IMDb > Looper (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Looper More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 11 of 64: [Prev][6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [Next]
Index 639 reviews in total 

An Incredibly Original and Masterful Work of Art (FULL REVIEW)

Author: kgaillard from United States
1 September 2014

After torturing myself by sitting through The Nut Job, I decided to wash that bad taste out of my mouth with one of my favorite movies Looper. Looper is one of the most original films that I have ever seen in recent years, and that's refreshing considering all of the uninspired crap that Hollywood keeps throwing at us nowadays. Now lets get into the review.

In the year 2074, time travel will be invented, but it will be considered illegal and will only be used by criminal organizations to kill people. To do this, they send people back 30 years where they will be killed by hit men called Loopers. As a result, the victims are erased from existence and the Loopers are awarded with silver bars. When the criminal organizations want to release a Looper from his contract, the Looper's future self gets sent back from 30 years from the future and the future self gets killed by the Looper. This is otherwise known as "closing your loop" and the Looper will be awarded with gold bars and be released from his contract if he does this. Failing to close your loop is otherwise known as "letting your loop run" and it will only be punishable by execution. One Looper named Joe is about to close his loop, however he lets his future self get away and needs to fix his dilemma by killing his future self. Joe then meets his future self at a diner where his future self tells him that there is a boss known as the rainmaker who is closing all of the loops.

The story of this film is so original and unpredictable. Nowadays, films are usually either sequels, prequels, adaptations, or films based on a true story. However, this film has a plot that has never been done before and has many unpredictable moments. Which is what makes the story so intriguing and exciting from beginning to end. There are a few plot-holes, but I don't mind any of them because of how exciting and unpredictable the film is.

The acting is also fantastic. Joseph Gordon-Levitt delivers a great performance as Joe, who is more of an anti-hero, meaning that he will do the right thing, but he will become a bad guy when he needs to. Bruce Willis plays Joe's future self, he did a great job and his character is more of an anti-villain, meaning that he is doing the bad thing, but for reasons that would save the future. The 2 people act so great that they feel more like Yin and Yang to each other. Emily Blunt also does a great job in her role and her character is someone who will do anything to protect her son from danger. Speaking of her character's son, Cid, he is played by Pierce Gagnon and all I can say is WOW! He pulls off some of the greatest child acting on screen. Overall, the acting is fantastic.

This movie also has a very nice visual style. The film looks very stylish and the action sequences are also very intense and exciting. There are also some instances of slow motion and they are all used in the right places. So the action, visuals, and directing are all given a large pass.

Overall, Looper is one of the most original sci-fi action thrillers that I have ever seen. With its original plot, strong acting, and thrilling action sequences, Looper is not only one of my favorite films of 2012 and one of my favorite films of the decade so far, but it is also one of my favorite films of all time, top 10 in fact.

MY GRADE: A+ (10/10)

Was the above review useful to you?

the toddler will create the time machine

Author: jettaaaha3 from Slovakia
1 September 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I really enjoyed the movie and i don't understand why is there so much haters. This movie is about time traveling and (logically) still be questions like "and what will happens if his future self..." I think most of haters didn't realize toddler is the future developer of time machine, to save his mother.

Very good directed and very enjoyable performances of all main protagonist, like Gordon-Levitt, Willis or Blunt, but especially, the toddler, because - in my opinion - he stole the movie.

So, I hope you will enjoy this movie like I do and don't bother with time travel debates, you are not Stephen Hawking or anybody with such intelligence, to be even close to time traveling concept.

Was the above review useful to you?

Novel ideas and strong themes delivered with precision; good solid sci-fi

Author: Chris Allen from United Kingdom
16 August 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A strong, original plot, superb acting and heavy themes make this action/sci-fi movie an understated classic.

Interlinking motifs like the ticking clocks stitch the film together; the soundtrack is brooding and effective despite its minimalism. Camera shots and angles show little variation, but the clever script and darkened colour palette carry each scene smoothly and quickly. The parallels drawn between Joe and Cid are subtle, but clear on a second watch: the Older Joe's bloodied face, the stroke of hair at Joe's temple, the backstory of an angry child - isolated from his mother - doomed to cause havoc if his path isn't altered by kindness. This contributes powerfully to the idea of karma in the film, as a never- ending circle of events. There are a myriad of references and recurrences, like the arrogant Kid Blue's perpetual injuries and anger within each of the cycles of Joe's life. Joseph Gordon-Levitt seems to represent the arrogance of youth; the cafe scene belays the way he thinks of his life as his own to live as he chooses - despite the evidence of his future self in front of him. Bruce Willis embodies a weary older self, shaken by the death of a woman who cared for him so deeply and driven to change the past in order to save her.

The violence is bloody, but minimal and necessary (disregarding Bruce Willis' final killing spree to tie up the loose plot ends of the Gat Men gang). Excellent performances all round, specifically Emily Blunt (grounded but emotional as Sara), Bruce Willis (a hardened, yet surprisingly tender Older Joe) and Pierce Gagnon (otherworldly and ominous as the mature-beyond-his-years Cid), give the film a depth beyond its action-blockbuster advertising.

Was the above review useful to you?

Inconsistent Core Story

Author: Helio Copter from United States
10 August 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First of all, this is a well-made film in nearly every way. Acting, cinematography, dialog, visual effects, sets and locations. And the directing is good on a scene-by-scene basis, with some very nice moments of theme reinforcement. The basic story is also interesting. And of course, there is the gimmick of Joseph Gordon-Levitt playing a young version of Bruce Willis' character, which is really well done all around.

However, and some other reviewers have noted it, the story here takes a turn about midway through and the film as a whole winds up feeling inconsistently focused. In some cases, change-ups and uncertainties are good. In this case, it all feels more like it is unfinished, and could have used some more revisions.


Specifically, the whole idea of "The Rainmaker" needed to have been worked into the screenplay earlier and in a more substantial fashion. As is, it feels to me like a peripheral story element that gets suddenly upgraded to being the primary focus, but there isn't enough of a full-circle effect for what happens in the later parts of the film to feel consistent with what has already happened in the early parts of the film.

All of that being said, though, I do not think that Looper is a bad film, and it certainly has enough going for it to merit a positive rating from me. My gripes here are not the same as those I have with Star Trek Into Darkness, for example. Looper is a bit unfocused as a whole, but more as a matter of editing and foreshadowing. It's still a well-written film, beat-for-beat. The fact that it moves slowly at times is not a flaw--that's just the type of film that this is. And there are some truly powerful moments here and there, brought to life by great technical filmmaking and a top-notch cast. Rian Johnson may not have hit perfection here, but he definitely has my attention as an up-and-coming director.

Was the above review useful to you?

An Entertaining, if not logically consistent, sci fi thriller

Author: clambakejr from United States
24 July 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I certainly enjoyed Looper. It's refreshing to see a sci fi flick that is dependent upon its script, and an original screenplay at that. Also, I have no idea why this film wasn't at least nominated for best Makeup, as it is pretty incredible how much alike Willis and Levitt look thanks to it. However, I had some problems with the logical possibility of the plot. Granted, I had no trouble suspending my disbelief, but since this movie strives to be in the same class as time travel classics such as Terminator and 12 Monkeys, a little scrutiny is called for. To start off, it is logically impossible to change the past. Otherwise, the problem of the grandfather paradox would be possible, where someone travels back in time and kills their grandfather, causing them to somehow never have been born and disappear in a puff of logic. Something close to this very thing happens in the movie, as young Joe (Levitt) kills himself causing older Joe (Willis)to disappear right in front of him. The problem is, older Joe would now never exist in order to come back in time to cause these events to happen. Even if we accept the films premise about time, it is still not completely internally consistent, mainly because of the ending. Since in the movie, it is possible for young Joe mutilate himself so that scars immediately appear on older Joe (when he is in the same time as young Joe), then it stands to reason that when young Joe shoots himself, old Joe should simply drop dead and not disappear. Along a similar vein, the film mixes up two meanings of the word 'can'. To illustrate, one meaning of 'can' is to have the physical (including mental activity) ability to do something. For instance, since my body functions properly, I have the physical ability to eat a hamburger. The second meaning of 'can' is that it is possible for you to do something. For instance, I can eat a hamburger this second if I have one in my hand. However, I cannot (it is impossible) for me to eat a hamburger this second if there is not one immediately available. To apply this to the movie, when young and old Joe are sitting across from each other, young Joe has the physical ability to take out his knife and mutilate himself. However, if old Joe has no scars, then it is impossible for young Joe to mutilate himself, because that mutilation did not happen. It would be consistent for young Joe to mutilate himself if old Joe already had a corresponding scar.

Despite the long rant, I would still recommend this movie to fans of sci fi or thrillers.

Was the above review useful to you?

Looper Fails to Excite

Author: jb_campo from United States
15 July 2014

I had high expectations of Looper, but ended up disappointed in the final product. The story falls flat and gets caught in its own repetitive loop, which drags it down the tubes.

Joseph G-Levitt lives in the past, does drugs, and is a looper whose job is to kill people sent back from the future by mobsters. Apparently the bad guys cannot just kill someone in the future, so they grab them, send them back in time, illegally, and the looper kills them for silver. This guy is a loser who just goes around killing people with no soul or purpose or respect or really anything at all. He just does what he's told to do, sleepwalking through life, and getting paid for. His only marginal friend is not really a friend. He shows his social side by studying French, a useless throw-in that served no apparent purpose.

How many times do we need to see this guy shoot somebody with his special gun? I didn't count the numbers, but enough already!! We get the point - he kills people. Kind of reminds me of 8 Mile, when the first few F-bombs have an impact, then you just get numb from overuse. Obviously, the plot didn't have enough depth, so the director used this tactic as a filler that added no value.

Enter Bruce Willis, Levitt's older version from 30 years in the future. OK you think, now it's going to get interesting. Not really. Willis and Levitt had no real chemistry. Casting mistake here. You learn some stuff about Willis in the future, and you learn he's trying to preserve his future by controlling his past. OK, yep, we saw this in Terminator 1, 2, 3. Nothing new here.

There are chase scenes, and killings, and an interesting Diner scene, but really, the story drags. I started using fast forward so I could get somewhere where something would happen. The final scene takes place on this farm which I think lasts a good 30 minutes, and brings in Emily Blunt. She does an OK acting job, but her role again lacks depth of character, so there's not much to work with. The ending, oh wow, what a surprise...not. Figure it out yourself, you don't have to be too imaginative.

Boring plot, disappointing chemistry, ad nauseum killing, standard b-grade acting. I cannot recommend this film, despite the advertising you see. It's just a poor film all around. I recommend instead Source Code which plays on a time travel theme, without the killing, and a superb storyline with superior acting. Skip Looper - it stinks.

Was the above review useful to you?

"This time travel crap, just fries your brain like a egg..."

Author: classicsoncall from United States
14 July 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

There are any number of reasons time travel stories can make your head hurt. This film had a Young Joe, an Old Joe and a Dead Joe. Dead Joe was the narrator. See what I mean?

Well I liked the concept of this picture, but to say that there were numerous inconsistencies in the execution would be an understatement. For example, when Abe's (Jeff Daniels) gat men eventually found and finished off Seth (Paul Dano), his on the run future self began losing body parts and became disfigured. But when Young Joe killed himself at the end, Future Joe disappeared. Why the two different treatments for what should have been the same outcome?

I guess you shouldn't force yourself to think about these things too much. If you just accept the flow of the story as it occurs, then it's a fairly entertaining sci-fi/action thriller. Still, if you think there ought to be some credibility built into the premise for a time travel flick, you'll only wind up discombobulated here. Like why would anyone agree to become a looper if your life span in retirement was guaranteed to max out at thirty years?

Here's an interesting thing though. The first time I saw this movie was shortly after I caught an Encore presentation of a film titled "Kid Blue". I tried to figure out if there was any connection to the character in this film, portrayed by Noah Segen, with Dennis Hopper's portrayal in the 1973 Western. The only thing I could come up with was that Dennis Hopper was an outlaw too, but as you might expect, in the future they had bigger guns.

Was the above review useful to you?

Yet another one

Author: contle from Hungary
27 June 2014

The idea, to make a movie that is more romantic than the Twelve Monkeys and more philosophical than the Butterfly Effect is a nice try, but it failed.

The time travel stories' basic problem is the paradox, what happens, if someone changes the past, and if it is even possible. In this one the concept is different than the usual, and the more it is shown, the more mistakes come out. The story is also nonsense, the characters are not real, skipping the reasonable choices. The writer didn't show the script to anyone before filming?

It disappoints me, that kneading some ideas, action, drama with time traveling can be called a sci-fi.

Was the above review useful to you?

'Looper' loops up and down making it spectacular and disappointing.

Author: dom-lerose-8
15 June 2014

One of the main problems when rating a film is if the film contains a mixture of good and bad content. Filmmaker Rian Johnson creates an interesting action film starring rising star Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Joe. Joe is a Looper. A Looper is an assassin who eliminate people from the future. How it works is criminals get the need to put a hit on someone and send them into the past to meet assassins called Looper's to do the dirty work. "Looper" is set in 2074 that has an amazing setting. It has awesome transportation, beautiful women, unique guns, time travel and people who all live well. Joe is surprised one day when the mob wants to put a hit on him when he meets his future self (Bruce Willis) that he is hired to kill on the scene of his job. The mob basically wants to eliminate him from the future. "Looper" contains a really unique and original story that has good scenes of action. In some scenes the action gets really silly and weird and just doesn't work. The first 30 minutes are amazing, however the middle of the film is really odd and doesn't go in the right direction. Rian Johnson chooses Joe to head to a farm to hide from the mob, where he meets Sara (Emily Blunt) and her kid. Not a single actor besides Joseph Gordon-Levitt give good performances which causes the film to loose its drama. The main problem with 'Looper' is that it is a prime example of a film with wasted talent. It could have been amazing, and proves that it has some strong content, but doesn't do anything else strong. It loops around in a zig- zag in terms of how good it is, but overall is decent.

Was the above review useful to you?

A good attempt at time travel.

Author: Jason Ooi from United States
3 June 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I really dislike time travel movies. They're almost impossible to get right, and the logic supporting them is usually absent.

Looper, however, is time travel done as well as I can see it being done.

It doesn't get too complicated, nor is it too stagnant and boring. The violence was a bit excessive, but not so overused for it's action to get tiresome. The view on the future that Looper provides is fresh and new, one that terrifyingly resembles our society. The eye drop drug and the reversion to silver and gold bars for currency was an innovative part, which definitely impressed me.

I felt like the concept of TKing was a cheap, easy resolution to the problem.

(Couldn't he have just shot his own hand off to stop his older self?)

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 11 of 64: [Prev][6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history