So basically it has all of the functions that people want from the Wii. I'm down.
dabobsta's forum posts
I'm sorry, but I have to completely disagree: I thought this movie was quite terrible in all honesty.
My thoughts in the spoiler block blow.
I can't remember the last time a movie has had to rely so heavily on a narrator. The movie would start, and you'd get Joseph Gordon-Levitt basically reading his lines off a script: "In the future time travel will be invented, and then immediately outlawed. However mob bosses will use it to send the people they want to dispose of back in time to a group of assassins known as Loopers. You see, in the future it is nearly impossible to get rid of a body thanks to tracking technology so the mob bosses hid them in the past, and I've killed someone who technically doesn't exist yet".
The movie goes on, you meet the guy who runs the Loopers, and then you get more narration: "That's Abe. He was sent from the future to organize the Loopers, but that is a piss-easy job so he has also taken over the city. In any other city this would be impressive". The movie goes on, and then you find out some people have superpowers, and, you guessed it, more narration: "It was discovered 10% of the population had developed telekinetic powers. At first everyone thought we would get a whole bunch of superheroes, but it turned out it's mostly used by guys trying to impress girls"
The thing that got to me is that 99% of the narration has little to no bearing on the movie itself. Abe having taken over the city doesn't factor into the story at all, and the only purpose of the whole TK thing was to have some way of immediately identifying this kid as the one who is going to grow up as this future big bad. The narration also doesn't make a whole lot of sense seeing as Joseph Gordon-Levitt is dead by the end of the movie.
Of course, the movie never really takes the time to explain how the time-travel works, or the rules they are working from. Bruce WIllis manages to escape the people who are trying to send him back in time, but gets sent back anyway, and this somehow causes him to turn up in the past slightly later than originally intended. That doesn't really make a whole lot of sense, since he should be sent back to the correct time regardless of when in the future he is sent back (and no, the movie never explains why that happens).
I'm sorry, but what twists and turns are you talking about? The kid turning out to be the Rain Maker? I had worked that one out as soon as I saw the kid. The kid becoming the Rain Maker, because of future Joe's actions? That's a pretty standard time-travel plot (someone going back in time to stop something winds up causing it). Of course that creates the biggest problem of the movie. If Joe only got sent back in time because of the Rain Maker, but the Rain Maker only got created because Joe was sent back in time, how does that work? Both occurrences are completely dependent on the other; one cannot happen without the other.
All in all, I found this movie to be quite safe; little more than a tired plot, and anything that could have been interesting about the movie was sadly not included. The movie barely even does anything with the whole time-travel concept. Aside from one or two scenes, the older Joe could have been a completely different character, and the movie wouldn't have needed changing one bit.
Also, slight correction: the Loopers are not known by the public at all. It's kind of the whole point of sending the future version back to be killed by their past self to keep them from ever blabbing about what they do.
A. The movie is basically in three acts (Young Joe, Old Joe, Rainmaker) and the narration only takes place in the first act. As for the example you gave being useless, Abe owning the city meant that the Loopers were able to do what they wanted without getting caught.
B. You seem to be missing the point of the movie. It is about breaking the loop. All three of the main characters are dealing with their own ways to try and resolve the loop so they can accomplish what they want but at the end Young Joe finally comes to his senses and realizes that he can stop the loop.
The movie was fun, but not great. The plot had tons of holes, you have to actively ignore them to enjoy it at all (which is the case with most plots centered around time travel). The action wasn't bad, and JGL and Willis were good and all, but it certainly wasn't any kind of tour de force. I''d probably give it a 3/5.
e: now if you want to see a movie that does time-travel without fucking up the plot, I'd suggest 12 Monkeys. A great film.
Terry Gilliam is a genius.
In Rian Johnson’s first big budget Hollywood film he decides to reteam with Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Brick) to create one of the best sci-fi films of the past decade. In Looper, Levitt plays a man named Joe who works for the mob in a squad of assassins known by the public as the titular “Loopers”. Levitt delivers a rock solid performance and guides you through the universe Johnson creates with charismatic ease. While Levitt might be the star Bruce Willis steals the show as the older Joe who is transported back in time as a hit for Joe but has a secret agenda of his own. The plot Is intricately planned out and takes many unexpected twists and turns that leads up to a heart-wrenching ending. This film is practically perfect in every way and Rian Johnson is proving to be one of the most talented and diverse directors of this past decade.