Looper

9

DestiniteOct 9, 2012

I went, I saw, I was entertained. I didn't go in overthinking every little thing, with some ridiculous notion that I was going to see a time travel movie and there would be no plot holes. No time travel movie has ever done that right. II went, I saw, I was entertained. I didn't go in overthinking every little thing, with some ridiculous notion that I was going to see a time travel movie and there would be no plot holes. No time travel movie has ever done that right. I didn't go in expecting non-stop action for two hours, either. I felt it spent just enough time on everything - action, story and characters. I still liked TDKR better, but this was an excellent movie.… Expand

6 of 16 users found this helpful610

All this user's reviews

10

fearless11Oct 13, 2012

Looper mixes mind-bending time-travel craziness, bloody action, some great hilarity and very nicely-done drama, all delivered in an astonishingly creative and original way.
Extremely well-written, shot, acted and, clearly, directed. I knewLooper mixes mind-bending time-travel craziness, bloody action, some great hilarity and very nicely-done drama, all delivered in an astonishingly creative and original way.
Extremely well-written, shot, acted and, clearly, directed. I knew it was good -- it turned out to be good raised to the 1000, meaning insanely good. A whole new level of fantastic. I'm never using the word "amazing" for non-truly amazing things (those that don't match Looper's level of amazing) ever again.… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

10

Coco890Oct 15, 2012

The trailer for this movie gives the wrong impression. Yes there's plenty of action and violence blended in with Sci-fi elements, but it's more than that. This is a thought-provoking, original piece of work. Sure there are some influences,The trailer for this movie gives the wrong impression. Yes there's plenty of action and violence blended in with Sci-fi elements, but it's more than that. This is a thought-provoking, original piece of work. Sure there are some influences, the biggest one seems to be Terminator, but this is as close to original as you can get in this day in age. I would like to also put out that, as I said there's plenty of action, but the movie at some points slows down. These scenes are just characters talking but they were never boring to me, but they might be to you. Half of the movie takes place on a farm but, like I said I was never bored. I have nothing bad to say about this movie. The plot and story are rich and thought-provoking. For example: If you could go back in time to kill baby Hitler would you? The screenplay is extremely well done and thought out. Sure there are some minor flaws within the time travel aspect(I can list a few but that could potentially spoil things) but that's the case with every movie about time travel. Johnson does a terrific job at plugging in most of these holes and this is probably the best and well thought out movie about time travel. Now if time travel did exist would it be something like this? Probably not but Johnson does such a good job at explaining everything that he makes us believe it, and he never breaks his own rules. You have to really pay attention to everything or else you might miss something and get lost, sort of like Inception. This is nothing like Inception by the way so those who are comparing this movie to that one are wrong. The acting in this more is terrific, but I'm sure none of these performances will get recognition from the academy which is a dam shame. Over the past couple of years Joseph Gordon-Levitt has slowly become one of the best actors working today. His performance is amazing, his impression of Bruce Willis is spot on from his facial expressions to the way he speaks he nailed it, and even though his face is covered in prosthetics he is still able to convey emotion and act. Bruce Willis is back between Expendable Two, Moonrise Kingdom and now Looper. I hope he picks these kinds of movies in the near future. He doesn't just kick was in this movie but he also proves that he's got the chops. One scene in particular, he is crying because of the terrible thing he did and even though I hated what he did I couldn't help but feel sorry for him during that scene. You'll know when you see it. Emily Blunt is great as well, I'm surprised not that many people actually mentioned her, without her the movie wouldn't have been the same. The kid is also great, he certainly has potential. He provided some humorous scenes that the film needed. The guy who plays the main person in charge of the Looper did a great job too. There really is no hero, everyone is the antihero which was a nice change as you don't often see that in movies and just adds to the freshness. The romance between Blunt and Levitt was nice, they both displayed a nice degree of chemistry. I really liked them as a couple even though they're both terrible people(I'd mention a few other things but I don't want to ruin anything). The ending to this film is brilliant, it has a lot of deep meaning behind it even though I'm sure people hated it. There's a reason why the director did this and if only people would look at the meaning behind it. This is as perfect of a movie about time travel as you're going to get. I loved everything about it. Sure you can pick away at some of the flaws within the time travel but what's the point? Every movie about time travel has some flaws within time travel. The strong script, outstanding performances, fleshed out characters, and the rich/original plot make this the best one. Johnson did a brilliant job at closing as many of the flaws as he could. This is one of the best films of the year, it's thought-provoking and original. This movie is still on my mind and though this won't alter my life in any way, I'm glad I got to see it.… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

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

10

makisterOct 7, 2012

Best movie I've seen in a long time. Genius plot, awesome actors and great cinematography. Definitely the best movie of the year. I really was excited when I saw the trailer, but I didn' t expect to have been as surpised as I became.

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

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

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

9

nightblade00Oct 1, 2012

I base great films on whether I am still thinking about them the next day. I was still thinking about Looper the next day. While I may watch something like "The Avengers" over and over again to go to sleep to and enjoy on a semi-regularI base great films on whether I am still thinking about them the next day. I was still thinking about Looper the next day. While I may watch something like "The Avengers" over and over again to go to sleep to and enjoy on a semi-regular basis, Looper is perhaps the best film so far this year (but far less re watchable as background noise while you are cooking dinner). Superb acting, casting, and overall directing.… Expand

3 of 9 users found this helpful36

All this user's reviews

10

barnet42Oct 15, 2012

An endlessly creative mind-blowing film that captures everything right about the movie going experience. Johnson conjures up the most imaginative action/science fiction film since 'Inception.'

3 of 9 users found this helpful36

All this user's reviews

8

allystewOct 3, 2012

Seen Looper tonight. Does it live up to the hype? Not really, but I don't think that is the movies fault. The trailer makes you think its an action flick but its not. Its a concentrate and work out the plot and time travel paradoxes flick,Seen Looper tonight. Does it live up to the hype? Not really, but I don't think that is the movies fault. The trailer makes you think its an action flick but its not. Its a concentrate and work out the plot and time travel paradoxes flick, however in my book thats a good thing! I didn't get the Joseph Gordon-Levitt make up as I don't think it made him look like Bruce Willis but watch out for one of the best child acting performances in recent memory. Even though I seen the main "twist" coming a mile off I still really liked the film. Like Inception I'm sure multiple viewings will make it even better. This is a real thinking mans Sci-Fi movie.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

9

GreatbealloOct 6, 2012

Intelligent. Entertaining. Unique. Violent. Emotional. Disturbing. Sentimental. I loved it. I hope it gets a nomination from the academy.

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

9

NektarNOct 2, 2012

Definitely one of the best movies of 2012, and most likely the best science-fiction movie of this year. With movies such as The Dark Knight Rises and The Hunger Games, Looper still manages to shine and delivering one of the best movieDefinitely one of the best movies of 2012, and most likely the best science-fiction movie of this year. With movies such as The Dark Knight Rises and The Hunger Games, Looper still manages to shine and delivering one of the best movie experiences of the year. A must see, surprisingly good. 9/10… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

7

DeitiesforsaleSep 30, 2012

This movie could have been so much more, but unfortunately shot itself in the foot around the time after the farm house was first seen. Around 30 - 40 minutes of nothingness... but relationship building and character development.. this is notThis movie could have been so much more, but unfortunately shot itself in the foot around the time after the farm house was first seen. Around 30 - 40 minutes of nothingness... but relationship building and character development.. this is not what I want to see in a Sci-Fi Thriller/ Action movie... Having said that, along with a few other irritating nuances.. I must say, stunning visuals, great acting, wonderful script.. it's a shame they let the structure go so horribly wrong.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

7

gilletteSep 30, 2012

The movie was ok. The only problem i had is Bruce is left handed and Joseph Gordon-Levitt is right handed. Did anyone else notice that. If i had to grade the movie i would give it a C plus

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

8

BestponyJan 1, 2013

Looper takes an tremendously silly concept and tries to ask some big questions with it, which unfortunately does not work at all. However, it manages to set up a compelling conflict that avoids standard "good guy, bad guy" fare for somethingLooper takes an tremendously silly concept and tries to ask some big questions with it, which unfortunately does not work at all. However, it manages to set up a compelling conflict that avoids standard "good guy, bad guy" fare for something much more complex, resulting in a very good thriller where you can easily forget about all the philosophy and just watch the players make their moves. It provided me with the rare experience of watching a Hollywood film and truly wondering what's going to happen next, because there wasn't any obvious happy end in sight. Add some great acting (with the exception of Bruce Willis, who, as always, plays Bruce Willis and matches Kristen Steward in his range of facial expressions), and the fact that it doesn't rely on CGI and explosions to keep you excited, and you end up with a surprisingly solid experience.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

8

worleyjamersJan 12, 2013

Looper is a really good sci-fi/action thriller. Although the second half of the film tapers off towards the end, the film is held together by a solid concept, great direction, and good performances, even if some things are left unanswered.

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

8

smijatovJan 16, 2013

Thank god that the National Board of Review seems to have common sense still with giving "Looper" the Best Original Screenplay award. This film is AMAZING. It is a "Inception 2.0" of sorts, but even more action-packed. Is that the possibleThank god that the National Board of Review seems to have common sense still with giving "Looper" the Best Original Screenplay award. This film is AMAZING. It is a "Inception 2.0" of sorts, but even more action-packed. Is that the possible downfall of it in the awards circuit? Maybe. I'll admit, I've been rather limited in my 2012 film watching (so far), but this has been my second favourite film of the year (right after "Argo"). The screenplay, as noted, is extremely well done with an intelligent idea and exceedingly good dialogue. Bruce Willis is great in action films, and he does the same here. Ms Blunt is a great actress and she keeps her head high with this performance. The best, however, is the work of the makeup department and Mr Gordon-Levitt. Wow. That was a great and totally out-of-character performance for his usual self. Finally, I can see him as a serious actor. So, what more does one need than a great screenplay and great cast? Technical aspects? Those are covered too. It's just a good film. No. It's a great film. There is no way about it. One of the best of the year.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

8

dijavantewowMar 20, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Not quite the movie the previews make it out to be, but it's still quite good. It's an interesting take on time travel, but that's not even the important part of the movie. This child that has such powerful abilities, that he brings the world terror in the future is in the grasp of the protagonist, but decides that instead of continuing to try and change that future (which in itself only perpetuates it), he decides to end his own life. One of the better sci-fi movies in a while.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

7

kane148Oct 8, 2012

This movie has an interesting premise and great actors and acting, which make up for the sometimes-lackluster action sequences. I think that if ones goes into this movie looking for simply an action movie, they will be disappointed. However,This movie has an interesting premise and great actors and acting, which make up for the sometimes-lackluster action sequences. I think that if ones goes into this movie looking for simply an action movie, they will be disappointed. However, if you want something deeper: compelling characters and character development, suspense, moral dilemmas, then you will be satisfied. The film does suffer a bit at a few crucial plot points, where it's not entirely clear what happened. If you leave the theater confused, then look online for an explanation and it should make those little pieces fall into place nicely.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

9

CritictheBombNov 16, 2012

This is a thrill ride and a joy to watch up to the end. It keeps you glued to your chair the whole time until the plot unfolds and a shocking end reveals itself!!!!

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

7

jkxtremeFeb 18, 2013

This is slightly unfair, as a film itself I would give it 8 maybe, but I must give it 7 due to the consensus, the consensus is this was an amazing film, it wasn't, it was solid but wasn't awe inspiring, it was also this decades Matrix, and itThis is slightly unfair, as a film itself I would give it 8 maybe, but I must give it 7 due to the consensus, the consensus is this was an amazing film, it wasn't, it was solid but wasn't awe inspiring, it was also this decades Matrix, and it wasn't, it was nowhere near Matrix, I had to be true to myself, I'd rent it before buying it
And Emily Blunt fans, She acts well, but she is the most pointless character ever… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

10

JPKDec 8, 2019

Really Well Made
With Looper, Rian Johnson truly shows how talented he is as a filmmaker.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

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

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

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

10

DeanomiteDec 11, 2019

This movie did the impossible, it made me like Joseph Gordon Levitt. For some reason, that guy always seems like such a poser twerp, but doing a Bruce Willis impression he was brilliant. Also, Bruce Willis was as good as at his best IThis movie did the impossible, it made me like Joseph Gordon Levitt. For some reason, that guy always seems like such a poser twerp, but doing a Bruce Willis impression he was brilliant. Also, Bruce Willis was as good as at his best I often forget what an amazing actor he is until rewatching something like The Sixth Sense, against type as a selfish bad guy of sorts. for a budget of $30m, it looks like a much more expensive movie. Rian Johnson is a master of craft, creating a plausible future with the bare minimum of tech and effects. I was most amazed when a pickup truck with a vacuum hose on the back was passably futuristic.… Expand

3 of 10 users found this helpful37

All this user's reviews

8

MarcDoyleOct 1, 2012

The first half of the film is extremely stylish and ambitious, but the second half just gets far too narrow in plot. There are a host of really nice time travel touches, but nothing that wasn't already covered with aplomb in Bill & Ted'sThe first half of the film is extremely stylish and ambitious, but the second half just gets far too narrow in plot. There are a host of really nice time travel touches, but nothing that wasn't already covered with aplomb in Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey. I give the film credit for attempting to go big with the attempt. Again, the story of the boy is really interesting, but I expected a grander path for the film after the first hour or so. It's great to see Piper Perabo in a slightly racier role than her Covert Affairs persona.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

7

BikerjamesOct 1, 2012

I love Sci Fi, and like all the actors in this film, so I was looking forward to seeing it. It was a mixed bag for me. The film kept me interested, but turned out to be more about the telekinetic kid than anything else. The child, playedI love Sci Fi, and like all the actors in this film, so I was looking forward to seeing it. It was a mixed bag for me. The film kept me interested, but turned out to be more about the telekinetic kid than anything else. The child, played by Pierce Gagnon, is one of the best child performances I've ever seen in a film. He is absolutely mesmerizing. Unfortunately, the film ended up feeling more like a "demon seed" scary film rather than an intriguing Sci Fi film. I did not care for the whole telekinesis angle which seemed tacked on, and there is a sex scene in the film which was ridiculous and unnecessary. There was also inconsistencies which made no sense. The younger looper always shot and killed the future loopers the instance they appeared, and for some unexplained reason when the older version of himself appeared he hesitated before shooting. There was also some very slow moments throughout the film. Not a bad film, but it won't be a Blu Ray purchase.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

8

SacrificeOct 15, 2012

Looper is a great sci-fi thriller with an intense and intriguing story. It has good characters and visuals while using time travel in interesting ways. The third act has a shift in pace and story. In my opinion it felt a little disjointed andLooper is a great sci-fi thriller with an intense and intriguing story. It has good characters and visuals while using time travel in interesting ways. The third act has a shift in pace and story. In my opinion it felt a little disjointed and less interesting compared to the first two-thirds of the film. Never-the-less, it is a great experience.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

8

TerKaDerOct 3, 2012

Looper was quite an enjoyable movie. The story seemed pretty original, though a little slow in the middle. I thought the performances of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Emily Blunt were excellent and whoever did the make up on Joseph's face did aLooper was quite an enjoyable movie. The story seemed pretty original, though a little slow in the middle. I thought the performances of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Emily Blunt were excellent and whoever did the make up on Joseph's face did a great job making him look quite close to a younger Bruce Willis. I think Looper was a very good blend of a mob story and sci-fi all rolled up into a nice cozy burrito. P.S. If you want a future car just attach some solar panels and wires to the outside of your car and you will be driving a car from 2044.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

8

KreativeGeekOct 12, 2012

Rarely you would find a science fiction movie these days not relying on CGI and action to draw audiences, this movie does not require both, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis pack a great performance, best science fiction movie I haveRarely you would find a science fiction movie these days not relying on CGI and action to draw audiences, this movie does not require both, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis pack a great performance, best science fiction movie I have watched in recent times.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

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

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

8

ReekyAlexJan 26, 2013

There are some plot holes and some times you just have yourself scratching you're head because it's not exactly clear how the time travelling works. But everything else of the movie is good and very enjoyable

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

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

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

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

7

GreatMartinSep 28, 2012

How would you like to sit in a diner having steak and scrambled eggs with a version of yourself, but 30 years older, who also orders steak and scrambled eggs? How would you like to be Bruce Willis surrounded by 20 men with guns and you killHow would you like to sit in a diner having steak and scrambled eggs with a version of yourself, but 30 years older, who also orders steak and scrambled eggs? How would you like to be Bruce Willis surrounded by 20 men with guns and you kill them all but can… Expand

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

7

Weis-muellerSep 30, 2012

It's a mix of "10" scenes and three times as much "6". Worth watching--as is any film that manages to have even a minute of level ten. But, 66 critics saying 8.2? They're bonkers.

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

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

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

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

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

9

PjdblueOct 9, 2012

I have been waiting to see Looper for a while now & like always when a film is highly rated with many positive reviews your excitment increases day by day. I can safely say it's up there with the best sci-fi / time travelling movies,I have been waiting to see Looper for a while now & like always when a film is highly rated with many positive reviews your excitment increases day by day. I can safely say it's up there with the best sci-fi / time travelling movies, Terminator/12 Monkeys etc. I loved the story & all the cast are superb, even the little touches like Joseph Gordon-Levitt plastic face.. Cool.
Everything worked so a must see for all I feel..… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

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

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

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

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

8

CitizenCharlieSep 30, 2012

Time travel is confusing. Once you think you may have a grasp on it and have ironed out the 'what-ifs', a new paradox will pop up and collapse your argument which was a house of cards anyways. There are too many holes, and especially plotTime travel is confusing. Once you think you may have a grasp on it and have ironed out the 'what-ifs', a new paradox will pop up and collapse your argument which was a house of cards anyways. There are too many holes, and especially plot holes, when you try to rationally reason through what it means to travel through time and change the past. Once time travel is invented, hasn't it always been invented then? If you go back in time and change something, will you just disappear because your specific future no longer exists?

Looper sidesteps this whole enigma by having old Joe (Bruce Willis) tell his younger self that there is no use trying to figure it all out; it will just confuse you. This one statement immediately smooths out the conversation he is having with young Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), the audience's mental gymnastics, and while still leaving them right there in front of you, chooses to ignore the Grand Canyon sized plot holes. If you spend enough time with a pen and a sheet of paper, you will most likely identify a dozen or so glaring issues with jumping back through time, but where is the fun in that? With Looper, it is enough to recognize you have a creative story to watch and gifted actors to watch carry it out.

The year is 2044, not so far in the future to imagine teleportation and interstellar flight, but far enough to dream up new technology, weapons, and illicit drugs. 2044 is quite similar to today's reality, but its every day norms and today's extreme edges magnified by 1000. There are hover motorcycles, currency is literally based on gold and silver, and the drug all the kids are using is administered through eyedrops and appears to have the effects as cocaine. There is also some glaring income inequality, you either have money or you do not; there is no middle class. The city landscape shows thousands of people living on the sidewalks and sometimes in the middle of the street. If someone steals from you, it looks like you are allowed to pull out your personal shotgun and teach them a severe lesson. Young Joe is a looper. At a specific time and always in the same place, the edge of a corn field, a hooded person will appear out of nowhere and all Joe has to do is immediately pull the trigger on his weapon and get rid of the body. These unfortunate souls are being sent back through time from 30 years in the future where time travel is illegal; therefore, it has morphed into a black market time travel system run by the mob. Young Joe is paid handsomely to do these simple tasks and spends the rest of his day and most of the night going to a club to drink, dance, take drugs, and spend time with Suzie (Piper Perabo), his favorite lady of the evening. There are rules to follow though. Since the system is run by the mob, breaking the rules is frowned upon. I will not go into the rules because young Joe does a good job explaining to you what they are. In his film noir, gravelly voice, which is trying to match a young Bruce Willis in style, Joe opens the movie and brings you up to speed on what has been happening with the time travel business and his specific spot on the food chain. He has looper friends with Seth (Paul Dano) as his closest one and he gets called in to see the boss, Abe (Jeff Daniels), from time to time. Other than that, young Joe is really running his own loop with his day job and his nightly activities.

Old Joe effectively ends that routine as soon as he pops into the corn field out of thin air. One would think that young Joe would have some questions or would want to cut his older self some slack, but no such luck. Young Joe enjoys his current situation and is in no frame of mind to have it messed with, even if it is a version of him doing the interrupting. Old Joe is on a quest to change the past and does not seem too pleased to run into his former self either. These two are the same man, but they certainly are different people. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is really the leading man here because Willis is in more of a supporting role and has noticeably less screen time; however, Bruce still gets top billing on the poster and in the credits. I wonder if that chafes Gordon-Levitt? Both Gordon-Levitt and Willis are very good here. On one hand, they are playing the same person and must try and match each other's facial ticks and mannerisms, but on the other hand, Gordon-Levitt is playing a kid against Willis's older and yes, wiser, character. Another supporting character is Sara (Emily Blunt) but I leave it to you to discover her role. Sara is saddled with most of the slower scenes in the middle which drag on a bit, but it's good to take a break from Joe, both young and old, after awhile. Looper was written and directed by Rian Johnson (Brick, The Brothers Bloom) who should be commended for sitting down and puzzling through what must have been a very arduous screenplay.… Expand

2 of 10 users found this helpful28

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

9

MarmaladeOct 5, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Looper is a movie that epitomizes how an ending can make or break a story. Looper is the complete and utter opposite of what we saw happen with the Mass Effect franchise. Whereas the ME series was fantastic up until the last 10 minutes of ME3, I found Looper to be "just okay" up until the last 10 minutes - and then it blew my freakin' mind. Without getting "spoily," I will be completely honest - I almost walked out on Looper about 45 minutes in. Why? I have a personal problem with disturbing/graphic violence. I'm very sensitive and have trouble dealing with certain kinds of violence (not so much guns and shooting, but the kind of violence that haunts the imagination). The first 45 minutes or so has a LOT of that. There were parts I couldn't watch, while there were other parts I COULD watch but freaked the hell out of me (hint to people who have seen the movie: Old Seth. I can't get it out of my mind). However, when the movie gets to the point where we're introduced to the young version of the Rainmaker, I decided to stay - and I'm glad I did. Whereas the Mass Effect ending completely ruined the franchise for me, the ending of Looper completely redeemed the convoluted blood bath that went before. My initial thought when the credits rolled: "I hated it - and it blew my freakin' mind." My feelings about the movie as a whole are mixed. I admit my bias against graphic violence plays a huge role in these mixed feelings, so I will put all of that aside and say that the premise is fantastic, the acting is superb (the kid in this movie was outstanding) and DESPITE the violence, the story of this movie is well-written and mind-blowing. It reminded me of the original Terminator movie (one of my favourite movies of all time). I probably won't watch it again because of my sensitivity to violence, but for those of you who can deal with it, it's a story that's both touching and profound will leave your jaw hanging open when the credits roll.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

9

thebaldavengerOct 5, 2012

I absolutely loved it. This is a great movie. Performances, direction, script: all are top notch. Not as much action as the trailer makes out but it doesn't matter because it's a proper, intelligent sci-fi movie. Makes a nice change from allI absolutely loved it. This is a great movie. Performances, direction, script: all are top notch. Not as much action as the trailer makes out but it doesn't matter because it's a proper, intelligent sci-fi movie. Makes a nice change from all the empty spectacle of most blockbuster films these days… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

9

YanYan1990Oct 7, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Rian Johnson's latest sci-fi drama is an absolute joy to watch; not just as a well executed non-linear narrative but also as a deeply resonant love story operating on two separate plains: the past and the future. Juggling this complex series of events and organising them into a story that makes sense - let alone functions at all - is an achievement not to be snarked at. The credit truly has to go to Johnson as both writer and director, as well as sterling performances from both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis, supplemented nicely with the work of Jeff Daniels and Emily Blunt.

Joseph ''Joe'' Simmons (Gordon-Levitt) is a Looper: an assassin in the year 2044 whose job it is to eliminate targets sent back from the future, where high-tech tagging has eliminated the possibility of effective body-disposal. The target is sent back, Joe takes him down, and then collects: it's as simple as that. The currency sent back from this dystopian future comes in the way of silver, which is no surprise given the current scarcity of rare-earth metals which shows no sign of abating in the far-future. But time travel itself is a well kept secret and, with the knowledge held by the Looper's, they are a risk to the fortunes of the mob; thirty years after they kill their last target, they are sent back themselves as the next target: thus the term ''Looper'' is born.

But what happens when the target is yourself? Joe is faced with this exact problem, as an older version of himself (Willis) kneels at his mercy. Young Joe's hesitation causes the target to escape. Now we watch as two opposing forces begin their own personal vendetta: Old Joe searches for a merciless villain from the future named ''The Rain-maker'', who in this year would be only a small child; leaving Young Joe no option but to stop his older doppelganger and his sadistic quest for revenge. The beautiful thing about all of this is that we are watching the same person with different life experiences motivating them. Where do we lay our allegiance? We learn that Older Joe has got sufficient reason to want this future kingpin dead, but at the cost of murdering a child? in the meantime we come to understand that Younger Joe may be the key to all of it.

A word on the supporting cast: Sara (Emily Blunt) - is the sole proprietor of a small farm. She lives alone, apart from her five year old son who possesses telekinetic abilities (TK as it is called in the film; an ability inherent in around 10% of the population). Abe (Jeff Daniels) is sent back to manage the Loopers and offers a more traditional antagonist for this picture, although part of the charm is that the dynamics of good and bad aren't particularly consistent.

Now, you will be left with questions. And this is not an intrinsically bad thing - in contrast, I think it opens the world of the movie up even more. I was led to query the nature of the time travel itself; multiple dimensions seeming to be a plausible necessity of the time manipulation process. These questions don't detract from the movie itself, which functions smoothly and focuses simply on the story at hand: This is the world we have been presented with and this is the story being told. All other questions - albeit interesting - are not required factors in enjoying what is an excellent movie.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

10

Embalmer98Jun 8, 2021

$.$.$.$.$.$,$,$.#.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.$.
》●》●》●》●》●》●》●》●》●》●》●》●》●》●》●》●

1 of 8 users found this helpful17

All this user's reviews

8

lahaine2012Nov 20, 2012

If you're looking for something thrilling yet thought provoking, go no further, Looper has arrived. Rian Johnson's Looper is a bold, wholly original genre film that delves into the fabric of time travel like you hardly get see these days. TheIf you're looking for something thrilling yet thought provoking, go no further, Looper has arrived. Rian Johnson's Looper is a bold, wholly original genre film that delves into the fabric of time travel like you hardly get see these days. The high concept story line of a man's future-self on the loose after failing to 'get rid of him' is only the tip of the iceberg. Whats left is a dizzying tale of crime, time alteration and most interestingly, parenthood, that twists and turns the audience like an intelligent thriller should. The deceptive direction may not satisfy all, but it kept the intrigue on high.The principal cast was very good, and it's also good to see Bruce Willis on form this year. Filmed with much style and edited with clockwork precision; I highly recommend this to movie-goers.… Expand

2 of 20 users found this helpful218

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

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

7

AlairaOct 1, 2012

Looper was good. It wasn't great, but it was good. It was really heading in the right direction except that inconsistencies with how "future" works was silly. Some of the characters are pretty annoying, too. You aren't ever actually sure whatLooper was good. It wasn't great, but it was good. It was really heading in the right direction except that inconsistencies with how "future" works was silly. Some of the characters are pretty annoying, too. You aren't ever actually sure what characters you are supposed to "like" and "dislike". That can be good sometimes, but by how the characters were developed and built, it fails. The movie had good ideas and concepts, it just wasn't pieced together that well. It's a pretty good movie if you only look on the 'outside'. If you want it to be logical and well done science fiction, then perhaps this isn't the greatest of movies. What separates a movie like this from Moon is that it Moon is perfectly structured and has very little to nitpick at. I suggest seeing it, but don't have super high expectations. It is only a B or C level sci-fi movie. But there are boobs… Expand

1 of 19 users found this helpful118

All this user's reviews

7

SantiagoMAKiiNAOct 7, 2012

The verdict is out. It appears if you are a troubled male enduring a violent life style, a woman from your past, or future, is likely responsible. If you want proof, look no further than this film. All major characters are deeply affected byThe verdict is out. It appears if you are a troubled male enduring a violent life style, a woman from your past, or future, is likely responsible. If you want proof, look no further than this film. All major characters are deeply affected by females. Whether it's a mother, a wife, or a hooker, they all determine the destiny of the world.
I won't give it away, but do pay attention to the various female driven pointers, from small to large. It's all there. Ladies are the oil that runs the machinery of the world.
This was no doubt an entertaining film. The story kept me interested. Particularly because the promotional trailers did something abnormal by today's standards: they didn't give away the whole thing. I didn't expect it to follow the path that it does. Two thumbs up right there.
It's worth mention what a fastantic job they did making Joseph Gordon-Levitt look like a younger version of Bruce Willis. Frightening.
The one bit that often gets to me when it comes to science fiction is how you can smell the compromisse in the futuristic look. Specially when it comes to technology. Our future selves are geniuses in one aspect, like, say, time travel, but when it comes to other details of the world, like architecture or simple street signs, we dumbed down... And of course, the story does take place in the "past" version of this future. Can you hear a studio guy say: 'we gotta shoot this thing cheaper!'... Well, you can't have it All. So it does feel a bit more like an HBO production than big theatre fare, but I still had a fantastic time. Enjoy.… Expand

1 of 21 users found this helpful120

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

7

mau1133Jan 26, 2013

i enjoyed it, enternaning and bruce is a little diferent in this one, well there are some crazy effects and even my girlfriend likeed it. i find myself at a loss of words so that means i cant remember too much about it

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

6

GilbertoOct 13, 2012

Looper was interesting, but not for so long. The concept of time traveling and the Loopers killing waste from the future seemed incredibly intriguing. But the problem is that the movie shifts from those ideals into a more standard type ofLooper was interesting, but not for so long. The concept of time traveling and the Loopers killing waste from the future seemed incredibly intriguing. But the problem is that the movie shifts from those ideals into a more standard type of movie. So the first half is fast paced and explains the concept in majestic ways, but then the second half deviates and almost completely forgets it. Its still an entertaining movie thanks to some very good acting and great direction, but the shifts in genre from action to slow drama kills what it could have been. It had the potential to be the next Inception, but the thing is that Inception never abandoned its unique concept the way Looper does. Looper feels like it lacks identity, but at the same time given what it does right, it also feels intriguing when compared to most of the movies that come everyday. Its a recommendable movie, but also disappointing nonetheless.… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

8

PierNov 7, 2012

A refreshing approach to the overly tired action genre. The film achieved many things right, but what really shines is by far the script. When is Looper 2 coming out?

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

JUIKERDec 23, 2012

I think this is on par with Source Code and Moon (and maybe even Twelve Monkeys) as story-driven scifi that could probably bear several watchings over the years. It's a fine addition to the canon of fine scifi movies.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

nutterjrDec 31, 2012

Possibly the kick ass film of the year! A good story with steady-state suspense and pounding action, a great cast with marvelous acting and a bravado director delivering a film of immaculate style and elegance.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

7

JamesLOct 10, 2012

The first half was much better than the second half. Once Willis arrives and we got to the farmhouse, I knew how the movie was going to end. The first part about the concept of looters was intriguing but could have used a little more "BladeThe first half was much better than the second half. Once Willis arrives and we got to the farmhouse, I knew how the movie was going to end. The first part about the concept of looters was intriguing but could have used a little more "Blade Runner" styling. The second half degenerated into the Terminator again and was quite predictable. The film should have been focused on the unseen future instead of dragging back into the present. Daniels' character could have been expanded as well. A seven is the most I can rate this one.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

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

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

6

TokyochuchuJul 11, 2013

The Looper is a decent but strangely disjointed movie. Time travel is always a tricky proposition and, if one were to think hard enough, there are a bunch of reasons why The looper doesn't make sense. But it is a sci-fi film, so what theThe Looper is a decent but strangely disjointed movie. Time travel is always a tricky proposition and, if one were to think hard enough, there are a bunch of reasons why The looper doesn't make sense. But it is a sci-fi film, so what the hell. It's well acted and unpredictable, both of which are a plus. More heart and less cane fields would have been much appreciated, though.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

DigitalkidNov 22, 2012

Tried to read some negative reviews, and is it a joke? "This movie is bad, because this scene is bad, plot is bad, acting is poor, actors are awful... blah-blah-blah". Are you all 15-years old? The only thing I didn't like, is that plot is aTried to read some negative reviews, and is it a joke? "This movie is bad, because this scene is bad, plot is bad, acting is poor, actors are awful... blah-blah-blah". Are you all 15-years old? The only thing I didn't like, is that plot is a bit dense for 2 hours, looks like writer had too many things to discuss and had to make it short..… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

10

Bitter_BoyJan 3, 2013

Rian Johnson wrote delicious script for this movie. It's inventive, original, and unpredictable (but with plenty of foreshadowing to properly prepare the audience). When you consider just how many movies recently are sequels and remakes,Rian Johnson wrote delicious script for this movie. It's inventive, original, and unpredictable (but with plenty of foreshadowing to properly prepare the audience). When you consider just how many movies recently are sequels and remakes, and the few that aren't are adapted from popular books, its surprising that hollywood managed to produce a movie this interesting. I don't give a 10/10 to anything, but there literally was not one thing I hated about this movie. Some "comic book guy" ("worst movie evar") types are unable to accept some of the fictional elements in the story, but that's their loss. I would dare any of them to write a script 10% as good as Johnson's.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

9

Knicksfan7Oct 17, 2012

I've pondered over this film for a few days and i still have yet to come up with a legitemate flaw. This was a great film. From the acting by the new superstar Gordon-Levitt, to the engaging and genius story, to the beautiful cgi. I just hadI've pondered over this film for a few days and i still have yet to come up with a legitemate flaw. This was a great film. From the acting by the new superstar Gordon-Levitt, to the engaging and genius story, to the beautiful cgi. I just had 2 minor flaws. It got a little bit boring a few times throughout the film but it was recovered quickly each time and it seemed a bit overly long but when you think about it there really wasn't a scene you could take out so i'll give Looper a 9.5/10. This is definitely the biggest surprise of 2012 for me, i didn't expect much from this film. I just expected another dumb time-travel involved film, but this one actually had an amazing plot that was near perfectly executed.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

10

DobbyJan 3, 2013

Brilliant, unique and disturbing, with a lot of unexpected twists and turns. Looper is far from your typical generic time travel movie and is one of those rare science fiction futuristic movies that will tug on your emotions. Emily Blunt andBrilliant, unique and disturbing, with a lot of unexpected twists and turns. Looper is far from your typical generic time travel movie and is one of those rare science fiction futuristic movies that will tug on your emotions. Emily Blunt and Joseph Gordon Levitt deliver brilliant performances and the child actor who plays Blunt's son is a scene stealer. Easily the best movie I've watched this year.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

eiskrapOct 22, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Good, definitely not this years Matrix, but enjoyable. TK bits seem added on to get an explanation that isn't very satisfactory. Remember there are two ways to close your loop!… Expand

0 of 13 users found this helpful013

All this user's reviews

7

DukeJonApr 21, 2013

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I enjoyed this film, to an extent. It's very clever, and it's refreshing to watch a film that doesn't treat its audience like idiots that need everything explained to them. The premise is interesting and the 3 lead characters give strong performances, particularly Emily Blunt.

However I found the film difficult to warm to, and was disappointed by the end. For me there are too many plot-points that weren't really believable. I found that idea of only using time travel to send people back in time to bump them off a bit stupid. Why not just kill people in the future? The rainmaker kid came across of being quite evil in nature, but if he's wiping out future crime lords doesn't that make him a good guy? Would Bruce Willis really shoot children? The choice of odd weapons used by everyone in the film (blunderbusses and pistols) was never explained, and the bad guys were all out of a video game (all wearing black trenchcoats). I was surprised that there weren't more memorable moments or set-pieces. Overall a clever film but not one I'd plan to watch again anytime soon.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

RechiauOct 16, 2012

I went to go see this movie on a whim. I'm not generally a fan of time-travel. However, Looper does incredibly well to keep the time-travel gimmick, while also being a generally good film. It keeps a steady, and never disappointing, paceI went to go see this movie on a whim. I'm not generally a fan of time-travel. However, Looper does incredibly well to keep the time-travel gimmick, while also being a generally good film. It keeps a steady, and never disappointing, pace throughout the film. It doesn't try too hard to explain the science behind the time travel or in what way it works. It just flat out shows you what happens. Which is better than being given five minutes of screen-time for some poorly articulated explanation for the mechanism of time-travel.

The film has a great feel to it. A dystopian future hasn't looked this good since Children of Men and Blade Runner- and I don't think one will for a while. The layout of the film is brilliant too, with the Life in a Day scene being one of the most powerful scenes (for me at least) this year in movies. The film does share some inconsistencies in the storyline, but it's never significant enough to draw it down.

The actors performances are brilliant as always. Bruce Willis portrays Old Joe incredibly well, you can get that sense of turmoil that he's going through. Pushed to the edge, if you will. You empathise at parts, but at the same time, you know he has lost it. Joseph Gordon-Levitt's portrayal of Young Joe is also great. Especially given the prosthetics and make-up he had to wear during his entire performance.

Anyway, to sum it up, it's an absolutely brilliant science fiction film. It blends great themes, science fiction elements and action into an enjoyable movie. Certainly recommended to anyone and everyone.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

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

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

8

DeSelleNov 16, 2012

Top of the line popcorn entertainment. Acting is good, plot holds a few surprises and most importantly the pace of the movie keeps you from looking at errors in the plotline due to the element of timetravel.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

9

HappymonkNov 30, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What a film. I did not expect this to be as good as it was. This is not a film for lovers of light-hearted films: it is a very dark one-of-a-kind experience. The problem is that I'm writing this review quite a long time after having seen the film; so I apologize for anything that I put wrong or not quite right. This is not a film about time travel as such; as time travel has been invented in the future, and it is used to send criminals back in time to be exterminated, when upon yourself arrives to be exterminated, you must do so, or you will suffer the consequences (as someone did in a very gruesome way during the opening of the movie). That is the premise of the plot in its simplest form. When (I forget the main character's name, sorry) arrives to be killed by himself, all hell breaks loose. The complicated (yet simple) storyline is handled masterfully, not leading to any confusing moments during the whole run-time of the picture. The acting is also ace, Bruce Willis providing everything you'd want from him in role such as this, and Joseph Gordon Levitt being the perfect anti-hero. The camerawork is mind-boggingly fantastic, although perhaps a tad hard to watch at times. This is a dark, unnerving sci-fi film that provides a very smart, witty and surprise of a gem that I don't think anyone was expecting. Not for kids, Looper wins the award of the most surprising film of the year (in a great way). 92/100.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

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

7

dharmaNov 10, 2012

Pretty good Sci-Fi time travel flick in the vein of 'Twelve Monkeys', starring Bruce Willis. Joseph Gordon Levitt is great here as usual, but I found the film a bit over-rated. If you've seen a lot of these time travel stuffs, you know wherePretty good Sci-Fi time travel flick in the vein of 'Twelve Monkeys', starring Bruce Willis. Joseph Gordon Levitt is great here as usual, but I found the film a bit over-rated. If you've seen a lot of these time travel stuffs, you know where it's heading, and the whole film is practically a set up for the ending.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

9

Bruce722Jan 15, 2013

Such a surprising cinematic experience. I was apprehensive before watching because most movies dealing with time travel completely butcher it and make the movie seem more silly than anything. Thankfully, Looper did a very good job with it.Such a surprising cinematic experience. I was apprehensive before watching because most movies dealing with time travel completely butcher it and make the movie seem more silly than anything. Thankfully, Looper did a very good job with it. They didn't try to explain anything about the science of it, which I was fine with, but I felt that they nailed the concept. Joseph Gordon-Levitt did an amazing job, not only acting but as portraying a young Bruce Willis. Obviously the make-up department deserves credit for the look but JGL mastered all of the mannerisms and the style of talking. Very impressive performance on his behalf. And I love Emily Blunt so her being in the film is a nice bonus, plus it's nice to see her take on a slightly different role from her typical typecast. The only negative in the film, in my opinion, was the telekinesis element. I thought it was a really silly aspect of the film and didn't need to be in there at all. The Rainmaker, could've easily been portrayed to be a genius child, not a borderline superhuman. That's really the only part of the film that was mediocre. Looper is definitely a movie that I think most people would enjoy. Some will probably find it challenging to follow but those that follow it well will surely consider it entertaining.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

9

KenmeiJan 3, 2013

Good movie and easily one of the best of the year, Looper does a good job of avoiding some of the usual trappings that time-travel movies fall into nowadays. I love the idea that is glosses over most of the explanation of why time travelGood movie and easily one of the best of the year, Looper does a good job of avoiding some of the usual trappings that time-travel movies fall into nowadays. I love the idea that is glosses over most of the explanation of why time travel works in this movie and just focuses on the story between Levitt and Willis, even if they aren't on screen together for the vast majority of the movie. I love how this movie takes a played out concept and puts a nice, original spin on it for the audience. I can see why this movie might turn off some people with a few things here and there, but I personally loved this movie. The only problem I have is that I didn't get to see it soon enough.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

8

Tss5078Feb 22, 2013

You can never go wrong in choosing a movie that stars Bruce Willis or Joseph Gordon-Levitt, but when they come together, that's when the magic really happens! Looper is the brainchild of Rian Johnson, who likes to bring us unusual stories,You can never go wrong in choosing a movie that stars Bruce Willis or Joseph Gordon-Levitt, but when they come together, that's when the magic really happens! Looper is the brainchild of Rian Johnson, who likes to bring us unusual stories, that mainly star JGL, however Looper is much easier to follow than most of Johnson's other films. While I'm not his biggest fan, his attention to detail has always really stood out to me and is perhaps never more evident than in Looper. Johnson actually used make-up and special effects to make JGL resemble a young Bruce Willis, which I found to be ingenious. Not to be overlooked is of course how clever a story Looper is, as it blends together time travel and the mafia. In the future, time travel has been invented, but like every other good thing, it is illegal. The mafia controls time travel and uses it as a weapon to commit murder. In this future world, it is impossible to dispose of a body, so the mafia sends their targets back in time where they are met an executed by a hired gun, known as a looper. The performances are of course top notch, Willis, the action star of a generation, only gets better with age, and JGL is the simply put the hardest working, most under appreciated actor in all of Hollywood. To be completely honest, this intriguing, action-packed, thriller was not as good as I expected it to be, and I really didn't care for the way in ended. That being said, it is still a great film that is definitely worth your while.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

mariopingOct 12, 2012

Looper -- well scripted. It has a very logical and believable sci-fi. My only problem is that Joseph Levitt-Gordon and Bruce Willis are just not from the same mold. Poor casting there.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

Looper

User Reviews