Looper Review (****)

by **lethargic** » Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:17 pm

I finally saw Looper last weekend.

It was good but definitely wasn't as good as I hoped and assumed it would be. And surely not even close to the masterpiece that is Brick. It was one of those movies that felt like it had fantastic ideas and concepts, but not enough budget to fully realize them.

My biggest problem with it was the stupid makeup job. It looked so bad it distracted me from enjoying the movie. I would've had ZERO problem with accepting JGL as a young Bruce Willis. They didn't need to do the lame makeup thing. Using that makeup felt like a publicity stunt that added nothing of value to the movie itself. And he didn't look like Bruce Willis, he looked like JGL as John Stamos as Bruce Willis.

I also watched Premium Rush. JGL usually picks great projects to work on. Even if the movies don't end up being great, you can still what attracted him to them. Looper may not be fantastic, but it's cool and unique. Premium Rush is nothing 90 minutes of bicycles and is the first time I question if JGL took a job solely for the money.

by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Wed Jan 01, 2014 9:34 pm

RetroRomper wrote:Looper: ** and a half out of ***** stars.

Hersher: ** out of ***** stars

You know, I was going to give Casual Observer a bunch of shit for his terrible opinion on Looper, but two stars? You somehow trumped him.

by **Tdarcos** » Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:32 pm

pinback wrote:Let me boil it down for you: If you're criticizing Looper because of the details and loopholes of the time travel assassin concept, you are BANNED from watching movies from now on, because you are doing it completely wrong. God.

You don't have the authority to ban me from anything. As Commander Tdarcos, I hereby command you never to sleep again. You are hereby banned from sleeping from now on, so there!

by **pinback** » Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:06 am

The more I read it, the more I'm convinced that my post above this one is the best, most important thing I've ever written on this BBS.

But let's move on. All of Robb's favorite movies are directed by Rian Johnson. I was not a huge fan, until I saw Looper, and UNTIL I realized that this is a man of great taste.

The Master was completely shut out of Academy Award consideration, at least for best picture. Rian Johnson, a huge PTA and Master fan had the quote of the year last year, when predicting this fucking debacle.

His quote was:

the most brilliant man in movietown wrote: I highly doubt an Oscar has a chance of earning The Master this year.

Well done, Rian. I like your movies. And I like you.

by **pinback** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:57 pm

Tdarcos wrote: The first thing that came up in my head was, well, he was an assassin of people from the future, wouldn't I then arrange to always carry something on me so that if I got sucked back I could kill the person about to do me?

That doesn't even remotely apply to the situation put forth in the movie.

Why it's great is why all great science fiction is great -- IT'S NOT ABOUT THE FUTURISTIC SPACEY SHIT. That's why you're all doing it wrong. Looper sets up a futuristic spacey conceit, like the best Star Trek episodes set up a futuristic spacey conceit, but the conceit is a WAY OF TELLING A STORY, not the story itself.

Let me boil it down for you: If you're criticizing Looper because of the details and loopholes of the time travel assassin concept, you are BANNED from watching movies from now on, because you are doing it completely wrong. God.

In bad sci-fi, the spacey conceit IS the story. Do you understand? Event Horizon REALLY IS about a fucked up warp engine that sends you to hell! That's why it is a bad movie (that I love dearly, but that's a different discussion) and Sunshine is not.

Looper is not about time traveling assassins.

by CO » Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:17 pm

RetroRomper wrote:Hesher: ** out of ***** stars

Agreed.

Fair warning, Jonsey, I didn't say it was a great movie, just JGL is good in a different quirky role (he bags a nerd-hottie looking Natalie Portman too).

by **Tdarcos** » Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:14 pm

pinback wrote:Looper: ****

CO wrote:Looper is not a four star movie, sorry to disagree with you.

It can be a 4-star movie if the 4 stars are censoring the word "shit".

pinback wrote:
RetroRomper wrote:Looper: ** and a half out of ***** stars.
That's insane. You are insane.

TDR, what did you think of Looper?

I have no opinion, it hasn't appeared at my local <s>bittorrent site</s> theatre yet. Just kidding, I've not really looked for it; I really had no interest in seeing the movie.

The first thing that came up in my head was, well, he was an assassin of people from the future, wouldn't I then arrange to always carry something on me so that if I got sucked back I could kill the person about to do me?

by **pinback** » Thu Jan 10, 2013 2:22 pm

RetroRomper wrote:Looper: ** and a half out of ***** stars.

That's insane. You are insane.

TDR, what did you think of Looper?

by **RetroRomper** » Thu Jan 10, 2013 1:08 am

Looper: ** and a half out of ***** stars.

Hersher: ** out of ***** stars

by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:09 pm

CO wrote:Looper is not a four star movie, sorry to disagree with you. You cannot have a time travel movie with a glaring paradox and give it four stars - so there goes one.

This we disagree on, but fine.

Next, you have a loooong boring middle part with mushy shit between JGL and the woman whose son he must save.

Boring! A guy's BLOOD GETS EVACUATED FROM HIS BODY! How is that boring?

Then there's the lazy writing where JGL goes first to the correct house but his older self has to go killing the two other people before getting to the right house, minus one star for lazy/mushy writing.

Doing it that way showed the audience that Old Joe would kill an innocent kid in order to get the life he wanted back. I mean, every screenplay in the world in that scenario is going to have Old Joe find the right kid last. That's why it's a movie and not a documentary, because the path that offered the most drama happened. I mean, is Vito Corleone dying in the middle of The Godfather lazy writing? (Serious question, I haven't seen The Godfather.)

Have you seen JGL and Natalie Portman in Hesher? It's a quirky but fun movie and a different kind of role for Levitt so I heartily recommend it.

Shit, I hadn't! Hadn't even HEARD of it. I'll check it out - thanks!

by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:03 pm

CO, did Bruce Willis need to address you personally during the scene in the diner for you to not worry about it? Apparently what he said did not get through to you.

Did he need to call out your specific genetic code for you to personally get it? I think the only way for it to get through to you, my friend, would be if the entire second act of the movie had Bruce Willis go, "C G A C G G G A C T C A (etc)" and then your eyes start to go wide and suddenly:

Old Joe says, "CO, don't worry about it."
Boom, he instantly turns into John McClane and says, "CO, don't worry about it."
Boom, he instantly turns into David Addison and says, "CO, don't worry about it."
Boom, he turns into Hudson Hawk and says -- well, nobody saw that one, so who knows what he would say.

by CO » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:45 pm

pinback wrote:You cannot have a time travel movie with a glaring paradox and give it four stars

Not true, it can be done smartly. How about Deja Vu? No paradox.

Looper did what the worst time travel movies/stories do. When he kills himself it destroys his older self in the same time period and the mother is suddenly not shot anymore. Why then are she and her son in the same place at that time? If the older self didn't exist then NONE of the events should have happened and the mother/son shouldn't have even been standing there anymore. Maybe it's not even really a paradox but just another example of lazy and convenient writing.

by CO » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:37 pm

pinback wrote:Time travel's not the point.

Perhaps I missed the point. What was the point of looper, smartypants?

by **pinback** » Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:09 pm

CO wrote:Looper is not a four star movie, sorry to disagree with you. You cannot have a time travel movie with a glaring paradox and give it four stars

BAD TAKE. You cannot have a time travel movie without a glaring paradox, by definition. Looper is smart in that it all but tells the audience, just don't worry about it. Time travel's not the point.

by CO » Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:51 pm

Looper is not a four star movie, sorry to disagree with you. You cannot have a time travel movie with a glaring paradox and give it four stars - so there goes one. Next, you have a loooong boring middle part with mushy shit between JGL and the woman whose son he must save. Then there's the lazy writing where JGL goes first to the correct house but his older self has to go killing the two other people before getting to the right house, minus one star for lazy/mushy writing. I love time travel movies, think JGL is a great actor, and enjoyed the concept but can't agree with more than 2 stars for this heap. Thank god for the torrent that let me avoid paying to see it.

Have you seen JGL and Natalie Portman in Hesher? It's a quirky but fun movie and a different kind of role for Levitt so I heartily recommend it.

by **pinback** » Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:42 am

I ain't seen Brick yet.

I have seen two other JGL movies this last month, Dark Knight Rises and 50/50, both of which I would give three (***) stars.

by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:25 pm

I like that we are establishing what four star movies Joseph Gordon-Levitt is in, though.

Brick: ****
Looper: ****

... I guess that's it so far. Oh --

That GIF: ****

I am going to assume you gave Brick four stars. I'll look it up. Ben and I agreed that Sin City and Die Hard are both four star movies. This is the part where we start to virulently disagree with each other, or somebody says something like, "The Matrix was also a four-star movie."

by **pinback** » Sun Jan 06, 2013 9:22 pm

Looper: ****

That GIF: AWFUL. Just... awful.

by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Sun Jan 06, 2013 8:28 pm

Looper Review (****)

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Looper Review (****)

Looper Review (****)