That actually would have been a pretty good evolution in the story
Looper (Post-release)
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
That actually would have been a pretty good evolution in the story
FakeBritishAccent
Sr Member
I think you hit the nail on the head right there. Part of me believes that Rian Johnson's original intention was to make a serious drama about the connection that exists between mothers and sons and the ramifications of having that connection severed...but then he got bored, popped in "Back to the Future 2" and decided to throw time-travel into the mix.
C'mon...just enjoy the movie and try not to think to hard about the time-travel business. Like Old Joe said in the diner “I don't wanna talk about time travel. If we do, we'll be here all day making diagrams with straws."
-Jonaas
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
Thing is... even people with good connections with their mother can go bad and very few without their mother go bad. It's a rather cheap set-up.
Seems more like it's aiming at the choices we make are what shapes us - good or bad.
I still see nothing that prevents Cid from growing up to become the Rainmaker, just because his mother stood up for him and protected him. Sure, it may not seem so obvious after that... and I think it's a cop out to assume that just because he was orphaned he'd go down the same path as Joe. Right or wrong... if he chose bad in one setting, chances are he may choose bad in the other as well.
He was obviously presented with a new set of values - self sacrifice out of love - but is that enough to change his future from what it was?
Seems more like it's aiming at the choices we make are what shapes us - good or bad.
I still see nothing that prevents Cid from growing up to become the Rainmaker, just because his mother stood up for him and protected him. Sure, it may not seem so obvious after that... and I think it's a cop out to assume that just because he was orphaned he'd go down the same path as Joe. Right or wrong... if he chose bad in one setting, chances are he may choose bad in the other as well.
He was obviously presented with a new set of values - self sacrifice out of love - but is that enough to change his future from what it was?
I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It's nice to sit down watching an original film, not knowing what is going to happen next and genuinely being invested in the characters.
The only scene I didn't like was Bruce Willis doing the movie hero shoot 'em up scene. It simply belonged in another movie, not this one, and was a bit silly.
Everything else, though? Pretty good.
The bit where the other guy's loop had his limbs suddenly vanish didn't really make much sense, but its part of the internal logic of this film's universe, and they kept it consistent. I actually reminded me of the photo in Back to the Future.
I figured that Emily Blunt's character had been a hooker/junkie like Piper Perabo's character and had become aware of Looper's that way.
It doesn't really make sense to send them back in time to be killed and then disposed of. I think it would be easier to kill them then send the body back; maybe even gas them in the time machine before sending them. But maybe its like the Terminator.
It's also a bad idea to have Looper's kill themselves; better to send them to another Looper who won't care.
Killing the Looper's while their young won't work. They sign up enough money to retire in their 20's and live the high life for 30 years. If they know they won't live to spend that money then no one signs up.
The only scene I didn't like was Bruce Willis doing the movie hero shoot 'em up scene. It simply belonged in another movie, not this one, and was a bit silly.
Everything else, though? Pretty good.
The bit where the other guy's loop had his limbs suddenly vanish didn't really make much sense, but its part of the internal logic of this film's universe, and they kept it consistent. I actually reminded me of the photo in Back to the Future.
I figured that Emily Blunt's character had been a hooker/junkie like Piper Perabo's character and had become aware of Looper's that way.
It doesn't really make sense to send them back in time to be killed and then disposed of. I think it would be easier to kill them then send the body back; maybe even gas them in the time machine before sending them. But maybe its like the Terminator.
It's also a bad idea to have Looper's kill themselves; better to send them to another Looper who won't care.
Killing the Looper's while their young won't work. They sign up enough money to retire in their 20's and live the high life for 30 years. If they know they won't live to spend that money then no one signs up.
Scareb
Sr Member
It wasn't explained in the movie, but Johnson said that in the future, everyone has these chips embedded in them that detects when they die and alerts the police to the location of your body, hence why they can't kill them in the future.
As for a different looper killing the future loop, he said would you really be able to live out your life being friends with the guy that eventually murders you? You'd be tempted to kill him in order to save yourself. The looper doesn't even know he killed his loop until after he's actually killed the person and checked his payment.
Definitely a candidate for Movie of the Year for me. I loved JGL before Looper but man, he really played a fantastic young Bruce Willis, right on down to his speech pattern. I usually don't care for children (in life and on screen) but Cid is a great character too, and Pierce Gagnon did a good job portraying him.
The weekend box office collection for Looper is estimated to be 21.2 million. The movie's production budget was $30 million.
The movie earned more in China.
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=95341
"The movie also was a huge hit in China, where production company DMG cofinanced the movie with Endgame, as it reportedly grossed between $23 and 25 million in its opening weekend for #1. This will be the first time that an international release opened bigger in China than it did in North America, let alone in the same weekend. "
The movie earned more in China.
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=95341
"The movie also was a huge hit in China, where production company DMG cofinanced the movie with Endgame, as it reportedly grossed between $23 and 25 million in its opening weekend for #1. This will be the first time that an international release opened bigger in China than it did in North America, let alone in the same weekend. "
Last edited:
Hear! Hear! How dare they present time travel and its paradoxes in such an unrealistic manner! Next we will see the media misrepresenting mermaids!
lol:lol
Nailed it and if anything, this is where I have a bit of issue with how this movie was marketed. I feel that it was shown as a Sci-Fi Action, possibly a thriller, but it is a straight up drama with the tiniest sprinkling of Sc-Fi in it. Granted, I still liked it, but it was not what I was expecting and I think there was time and enjoyment lost as I made the transition from what the trailers seemed to promise and what the movie actually had to offer.
JD
Master Member
The hero shoot 'em up scene is written into every Bruce Willis contract and must appear in every movie Willis appears in.
Zombie_61
Master Member
Allegedly, Willis gave Levitt an audio recording of himself acting out all of Levitt's lines as he would have performed them, so that Levitt would have a better idea of Willis' speech patterns and inflections. Now that's commitment and dedication to a project! Also, Levitt said he spent quite a bit of time with Willis off of the set so that he could "study" him. It definitely shows in his performance in the movie.
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
Though that would have been an interesting twist there are a few facts in the movie that dispel this.
1: the Rainmaker came out of nowhere and no one knows what he looked like.
2: Abe was Kid Blue's older self. How could his older self be both in the future running things brutally and then also in the past teaching his younger self to grow some balls?
2: Abe was Kid Blue's older self. How could his older self be both in the future running things brutally and then also in the past teaching his younger self to grow some balls?
A mermaid is a creature with near human upper body and fish lower body. If they suddenly said a walrus head and shark tail was a mermaid and lived on the moon, you'd be peeved too.
Last edited:
nickytea
Master Member
To be clear; Abe as an older Kid Blue is fan rambling, not supported by any implicit evidence in the movie itself.
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
It still makes more sense than if Kid Blue was the Rainmaker. I was missing an *IF* in fact 2.
nickytea
Master Member
Not Gatmen, but the future mobsters, yes.
Loved the movie right up until the ending.
Couldn't he have just blown his trigger finger off and accomplished the same goal?
-Gary
Couldn't he have just blown his trigger finger off and accomplished the same goal?
-Gary
That's what I meant, I thought those mobsters were Gatmen as well. But anyway I'm glad someone else saw them!
Similar threads
