Looper - Bruce Willis kicks his younger selfs ass. Page 3

  • Page

    of 4 First / Last

  • mikew1985 28 Sep 2012 13:50:30 12,672 posts
    Seen 15 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Tickets booked for 9.20 tonight, cannae wait!
  • faux_carnation 29 Sep 2012 01:08:17 9,272 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Sorry to say it, but I was underwhelmed. It's good, but not amazing.

    Also, I just read the Guardian review (waited till I'd seen the film), and its like the reviewer literally didn't understand the film at all. It's full of factual inaccuracies. Shoddy.
  • mcmonkeyplc 1 Oct 2012 12:43:42 39,440 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Yeah I watched this last night and came away a little underwhelmed. It's good, not awesome.

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • beastmaster 1 Oct 2012 13:03:16 11,337 posts
    Seen 17 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I though it was awesome!

    The Resident Evil films. I'm one of the reasons they keep making them.

  • Deleted user 1 October 2012 13:05:14
    Anyone going to see a film expecting it to be amazing is always going to come out of it feeling underwhelmed.
  • mcmonkeyplc 1 Oct 2012 13:08:24 39,440 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I didn't think it was going to be awesome...but calling it this decades Matrix is wrong on many levels.

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • mikew1985 1 Oct 2012 13:14:37 12,672 posts
    Seen 15 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Yup, good but not amazing.

    The kid is fantastic though, i don't know if its just fluke to find a kid that can semmingly act so well or great talent spotting. I'm bemused as to how a child so young is capable of that.
  • Emth 1 Oct 2012 13:52:42 132 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I was expecting a bit more after how ridiculously highly rated this is on IMDB... Maybe it's just me but it seemed like there was too much narration explaining the story.
  • ResidentKnievel 5 Oct 2012 19:34:02 6,182 posts
    Seen 16 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Telekinesis? Really?

    I was expecting it to be a thriller about time travel and assassination then they throw telekinesis in to the mix.

    The second half was a bit rubbish


    Edited by ResidentKnievel at 21:10:59 05-10-2012

    [code]Armoured_Bear wrote:
    Unlike yourself, I don't have a weird obsession with any platform.[/code]

  • mangojoe 5 Oct 2012 19:52:41 418 posts
    Seen 2 weeks ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Thanks for the spoiler fuckface
  • ResidentKnievel 5 Oct 2012 21:14:39 6,182 posts
    Seen 16 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Sorry about that.

    If it's any consolation it's talked about in the opening segments so it's not too spoilery and probably should have been included in trailers.

    [code]Armoured_Bear wrote:
    Unlike yourself, I don't have a weird obsession with any platform.[/code]

  • neilka 5 Oct 2012 21:18:26 15,860 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    It was in the trailers.

    A map is like comparing velocity and speed.

  • ResidentKnievel 5 Oct 2012 21:20:17 6,182 posts
    Seen 16 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Ah well then

    I think they should have just stuck to the one sci-fi concept rather than throwing telekinesis in to the mix. It felt like a band-aid was applied to the story needlessly, they could have explored the time travelling assassin aspect more thoroughly instead.

    Edited by ResidentKnievel at 21:24:21 05-10-2012

    [code]Armoured_Bear wrote:
    Unlike yourself, I don't have a weird obsession with any platform.[/code]

  • CosmicFuzz 6 Oct 2012 08:31:27 23,888 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I thought it was fantastic.

    Our month-long focus on indie games starts with my look at the PS4's best game (still): Resogun!

  • urban 7 Oct 2012 10:27:43 10,942 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    @ResidentKnievel

    I enjoyed it but I'd say that it's the weakest Rian Johnson film so far.

    8/10.

    Factual inaccuracies? Explain to me how a Fictional film can possibly have Factual inaccuracies?
  • sport 7 Oct 2012 11:06:18 12,697 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Saw it on Friday. Really good, but as others have said, not "ZOMG AMAZING".

    One part that kinda confused me:

    When BW first goes back and JGL fails to kill him - ok cool I get that - that's what sets up the "old vs young" aspect. But then JGL falls from the ladder at his apartment and we go back to field to see a "replay" of the BW arriving scene, only this time JGL does kill him. ?!?!?!?! Was this purely to show how we get to the older BW character through the years?
  • AaronTurner 7 Oct 2012 11:09:34 7,684 posts
    Seen 17 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Yes.
  • sport 7 Oct 2012 11:21:35 12,697 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    AaronTurner wrote:
    Yes.
    Fair enough. Still confused me at the time. Probably best not to over-think continuity where time travel is involved.
  • JCHilton 8 Oct 2012 03:56:23 1,465 posts
    Seen 7 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Loopers exist because it's "Impossible to kill in the future [because of ID tagging and the like] or so I'm told".

    The mob makes the great effort of illegaly establishing an underground venture of inter-chronological hitmen, whom kill and discard of future people.

    A looper kills and works under one established and "Accepted" rule: that they must kill themselves (sent back from the future) and "close their loop"; as to destroy all trace of their existence. (Without touching upon how this is a false dichotomy and that it doesn't really make sense, as the danger of being "found out" lies within the murders themselves more than if you exist in the future). "The mob" collects the future looper and personally send them back in time....

    "The mob" collect the lead character and willy nilly kill his wife. KILL his wife... Thus sparing on the consequential events. They go through the trouble of setting up this "looper malarkey" only to KILL the lead characters wife, in the future, in her own home, in daylight, by the very same "mob", then burn down her house? Hell if it's that easy, why does this film even exist?

    Lets not even touch upon the time paradoxes, telekenesis and diner scene in which Rian tells the audience to 'forget about all this time convolution'.


    Brick is genius writing in comparison. "This decades Matrix"? I think not.

    Edited by JCHilton at 04:03:19 08-10-2012
  • Mola_Ram 8 Oct 2012 07:11:50 7,249 posts
    Seen 39 seconds ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Well, I loved it. I thought the writing was great, and the lines impeccably delivered by both Willis and Gordon-Levitt. I could see Willis bringing back shades of that great performance in 12 Monkeys.

    Yes, it falls apart if you think too much about it, but imo that's more of a function of the time travel thing, not a fault of the film itself. Loopholes and paradoxes are pretty much a given with time travel. Try to do it realistically, and you get a confused mess like Primer (which I also loved).

    Speaking of Primer, I reckon the name of Jeff Daniels' character is a shout-out to that movie.

    But yeah, it will hurt your brain to think about it. For example, I assume that there are multiple timelines in this movie that could exist at any given moment, which is why Old Joe described his memories as "one possibility". Which also explains how he was able to continue to exist in the future in that way, give that he would only have had the money if he had, in fact, killed himself.

    But if multiple versions are possible, then why do they worry so much about "closing the loop"? Why go to all this effort, when it would probably be so much easier to just let the guys live and swear to never reveal anything?


    Actually, that probably was explained at some point, but meh. I need to think about it some more. :)
  • JCHilton 8 Oct 2012 08:13:39 1,465 posts
    Seen 7 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    It's obviously a movie written to supply a narrative that touches upon many areas of emotional impact rather than any philisophical debate.

    Putting a disclaimer in your film -(the diner scene), is a backwards attempt at solving/ discussing any complexities fiction allows a writer,

    I feel Rian was much more comfortable with a down to earth gritty genre such as noir [Brick]. His science fiction is a tad too generic and pastiche.

    To me (though I cannot claim to know certainly), this film seems as though one developed from imagery: seeing your older self/ interacting with them/ ]the little boy's telekenesis/ the ritualistic murders/ the hoverbikes etc Which while leading to a stylistic aesthetic seems sewn together at the edges: narratively speaking.

    I feel science fiction; it being the prophetic genre it has grown into, has to have some sort of prevailing morality/ parable or deconstruction of a current or historical societal/ human dilemma. I guess I was just looking for some intellectual rigor/ depth.

    Depth that independant film productions such as Primer (@Mola_Ram As you mentioned) and [at the time] Brick, pride themselves on. Dare I say it even Inception with all its flaws made more of an attempt at clear exposition: sticking to its own "pre established" rules. In the case of Looper little effort was made; it's not clever to admit this and offer vague/lame cover overs.

    Enjoyed Joseph's imitation of Brucie though.

    Edited by JCHilton at 08:15:13 08-10-2012
  • Scurrminator 8 Oct 2012 08:53:01 8,405 posts
    Seen 50 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Handy timeline someone did showing how there is more than one.
    But then even that can be broken down and proved to be wrong I guess...

    You dare to strike Scurrcules!?

  • JCHilton 8 Oct 2012 09:22:55 1,465 posts
    Seen 7 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Scurrminator wrote:
    Handy timeline someone did showing how there is more than one.
    But then even that can be broken down and proved to be wrong I guess...
    I see the trickle down/descending tier-like effect of time, but how does that explain the reverse influence of the younger on the older [through parallel universes I assume]?

    Oh nevermind, it's not wise to criticise a film for over-complication disguised with flashy cinema, then indulge it with rationalisation. :)

    Edited by JCHilton at 09:23:25 08-10-2012
  • sport 8 Oct 2012 09:37:12 12,697 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    JCHilton wrote:
    Scurrminator wrote:
    Handy timeline someone did showing how there is more than one.
    But then even that can be broken down and proved to be wrong I guess...
    I see the trickle down/descending tier-like effect of time, but how does that explain the reverse influence of the younger on the older [through parallel universes I assume]?

    Oh nevermind, it's not wise to criticise a film for over-complication disguised with flashy cinema, then indulge it with rationalisation. :)
    Willis pretty much lays it down in the diner scene i.e. slams table and yells at JGL to not even try get his head around time travel. Works for me.
  • Scurrminator 8 Oct 2012 10:22:53 8,405 posts
    Seen 50 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    JCHilton wrote:
    Scurrminator wrote:
    Handy timeline someone did showing how there is more than one.
    But then even that can be broken down and proved to be wrong I guess...
    I see the trickle down/descending tier-like effect of time, but how does that explain the reverse influence of the younger on the older [through parallel universes I assume]?

    Oh nevermind, it's not wise to criticise a film for over-complication disguised with flashy cinema, then indulge it with rationalisation. :)
    I guess once that older person is brought back into 'that' timeline then things that happen to the younger one affect the older one.

    You dare to strike Scurrcules!?

  • M83J01P97 8 Oct 2012 11:22:01 6,598 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Anyone else think Rian Johnson could be a great director for a live action Akira?
  • Razz 8 Oct 2012 11:29:03 61,090 posts
    Seen 20 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    If it's impossible to kill in the future than how is it that they kill his wife?

    Edited by Razz at 11:31:27 08-10-2012

    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Steam/PSN/XBOX: Razztafarai | 3DS: 1246-9674-8856
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

  • McGeeza 8 Oct 2012 11:45:55 933 posts
    Seen 29 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Razz wrote:
    If it's impossible to kill in the future than how is it that they kill his wife?
    Indeed. That was a script failure. It would have been a good excuse for a chase scene/shootout with the Chinese Police turning up and chasing down the bad guys (with a captured Brucie).
  • Razz 8 Oct 2012 11:50:37 61,090 posts
    Seen 20 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Possibly, but I think the mobsters started setting fire to village where Bruce had lived, perhaps they killed her by mistake and were using the fire to cover it up, which begs the question, if that works why the blooming heck would ou bother using a time machine instead? :D

    Edited by Razz at 11:51:22 08-10-2012

    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Steam/PSN/XBOX: Razztafarai | 3DS: 1246-9674-8856
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

  • morriss 8 Oct 2012 11:51:54 70,947 posts
    Seen 18 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    faux_carnation wrote:
    Sorry to say it, but I was underwhelmed. It's good, but not amazing.

    Also, I just read the Guardian review (waited till I'd seen the film), and its like the reviewer literally didn't understand the film at all. It's full of factual inaccuracies. Shoddy.
    Or you didn't understand it. There's always that possibility.
  • Page

    of 4 First / Last

Log in or register to reply