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 14 of 65: [Prev][9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [Next]
Index 649 reviews in total 

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A reasonable and stylized movie, although ultimately somewhat forgettable

Author: Onno Smits from Rotterdam, Netherlands
21 January 2013

Review originally posted on - 'Looper' is a sci-fi action thriller starring Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon-Levitt. The plot revolves around the concept of illegal time-travel. The movie is set in the year 2044, where time-travel hasn't been invented yet. But 30 years later, it will have been. It will be immediately made illegal, but the mob of the future still use it for one simple goal; body-disposal. When they need someone gone in the future, they simply send him back, and a 'Looper' in the movie's current time will kill and dispose of the body. Very 'clean'. This plot device is intriguing, but in the end it is rather detached from the ultimate direction of the film.

If you have seen the trailer for 'Looper' I must warn you. There is a strange disconnect between the trailer and the actual movie. This had me somewhat confused for a reasonable portion of the movie, as it really wasn't heading in the direction I was anticipating beforehand. This is in no way a fault of the script or director, simply an unfortunate outcome of my preconceived notions of the film.

The actual movie had somewhat less action and suspense than I anticipated, opting instead for a more slow and deliberate pace. The whole time- travelling angle of the plot was also less involved than I originally gleaned from the trailer, with it being used pretty much exclusively to set the stage for the story. I felt this was slightly off kilter with the premise of the movie. The slower parts of the movie can actually feel somewhat dull at times, rather than suspenseful, which is what I think the director was going for.

There are some very fun aspects of the film though. Joseph Gordon-Levitt playing a younger version of Bruce Willis' character adds a few laughs and plenty of impressive make-up effects. The world in which this story is set is very well thought out and crafted with its own impressive style. This radiates throughout the movie, which truly has its own unique identity. This is brought to life with some impressive acting. Bruce Willis is as great as always, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt really stands his own in the lead role, bringing some impressive Bruce Willis impressions and mannerisms to the table. Emily Blunt also impresses with her depiction of the character 'Sara'. The actor that impressed me most however was the little kid who played 'Cid'. I'd wager he is about 6 years old and he gave one hell of a performance in the rather large role he plays in the film. It was really impressive irrespective of his age, but even more so because of it.

'Looper' is the latest in a line of what I call 'Bruce Willis' Sci-Fi adventures'. Examples of previous installments of this are 'The Fifth Element' and 'Surrogates'. It seems Bruce ventures into another sci-fi project every few years, each one with the same basic result; A reasonable movie which is ultimately somewhat forgettable. 'Looper' is no exception, but at least brings a truly unique style to the genre. - Review originally posted on

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

It Doesn't Exactly Rewrite History

Author: piratecannon from United States
3 January 2013

Looper is a movie that's been on my radar for quite some time. It's about mafia-types who are involved in time travel for the sake of eliminating unwanted "garbage," and it features both the formidable Bruce Willis and Nightwing himself, Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Because I don't have quite as much free time as I used to, I had to skip this one in theaters. When it finally trickled down the DVD/Blu-ray format earlier this week, however, I was all over it.

This is the perfect example of a movie that quietly made its way into cinemas without having an overabundance of pomp and circumstance paving the way. I'd taken a fleeting interest in it upon reading about the movie's story line, but it wasn't until a multitude of friends took to Facebook in order to sing its unparalleled praises that I genuinely took interest. And, I have to say, though solidly crafted it is, I found the movie to be a bit of a letdown. Let me explain why.

With any time travel flick, one expects there to be plenty of mind- bending timelines that crisscross with one another (heck, they may even congeal into something indecipherable in the final moments, but the goal is to keep the audience playing the "prediction" game throughout). While Looper does this, I found it far too easy to foresee how things would play out (this was in stark contrast to 12 Monkeys, Willis' other time travel movie). To delve into the specifics of this would put me at risk of including spoilers in my review, so suffice it to say that, though well written, there was nothing Earth-shattering about our protagonists' concluding revelation. Another point of contention—and one that has been widely discussed, I believe—was the decision to drown JGL in make-up so as to make him resemble a young Willis. At times, it works, but more often than not I found it nearly impossible to not envision the actor with his true face. Would it have been better to simply allow JGL to be, well, himself, and to sparingly use CGI to fill in the awkward transition moments during his character's life? I don't know. Still, I can't ignore the fact that the make-up was more of a distraction than a boon.

Actually, I think Looper's greatest strength is its focus on the development of telekinesis as a part of the human genome in the not too distant future. Some of the film's best moments come as a result of this plot point, and I wish a little more focus on this would have been the order of the day.

Please don't misunderstand me. Looper is far better than the vast majority of drivel that Hollywood allows to make it past the stages of early drafting, and it makes for perfectly good viewing for anyone who enjoys sci-fi. Just don't expect it to rewrite history.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Thrilling and intriguing sci-fi to ponder about....

Author: Joe from United Kingdom
2 January 2013

Despite the childish name, this isn't a kid's movie. It's a violent action packed sci-fi film which will test your patience. I don't want to say too much about the plot else it could really ruin the film for you, as it's all about the surprises. The basic idea is that our lead is involved in killing people sent from the future to the past to remove trace of them! As you expect, this system breaks down along the way and we have a chat on our hands.

Surprises galore as said and some fine acting for a sci-fi movie keep our attention. Taking in the elements of time travel you will find plenty of loopholes (no pun intended) but suspend your disbelief. It does lag at points but will retain your interest.

Some will have a problem that it is derivative but that is being churlish. You'll find it has influences and parallels from too many to be deemed a copy: Inception, Blade Runner, Carrie, Terminator, Jumper, Donnie Darko and even Back to the Future amongst others. Possibly the truth may also be coincidence in some parts.

Overall, a fair movie. The director has had the confidence to make a movie that is testing and interesting. It will definitely raise some interesting ethical questions for viewers to ponder in that sense is worth a watch. Got the makings of a cult viewing movie I think.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Can be better

Author: Carl Wong from Hong Kong
26 December 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Looper is one of thought- provoking movies in recent years. Although it has some defects in the story plot, it is overall entitled to a slick piece of good sci-fi film. ( not a masterpiece ) The story to some extent is hard to fathom the whole backgrounds and implications. It irks me to try to understand why this happens, how this comes from. The whole premise of the film is not satisfactorily explained. For example, the background of 2074 society and gangs which send "loopers" to 2044 to deposit dead bodies make me confessed. Meanwhile, the 'Rainmaker', as well as his mother, are not fully explained and how do they relate to the time traveling. And the "Bruce Willis style", like the Die Hard and the Expendables is not necessarily extended so long. "Looper" is not an action, but a sci-fi. The most fatal part is time-traveling paradox. Present Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Future Joe (Bruce Willis) are messed up. Their relationship in general is very hard to fathom and lacks in verisimilitude.

As many reviewers said, Looper is a stunningly original sci-fi masterpiece. I agree to certain extent. Even if there are some defects, Looper is still vastly superior to any of the higher profile action released in recent years. Present Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) adds bonuses to the film through his vivid performances, along with typical Bruce Willis's action style.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Loopy, loopy nuts are we

Author: #BigRonFilmReviews from Canterbury, England
14 December 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Sending someone you want dead back to the past is a good way to dispose of a body, but what if the person they send back is you?

Bruce is from the future, JGL is from the present, one's trying to change his future, the other to retain his present. Set in a dystopian future (that looks a bit like East London) a tale of Time Travel, Telekinesis, Drugs and Paradoxes.

Willis remembers his own moves as his past self makes them, cuts on the present self appear as scars on the future self… all good confusing fun.

Think Back to the Future meets Terminator 2 and perhaps The Omen. Thoroughly enjoyable. #BigRonFilmReviews

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Brilliant Movie Told In A Snail-Paced Way!

Author: Tejas Nair from the Entertainment Capital of India
13 December 2012

So, the actors have acted well. Joesph over-acted, no doubt. Emily Blunt is sexy as she was in TDWP. Bruce is hands down, awesome! But I like him in Die Hard more.

The story could be more interesting sans the telekinetic child who will (per se) rule the world as an avenger. Shite! That messed this up. The time travel theory was good. The screenplay was better. The thrills were best and even Cid's performance was greatest, but his character couldn't survive this plot.

I was bored at times whenever they hung out or talked about the barn area; just like its atmosphere, I took snack breaks at that time. The direction is good so is the music. But Hans or Thomas could've done it better. But I guess they are Johnson relatives. (Don't give me the fact crap)

Bottom line, LOOPER is amazing yet hard-boiled; its cast is super but the characters are little feeble. Watch it though, coz I am sure you won't be disappointed like you will after Pitch Perfect or Savages.

Can be watched with a typical Indian family? 40% YES

Language: No Sex: Hardcore foreplay present Nudity: Female body parts flaunted prior to carnal knowledge Violence: Yes Mouth-Kiss: Yes

For more:

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Hunted By Your Future. Haunted By Your Past.

Author: CinemaClown from India
9 December 2012

Taking the tried & tested formula of time-traveling in sci-fi films, Looper creates an original beauty of a film that is as satisfying as its smart plot. It's not so complex that you're gonna have a hard time figuring it out nor is it too simple that you can spare your attention away from it for a while. The balance this movie has between its sci-fi elements and action-drama is its real strength, making Looper one of the best films of the year.

Looper presents a future where time travel has been invented but outlawed. Run by criminal organizations, it allows them to erase their enemies by sending them back in time where they are cleaned up by the "loopers". This tells the story of a Joe, the best looper in the business until the day his own self is sent back in time to be killed by him.

Very well written and directed by Rian Johnson. The vision of the future is impressive too and so is the way it has been filmed. The editing is really good, making the whole movie highly gripping as well as expertly paced. Both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis play the present & future versions of Joe, respectively and both give equally good performances. Especially Joseph Gordon-Levitt who went to great lengths in preparing his role as well as to look like the younger self of Willis.

Overall, Looper is one of those rare sci-fi thrillers that tells its story in an effective way, presenting itself as an intelligent yet not confusing piece of movie, wildly entertains as well as amuses the viewers and finally signs off without leaving any trace(s) behind. Easily one of the best films of the year and one of the best science-fiction films to have come out in a long time.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

error in continuity and fluff

Author: gorillapimping from United States
22 November 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

For a two hour movie it was simply too uncompressed. The plot could be told in little over a minute with a clear understanding of the point. At its base it was of a martyr who altruistically gives up his own life for the greater good and without any public recognition. With plenty of unnecessary fluff, they managed to expand this concept into a slow progression film. I do admit that some of the time travel paradoxes are well developed like the creation of old memories for the old Joe. However there is one major error in continuity- It could not be a cycle as described at the end because if young Joe didn't kill himself, he would grow up to know what caused the Rainman's violent mannerisms, and thus old Joe would not have gone back in time to do justice the way he attempted. For Rainman to turn out evil the way he did, Sara would have had to be shot by old Joe, and young Joe would have seen it and grown into old Joe with the knowledge of who Rainman was and why it happened, and thus would not have continued the cycle by going back in time and failing to kill child Rainman again, but would perhaps take different measures. In short, If Rainman is evil, old Joe must know why, and would not go back in time to make the same mistake. I think it deserves a 6.9 IMDb score, but I'm shooting it a 6 to bring its overrated current score down to justice.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Long and boring

Author: Sheilamoira33 from United States
21 October 2012

This movie was so very slow! Of all the movies in the theater this weekend, we regretted going to this one, and only did so because of the very good ratings on IMDb. Who did these ratings, the production company and an army of paid zombies? Honestly! We found it to be quite boring and somewhat predictable. It was actually a pretty good story line, just way too long in getting there. And so much of the technology was just not credible! For instance, going into the future 30 years, and the time machine looks like a contraption from an old western. Also, Joseph Gordon-Levitt as a young Bruce Willis? Really? More importantly was the lack of character development. We don't know anything about their backgrounds, likes, or how they got involved with the mob. The romantic relationships were not believable, because, while the women were beautiful, there was no chemistry.

If you decide to go, go hungry and arm yourself with plenty of popcorn, candy and drinks. You'll have plenty of time to slip out to the restroom without really missing anything.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

a smart idea, but not well executed!

Author: junkielee from Cairo, Egypt
21 October 2012

Rian Johnson's third feature, the second one stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt in the leading role, after his career debut detective-noir BRICK (2005, 6/10), however his second film THE BROTHERS BLOOM (2008, 6/10) has lost its traction with both the audience and the critics, in spite of a scale-up budget and cast.

I saw this film in the local multiplex, and my expectation had been drastically kindled thanks to its great reviews in its domestic reign (especially after a season mainly consists of summer leftovers and studio's substandard cranked-outs), although I'm no big fan of Rian's past work, and consider him as the next Christopher Nolan might spoil him through excessive enthusiasm (also, to juxtapose this time-travel vehicle with the monolithically staggering INCEPTION, 2010, 9/10 is not such a grounded idea at all).

The milieu of a dystopian future with a darker and more desolate vantage view is not a novel gambit it the Sci-Fi genre, the film also is wanting the budget to exhibit its ambitious future world, basically the film hinges on a quite groundbreaking caveat, the requisite existence of "the loopers", which is a somewhat moot point (it's rather difficult to be convinced the future criminals will make such a big fuss to illegally dispose the dead bodies with the omnipotent time machine, which triggers another more pertinent point, why not kill first, transfer later?), so all of these unsolved questions have kind of deglamorized the film per se.

But honestly speaking, if one can drop the feeble premise, the film is potently entertaining, especially in the latter part, when all the Sci-Fi stunts turns into a supernatural thriller. Joseph Gordon-Levitt has slowly but firmly established his own fan base and although almost ruined by the ridiculous make-up (I don't buy the resemblance of him and Bruce Willis no matter what 30 years could alter a person), all he needs is a meaty role to send him into the upper stratum as like Christian Bale or Joaquin Phoenix. Emily Blunt gives an impressively gritty performance with her southern American accent (for me it's rather disparate from her usual comfort zone, but I am no American, so I don't have the say whether it is accurate or not), a hard-bitten motherhood is always a rite-of-passage for young actresses when they (infinitely) reach 30. Paul Dano is technically wasted in the film, so are Rian's old buddies Jeff Daniels, Noah Segan is too goofy to be taken seriously. An unexpected discovery is the young boy Pierce Gagnon, a big bravo for him to nail the most demanding work in the film.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 14 of 65: [Prev][9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [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