotypical older and wiser man. What we are to learn from this is unclear and is about as deep as the main characters get (except at the end when for some reason one character has a change of personality over the space of a day or so). Blunt and JGL are not terrible actors in any way shape or form, and neither is Bruce Willis for that matter, however the direction results in some fairly hammy and uncomfortable acting and some scenes are plain unwatchable without seeing them in a humorous light.

All in all, this is a sci-fi film without a coherent sci-fi plot, a drama without character development, a thriller without the thrills and suspense and an action film without much action (apart from one scene which, again needs suspending disbelief to watch, where Bruce seems to think he is Die Hard, or even more likely the Expendables.)… Expand

13 of 28 users found this helpful1315

All this user's reviews

3

Snowdon-goatOct 11, 2012

Attempt at cerebral sci-fi let down by endless plot holes and a feather-headed lack of logic... First the good

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

3

mess888Dec 26, 2012

The worst movie i saw this year by a long margin, not only its full of the usual nonsense about time traveling but also the whole story is a mess. I watched the movie accepting its own schizophrenic paradigms but even doing so all theThe worst movie i saw this year by a long margin, not only its full of the usual nonsense about time traveling but also the whole story is a mess. I watched the movie accepting its own schizophrenic paradigms but even doing so all the remaining plot doesn't make sense, the main character is just a lunatic cliche that doesn't even know himself and act randomly without any logic, all the events, i repeat, even accepting the time traveling part that is very inconsistent on its own, are scattered without any logic leading to an end where he does the dumbest choice of the whole movie, really only for 10 years old kids or something, avoid it.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

3

Bo33yDec 22, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The title is a Mars bar and just like junk food this film delivers that useless energy. In its fantasy came a world that could never even be explained, logically or even with any degree of attempt. Maybe in 1930's there is an era of which this film is modeled from definitely in no foreseeable future. This aside the plot is littered with gaping holes. Paradoxes were given as much thought as some illiterate explaining the theory of relativity and resulting in suicide. Quite literally those braincells where already popped from it's crackheads abusive direction. Poor at everything, what SCI-FI I ask, it really didn't even try to be scientific. Bums with guns, and silver equals gold.… Expand

0 of 6 users found this helpful06

All this user's reviews

3

Terbo49Jan 18, 2013

In 2 words, this film is so-so. It wants to be a Hi Res concetpt sci-fi film, but the plot doesn't hold out for that, and the splatter violence and appalling and unnecessary language give away the fact that there isn't enough in the story orIn 2 words, this film is so-so. It wants to be a Hi Res concetpt sci-fi film, but the plot doesn't hold out for that, and the splatter violence and appalling and unnecessary language give away the fact that there isn't enough in the story or the characters to keep it going. If you've paid oyur money and bought your popcorn, it will tick over, but you'll forget it within minutes if you have any semblance of intelligence. And if you have any sensitbility, you will actively WANT to forget it. It's just poor and nasty, at its heart.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

2

BritinLAOct 1, 2012

I'm confused and a little shocked at the reviews. I heard a rave review on NPR and so my husband and I went to see it. We both found it boring and a mix of too many not very interesting things. It never really made up it's mind what itI'm confused and a little shocked at the reviews. I heard a rave review on NPR and so my husband and I went to see it. We both found it boring and a mix of too many not very interesting things. It never really made up it's mind what it wanted to be. I should have watched the trailer first. My advice would be to skip it. Emily Blunt and the kid were the only redeemable features for us.… Expand

5 of 14 users found this helpful59

All this user's reviews

2

m3xcOct 12, 2012

There are two aspects of Looper that cause it to be stifling: It tries too hard to be stylish and too hard to be deep. The production values are there, with the actors well cast - though, when it comes down to it Bruce Willis is cast as aThere are two aspects of Looper that cause it to be stifling: It tries too hard to be stylish and too hard to be deep. The production values are there, with the actors well cast - though, when it comes down to it Bruce Willis is cast as a character that is essentially himself in every single Die Hard, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt is cast as (and takes on the attempts at acting like) a younger Bruce Willis.

Here is where an interesting facet comes into play: The most basic -simplified, if you will- premise is that one person meets themselves in the future. With the help of some keen makeup and prosthetic, Gordon-Levitt was able to be given the jaw, cheekbones, and forehead of Bruce Willis. In addition, speaking in a raspy and sort of brooding tone, the film is able to pull off a decent narration.

However, it just tries too hard to be "cool"; too hard to be "noir."

The director, Rian Johnson, attempts to be the next Christopher Nolan by mimicking the deep provocations of Inception but fails due to the fact that the presentation is terrible. One moment he throws a concept at the audience and before one can really figure out any profundities or even specific relations to a plot, the scene following is an elementary action scene or something that is easy to conceive, partially due to similarities with action films hitherto.

Perhaps with another viewing, aside from gawking at visuals, the viewer would be able to construe of something that is probably not there and, the undeniably corny plot "twists" thrown in make this film more than just a waste of money but also a waste of time. Inception was deep with the only real downside being that of the latter portion of it being drawn out - Looper tries with all of its might to be Inception, but can evaluated from its ending which is, in the larger scope of cinema, a cop out.… Expand

3 of 10 users found this helpful37

All this user's reviews

2

MikefromAngusJan 6, 2013

The problem with this movie is, that it tries to be taken as a serious piece of work. But fails, becasue of the many loop holes in the plot. On the positve side, the cast did a great job. But that wasnt enough, to save this movie.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

2

OxcartNov 4, 2012

Looper is one of those films that desperately wants to be taken seriously. It tries to capture audience interest and respect in several ways -- action, inter-character and character development, even the cerebral "nature of cause and effect"Looper is one of those films that desperately wants to be taken seriously. It tries to capture audience interest and respect in several ways -- action, inter-character and character development, even the cerebral "nature of cause and effect" conundrum. Unfortunately, it screws everything up and makes a royal mess. Its characters are, by and large, shallow to the point of one-dimensionality, generally merely character stereotypes rather than even photocopied archetypes. The primary anti-hero protagonist/antagonist (yep, it's that convoluted) probably undergoes the most development, but that's due in part to the fact that he's being played by two separate actors. By and large, the performances are wooden and unconvincing, the writing stilted to the point of being hack dialogue, and the plot so full of holes that trying to sort it all out would take much more time than this film is worth. (Consider this a note to all would-be time travel story writers: whether you decide on a deterministic or non-deterministic model of causality doesn't matter as long as you are consistent. Looper? Total flop on that.) Joseph Gordon-Levitt does a reasonably good job with what the script gives him (which isn't much), and Emily Blunt turns in a rather good performance, in part because she's the only believable character in the whole mangled mess. To be totally and brutally honest, if billing on this movie were by quality of performance, Blunt should be going first; hers is the best portrayal in the film. By the same logic, Bruce Willis' unconvincing, flat, and downright uninterested performance should earn him a credit just below the lighting intern. Frankly, Willis phoned in this performance; even with the pathetic writing, he could have done much better. Jeff Daniels turns in a decent portrayal of a boss from the future sent back to run herd on the miscreants that populate the turkey of a plot. Scriptwriting was horrendous, particularly in the area of plot. The entire film was over-the-top violence and brutality. Really, with the aforementioned exceptions to the generally poor performances, the only other people in this production that deserve a true pat on the back are those responsible for generating the setting and scenery. They, at least, did a fine job in creating a dystopian, energy-starved, socially collapsed world in which to set this train wreck of a film. (It's an unfortunate thing when the setting is outshining most of the cast in quality of performance.) Given the blasting I've given this film, it's easy to wonder why I'm giving it a 2 instead of a 0. Three reasons: Gordon-Levitt, Blunt, and the scene setting crew. Everything else? Junk. Had I known now what I was getting into, I would not have gone to the theater for this. I would've waited until it hit cable...and then watched something else.… Expand

8 of 18 users found this helpful810

All this user's reviews

2

csw12Jan 26, 2013

Looper is a movie that has an interesting story to some degree but from the mindless action scenes to the and incoherent editing, Looper fails miserably like Bruce Willis's acting.

0 of 5 users found this helpful05

All this user's reviews

2

sabazukiOct 10, 2012

Seeing the trailer I thought:
- great idea
- great actors - must see After seeing the movie: - a great idea is not enough without a proper storyline - great actors with poor story and dialogue, poor direction and poor make-up (JosephSeeing the trailer I thought:
- great idea
- great actors
- must see
After seeing the movie:
- a great idea is not enough without a proper storyline
- great actors with poor story and dialogue, poor direction and poor make-up (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) are worth nothing
- why on Earth did I fell for the trailer????… Expand

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

2

JonnyRavesNov 4, 2012

Looper sucked in so many ways that it's actually difficult count them all. Unlike most of the other haters, I would be willing to overlook the ridiculous plot and the inconsistencies (of which there are many), if the movie was generally wellLooper sucked in so many ways that it's actually difficult count them all. Unlike most of the other haters, I would be willing to overlook the ridiculous plot and the inconsistencies (of which there are many), if the movie was generally well executed and entertaining. But it's not. The movie is amateurishly directed, poorly edited, and unevenly paced. 80% of the action scenes lack the slightest amount of tension and fall completely flat. There is not one single well-developed character in the entire film, so there's no reason to care when anything happens to any of them. The script is disjointed and back-fills plot lines to explain things after they happen. The last two-thirds of the movie is very boring, and is chock full of clumsy, melodramatic, and just plain corny dialogue (especially between the Emily Blunt character and her "son"). Some of these dramatic scenes are so long and awkward that when I saw it, people in the theater were actually laughing uncomfortably, unsure of how to react. Then on top of everything else, Looper is a highly derivative mish-mash of other, much better, sci-fi movies, but doesn't even do a competent rip off job (see Inception ripping off the Matrix). Instead, what the viewer gets treated to is a series of dumbed-down scenes and plot points from movies like 12 Monkeys, The Matrix, Blade Runner, The Fifth Element, Strange Days, and a host of others. In the end, Looper is a smelly turd of a Movie. The only possible explanation I can offer as to why people liking this movie is that maybe we've been starved of a truly great sci-fi movie for so long, that almost anything will do at this point. Or maybe people are just idiots. Or both.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

2

Rox22Mar 11, 2013

I know I'm in the minority here, but I HATE this movie! After watching it I was actually angry. I felt like the writers and the director had just smacked me. This movie really did show ALLOT of promise as it built itself up rather nicely,I know I'm in the minority here, but I HATE this movie! After watching it I was actually angry. I felt like the writers and the director had just smacked me. This movie really did show ALLOT of promise as it built itself up rather nicely, establishing a "kind-of" realistic near future. But then they introduce the whole time travel element. At first it was a creative new use for it. But the longer they developed it, the more it the logic surrounding it fell apart. Basically they have created a form of time travel that completely ignores its own rules to the point that you would have to be a a half brained idiot to not see it. Basically the movie is saying: Shut up, stop thinking and enjoy the movie. Overall: This had the chance to be a really good movie, but any ingenuity was raped out of it by lazy writers and a director with no direction.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

2

Chad_HillJan 5, 2013

I joined Metacritic, as a public service, to review this movie and hopefully prevent someone else like me, who generally relies on the consensus of professional critics, from making the mistake of watching this tripe. THIS IS NOT A GOOD FILM,I joined Metacritic, as a public service, to review this movie and hopefully prevent someone else like me, who generally relies on the consensus of professional critics, from making the mistake of watching this tripe. THIS IS NOT A GOOD FILM, IN THE LEAST. Compounding the film's incoherent, inconsistent treatment of time travel -- the writer explicitly telegraphs, during one of the scenes, that the viewer need not attempt to make any sense of it -- are myriad additional (glaring) plot holes and unanswered questions. The "development" (such as it is) of JGL's "character" (such as it is) is utterly, maddeningly unbelievable. (The only way even to begin to make sense of him is as a walking mommy complex.) The penultimate action sequence is simultaneously so out-of-place and fantastic that it beggars contemplation, much less belief. And those are just the movie's three most fundamental defects; there are many, many more. It seems to me that the writer, when developing the screenplay, first conceived of the "clever" ending (which is actually clever only insofar as one is profoundly stoned) and then sloppily constructed a storyline to get there. I am honestly *befuddled* by the strong critical reception of this movie, *befuddled*. See also the reviews by Oxcart, JonnyRaves, mess888, and (especially) SebDangerfield. Do not waste your time or money on this one.… Expand

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

All this user's reviews

2

dyshpoJul 28, 2013

this movie is held together barely by duct tape logic. The producers really cashed in on people who just want a total escape into absurdity really so many holes the cast should've felled to their deaths but somehow they managed to live. Greatthis movie is held together barely by duct tape logic. The producers really cashed in on people who just want a total escape into absurdity really so many holes the cast should've felled to their deaths but somehow they managed to live. Great entertainment loved this movie i really liked campy time travel logic i really loved going down the rabbit hole.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

1

fantasySep 29, 2012

No one was looking forward to this movie more than me. I love science fiction, Bruce Willis and especially time travel. So let me get to the nitty gritty. There is no time travel to see nor any glimpse of futuristic life. So get that outNo one was looking forward to this movie more than me. I love science fiction, Bruce Willis and especially time travel. So let me get to the nitty gritty. There is no time travel to see nor any glimpse of futuristic life. So get that out of the way immediately. Secondly, the writing for this script is as lame as anything you will ever see. The plot hole is so obvious that you could drive a Mack truck thru it. This is blood and gore shoot em movie in which you feel nothing for any character. Th ending is predicatble. Just awful.… Expand

2 of 16 users found this helpful214

All this user's reviews

1

franclinolinOct 1, 2012

Don't waste a minute of your time or a nickel of your money on this silly lightweight schoolboy shoot 'em up. I cannot imagine how low the bar must be for reviewers who manage to find some kind of 'artistic value' in this train wreck of aDon't waste a minute of your time or a nickel of your money on this silly lightweight schoolboy shoot 'em up. I cannot imagine how low the bar must be for reviewers who manage to find some kind of 'artistic value' in this train wreck of a poorly plotted movie. The worst thing about this truly terrible film may be that it takes itself so seriously...not one light moment, not one original scene, not one fresh line of dialog. BEWARE!!!… Expand

3 of 13 users found this helpful310

All this user's reviews

1

pdwlsnSep 30, 2012

I have three words.

SAVE YOUR MONEY! I am a big Bruce Willis fan and if that is why you are going to see this it is a big let down, 10 min was probably all he was in the movie. This movie was so slow it was hard not to fall asleep. MyI have three words.

SAVE YOUR MONEY! I am a big Bruce Willis fan and if that is why you are going to see this it is a big let down,
10 min was probably all he was in the movie. This movie was so slow it was hard not to fall asleep. My husband did 3 times, I kept waiting for the good stuff to start. Then I realized the good parts were all shown in the trailers.

We were very disappointed to say the least. I would not even call this a good renter. We even checked the reviews and both views said go. Now I wonder if they wandered into the wrong theater. Bruce. You are a much better actor. How about a sequel to Reds?… Expand

2 of 10 users found this helpful28

All this user's reviews

1

JemJem78Oct 12, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The trailer for Looper had my attention, but the film did not. The first act of the film starts out very promising...set in 2030something a dark future underworld of crime where Loopers are paid to "assassinate" dudes sent back from 30 years into the future where time travel exists. Blah blah. I'm not going to spend ages writing this, because this film already owes me 2 hours of my life back. I wish everyone would stop raving on about JGL's prosthetics that are supposed to make him look more like Bruce Willis. They don't. The action is contrived, unsuspenseful, stupid and scarce. The 2nd act is boring...I could give to craps about anything that happened to any of these characters but Im forced to listen to the rubbish dialogue while this film tries to figure out what it wants to be and never does. Unimaginatively filmed, annoying subplots, too many boring characters, a child actor who is annoying and far from menacing (like he is meant to be), plot devices that are poorly used...themes that are not sufficiently explored because they are in the wrong genre of film to allow time for this to happen and actions without consequences. My biggest annoyance was how he betrayed his "best" friend in the first act and gets all sad and then this is never mentioned again. Don't waste your time on this mess of a film.… Expand

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

1

zecgMay 10, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A daft script that just isn't interesting. Worst treatment of time travel paradoxes: change a man in the present and that same man from the future changes to his own surprise. Seriously, the Futurama episode where Fry is his own grandfather is practically PKD compared to this tripe. Telekinesis mentioned in the first five minutes, to be used as a Deus Ex Machina in the ending, all in between is filled with awkwardly paced boring filler. The ending feels like bland proselytizing. Incredibly disappointing.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

1

Tariq610Feb 1, 2021

The only reason why I wanted to watch this movie was due to Joseph Gordon-Levitt after watching inception. The movie was boring and I really didn't find it interesting, boring plot. I don't know why people love this movie

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

0

NazguleroJan 3, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Basically unwatchable. I really do not understand why Joseph Gordon-Levitt is being heralded as the new Hollywood superstar. There is absolutely nothing that makes you want to see him, in any role. He is short, ugly, has absolutely no charisma, and is as boring as hell. Well, hell is probably a lot more interesting. Bruce Willis at least attempts to spice this movie up, but even he cannot do it. When trained killers miss him time and again, at point blank range, the entire premise becomes nothing but utterly ridiculous.… Expand

2 of 15 users found this helpful213

All this user's reviews

0

gimmedatsammichSep 28, 2012

If you are a fan of high bodycount, ultra violent action movies and hopelessly dystopian visions of the future, and you don't care about silly little things like theme, or even a coherent message that teaches us something, ANYTHING about theIf you are a fan of high bodycount, ultra violent action movies and hopelessly dystopian visions of the future, and you don't care about silly little things like theme, or even a coherent message that teaches us something, ANYTHING about the human condition, look away. Stop reading right now. I warned you. Don't you dare thumb me down. This review is for people like me, people who like a little bit of hope and optimism in their movies, and are tired of cold blooded killers and ruthless criminals ("with a heart!", I can hear them saying) occupying the lead spots in supposedly intelligent, critically acclaimed (a term I have learned to take with a hefty grain of salt) movies. So, what makes this movie so bad? First of all, it doesn't have an original bone in its emaciated, cliche ridden body. If you've seen Blade Runner, or Twelve Monkeys, or even the awful remake of the awful adaption of the awful comic strip 2000 A.D., or hell, basically any movie made in the last seventy five years, you've seen Looper. People will think it's original because it's based around a mildly inventive, highly questionable gimmick- time traveling hitmen assassinating themselves- but in reality, it's blatantly, shamelessly derivative. There's even a scene where Jeff Daniel's character (Tom? Joe? Bill? Jesus? I can't even remember the guy's name) points out the movie's own fatal flaw, in which he chides JGL's drab, uninspired Hollywood wardrobe. Masterful bit of foreshadowing right there. Or perhaps a subtle jab at itself? Either way, I should have left the theater right then and there. Let's start a checklist. Why? It's fun and I'm lazy: Bleak vision of the future? Check. Exorbitantly powerful criminal empire? Check. Widespread poverty? Check. Totally ineffective/powerless government/police force? Check. Unbelievable, scientifically implausible technological advancements? Check. Low I.Q. henchmen with terrible aim, wielding nonsensical weapons (the ridiculous long barreled revolvers reminded me of the joke pistol the Joker uses in Tim Burton's "Batman"). Check. Drug addicted, shamelessly materialistic, callously indifferent populace? Check, check, and check. Beautiful, gentle Asian prostitute who saves the older Joe from a life of crime? Check. Faceless villain? Check. Complete lack of any likeable characters? Check. Convenient, contrived ending? Check. Sound familiar? Alright, enough checks. I'm tired, and all of this is skirting the real issue. "Looper" is the kind of garbage I'd expect out of a film school amateur, a kid who has yet to learn the single most important thing about storytelling: soul. As in, this movie has none. "Looper" left a bad taste in my mouth, and if you're anything like me, you'll be just as disgusted. Avoid at all costs.… Expand

9 of 42 users found this helpful933

All this user's reviews

0

mostmoviessuckSep 29, 2012

I went to see this strictly based on the critic reviews. I am basically all done with reading any sort of critic reviews. The same people who invest in the movie production are the same people who own the media outlets that write the reviews.I went to see this strictly based on the critic reviews. I am basically all done with reading any sort of critic reviews. The same people who invest in the movie production are the same people who own the media outlets that write the reviews. This movie sucks. I wouldn't recommend this movie if it was free on the Lifetime movie network. Hollywood is a joke, American film is a joke. Absolutely pathetic.… Expand

9 of 36 users found this helpful927

All this user's reviews

0

TurkishCriticFeb 25, 2013

This story was written by someone who does not comprehend even the basics of time travel problems and paradoxes. It is a mystery why this chaos received so high grades. The plot in short: mafia from the future sends their assassinationThis story was written by someone who does not comprehend even the basics of time travel problems and paradoxes. It is a mystery why this chaos received so high grades. The plot in short: mafia from the future sends their assassination targets into the present to be disposed of; in the present there are killers, so called loopers (organized by a sadist from the future) who await their targets and kill them. Before or later, the looper receives a mission to kill his future self. Some of them fail to do so. And then the chase begins. First of all, the premise is pretty stupid, to use such advanced technology for such mundane goal. In the movie they have explained, that in the future it is impossible to get rid of someone without being tracked. It is, as it seems, far easier to build a time machine then to avoid tracking technology from a collapsed society. Then we have a pretty horrifying (and illogical) scene of punishment for a failed looper. His present self is mutilated and his future self loses his limbs one by one. This is wrong, all his wounds have been inflicted in the past so they would appear all at once in the future. And it is unresolved if his present self has been killed or will they keep him alive for the next few decades without his limbs, until he is sent into the present. Then we have our „hero", Joe who escapes his captors in the future, escapes his present looper-self and begins his search for a mysterious future mafia boss, the elusive „Rainmaker", who in the future has killed his wife. Then begins a „Terminator-rip-off". Terminator-Joe from the future does not have exact information about Rainmaker, only his date of birth and he manages to narrow his search to only three kids he will have to kill. He eliminates two targets and of course, his past self protects the real Rainmaker, the fact that it HAS TO BE KNOWN to his future self even before his trip to the past, because it is past, no matter when the audience has find out this. Then the Terminator-Joe eliminates his entire (ex-)gang and there is a showdown between him, his present-self and the Rainmaker-Kid. The situation is resolved when the present Joe kills himself and the Terminator-Joe disappears. Which would set in motion time traveling paradox: Terminator Joe does not exist so he cant be sent into the past and all his actions would be reversed. But no, all his actions in the movie remain. The Rainmaker-kid survives and he will grow up not to be mafia boss but exemplary member of future society. The end. Oh, and this Rainmaker-kid has a Carrie-like telekinetic abilities, which has nothing to do with a plot and is complete superficial. As for the pacing of the movie, it is horrible. We begin with a bang (literary), then a movie comes to a halt and we have an hour or so pure boredom (or character „development"). Then we have a final shoot out. All in all a very bad experience, caused by a fanboy-hype. If you want to see Bruce Willis travel through time, watch „12 Monkeys", a far superior movie in every sense.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

0

amboyOct 24, 2012

Apparently the method of time travel movies is to show the same scene over and over again to see if the outcome can be changed. The effect is numbing. J. Gordon Leavitt is talented, but he is gotten up to look like Keanu Reeves and actsApparently the method of time travel movies is to show the same scene over and over again to see if the outcome can be changed. The effect is numbing. J. Gordon Leavitt is talented, but he is gotten up to look like Keanu Reeves and acts accordingly. Bruce Willis has only his smirk left. I lasted a bit less than an hour.… Expand

2 of 13 users found this helpful211

All this user's reviews

0

WhySoSerious008Oct 11, 2012

What happened to cinema, Looper is a terrible film, reasons are 1. shaky cam 2. baby being shot 3. poor writing 4. not believable. Joespeh gordon levitt really gave a poor performance as well as the others. The best scenein the film was theWhat happened to cinema, Looper is a terrible film, reasons are 1. shaky cam 2. baby being shot 3. poor writing 4. not believable. Joespeh gordon levitt really gave a poor performance as well as the others. The best scenein the film was the credits, everything was so off. It was unwacthble, do not see this, my nan approved this message.… Expand

3 of 18 users found this helpful315

All this user's reviews

0

MaventOct 7, 2012

What bothers me about this movie isn't that it's stupid. It's that so many stupid people are calling it "smart". Right, so the Mob has time-machine technology. But instead of using it to, say, send them back football scores or manipulateWhat bothers me about this movie isn't that it's stupid. It's that so many stupid people are calling it "smart". Right, so the Mob has time-machine technology. But instead of using it to, say, send them back football scores or manipulate the stock market, they use it to get rid of bodies. Right, that makes ALL KINDS of sense. Oh, and instead of just using the time machine (which would obviously have to also be a "space" machine, since the planet is constantly moving) to dump the bodies into the ocean, or a volcano, or outer space, they hire people in our time to kill them. *sigh* If you think this movie is "smart" or "clever" or any of the other terms currently being used to describe it, it's because you yourself are an idiot.… Expand

2 of 13 users found this helpful211

All this user's reviews

0

rocklobOct 2, 2012

I dont like this movie. its too much like bladerunner and is not original at all. It was the biggest waste of 9 dollars and two hours of my life. No one should see this movie.

2 of 11 users found this helpful29

All this user's reviews

0

KulivontotOct 6, 2012

I liked this movie way better back when it was called the Terminator. Seriously? A movie about a time traveler coming back in time to assassinate a child who will change the future? Gee whiz, where have I heard that before. And then aI liked this movie way better back when it was called the Terminator. Seriously? A movie about a time traveler coming back in time to assassinate a child who will change the future? Gee whiz, where have I heard that before. And then a movie where the protagonist goes back in time to watch himself get killed? Does that sound familiar? It should because Bruce Willis already did that one in Twelve Monkeys too. Bruce Willis blatantly tells the audience "Hey, don't think to hard on this time travel stuff or your head will explode." What he really means is "The writers of this movie are too lazy to worry about filling in all the plot holes, so just accept it and we can move on." The action scenes seem to be added in to distract you from the terrible acting and boring dialog that drags on for the second hour of the movie. Bruce Willis' character seems to only exist for comedic effect.
Skip this one, go rent Terminator and Twelve Monkeys and watch the movies this one tries so hard to be.… Expand

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

0

GridoverflowJan 4, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. You either hate this movie or you are retarded. This movie has made you expect something good but it screwed you. The time traveling makes no sense at all. When in the end the main character shot himself his older version should disappear IMMEDIATELY not thinking and have a bad disappear effect. The fact that the kid was introduced at the beginning of the end and his powers were only introduced at the end with no explanation at all, makes me thing what the hell the writers were thinking. To include time travel in a movie is not new (see back to the future) but at least in that movie they explained how it was "possible" as you should in science-fiction. This movie did NOT! This was just a major disappointment and you will start to hate the kid and at the end he lives.… Expand

2 of 28 users found this helpful226

All this user's reviews

0

psyprbsfan1Feb 7, 2013

if garfield was sent back in time to past garfield to kill future garfield i bet they would have both eaten lasagna but that did not happen 0/100000 DONT BOTHER WATCHING

1 of 36 users found this helpful135

All this user's reviews

0

kingdomboostAug 3, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. THERE IS A SPOILER IN HERE! I FEEL, THOUGH, THAT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS IT!What garbage! The previews were very vague and now I see why. If the previews showed that Willis's character was going around shooting up children then I'd say it would get no views at all. Getting through the first 15 minutes was a chore, then the nude girls started showing up. Time to fast forward a scene or two. Then it starts to get interesting as Willis and Levitt meet up in current time. Well, more interesting than it was. Then Willis's character starts to kill children (with what all is going on today who thought it was a good idea to glamorize this idea???). That would have warranted an instant shut of, but it left me so dark that I had to fast forward to the end to get some closure to the movie, where I saw another child get shot in the face. Even though the movie ends with a little closure concerning the situation it wasn't enough, and afterward I had to watch a comedy just to shake the bad energy. The plot was crap, barely coherent in any way, and if you're paying attention even in the slightest you'll pick up on a major hole that should ruin the whole movie anyway. Absolutely a ZERO in every way. Willis and Levitt should be more careful of the movie roles they chose. Sometimes your character choice leaves a bad impression on your fans. My verdict: craptacular, absolutely avoid this move.… Expand

1 of 14 users found this helpful113

All this user's reviews

0

googlecraftMar 13, 2014

This film is the definition of terrible! It has more plot holes than I can count, this films time travelling rules are about as backwards as its storyline, it had random telekinetic abilities stuck in that had no influence on the story atThis film is the definition of terrible! It has more plot holes than I can count, this films time travelling rules are about as backwards as its storyline, it had random telekinetic abilities stuck in that had no influence on the story at all. And the ending made the whole film pointless since it apparently shouldn't have happened.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

0

BroyaxSep 12, 2017

Le voyage dans le temps, c'est casse-gueule comme sujet, il faut une grande rigueur d'écriture, ce dont est dépourvu Looper, hélas. Il s'enlise dans les voyages et paradoxes multiples dans un vague histoire à tiroirs qui vous tombent sur laLe voyage dans le temps, c'est casse-gueule comme sujet, il faut une grande rigueur d'écriture, ce dont est dépourvu Looper, hélas. Il s'enlise dans les voyages et paradoxes multiples dans un vague histoire à tiroirs qui vous tombent sur la tête. Quand en plus c'est aussi mal filmé et aussi longuet, ça tourne à la purge.

Bruce Willis essaye de rester sérieux et fronce le sourcil entre deux sourires en coin mais on le sent lui aussi clairement dépassé par les évènements d'un scénario boulotté par une équipe de stagiaires remplaçants qui n'y comprennent (plus) rien. Essayons de rembobiner pour passer le film à l'envers, on ne sait jamais : sur un malentendu, ça pourrait marcher.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

Looper

User Reviews