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

Reviews & Ratings for
Looper More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 15 of 69: [Prev][10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [Next]
Index 681 reviews in total 

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Looper Fails to Excite

3/10
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?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Yet another one

2/10
Author: contle
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?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Not bad, but not as good as it thinks it is

6/10
Author: Leofwine_draca from United Kingdom
7 May 2014

LOOPER is the latest Hollywood movie to tackle the thorny topic of time travel. This one's a little bit like the Van Damme vehicle TIMECOP, although it strives to be less cheesy and more realistic thanks to the presence of former indie director Rian Johnson, who also made the high school murder mystery BRICK with Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Gordon-Levitt plays an assassin who executes criminals sent back from the future for spurious reasons, although inevitably he soon finds his life spiralling out of control when things take an unexpected twist.

I really wanted to like this film. It feels fresh and appealing in many ways, and visually it's a triumph. Gordon-Levitt's performance is fine, although that prosthetic make-up is distracting, and it's fair to say that Bruce Willis is pretty good too, as this is probably the best performance he's given in a while. The action sequences, when they come, are efficiently handled.

So what gives, then? Well, the truth is that LOOPER isn't quite as entertaining as it thinks it is. For once, the story doesn't really work under close scrutiny. All of the other time travel movies I've seen have made a point of not allowing the characters to encounter themselves in another time period, as this would cause a paradox. In this one, Willis and Gordon-Levitt share cups of coffee together, and it never quite gels.

In addition, the pacing is off, with long, boring and tension-free interludes spent sitting around in a farmhouse with the miscast Emily Blunt. Yet another twist involves characters who are telekinetic, which is all a little too much; wasn't the time travel plot enough? Although it's not bad for what it is, LOOPER doesn't hold a candle to the ultra-efficient low budget Spanish time travel movie, TIMECRIMES.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

An average and predictable action movie that could have been so much more

6/10
Author: dalejones22 from United Kingdom
3 October 2013

Looper wasn't a bad film, however it fell well short of its potential and no doubt falls into the category 'only watch when bored'. My biggest issue with the film - aside from its climax being predictable - is the plot, which seemed confused and noticeably switched focus midway through the film.

Whilst I'm not against that if done correctly, it was the subsequent lack of character development that really made this film suffer. Most of Looper's characters seemed insignificant - you found yourself simply not caring about them. This to my mind was caused by the surface level knowledge you're given throughout the film. That said I did enjoy Blunt and Levitt's performances, whilst Bruce Willis does what he does best. The action set pieces are okay - nothing you haven't seen before - but are thankfully good enough to hold an audience's attention.

Overall a decent watch but nothing that will make a lasting impression.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

where is time travel when you need it?

1/10
Author: philip
17 September 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

i wish i could loop back in-time and not watch it, go firefly hunting, or feed some stray cats. this movie was retarded... i skipped through most of it which may or may not make this review, a review, but: the whole "life runs in a circle" thing as drawn at the very end of the movie was a nice concept but with the plot and story board of this movie... lame. the hinting of "the ends justifies the means" with killing the children, added to the fact that the one who supposedly cherished life and love was the one who was carrying out this horrendous escapade, was even more fuel to my fire of how... retarded this movie was. i watched the preview again after i watched it... i don't see a connection? someone please help me on that one..?..!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Creepy eyes, bad prosthetic nose constantly reminds you this is a movie and not reality

3/10
Author: schf from United Kingdom
11 September 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A young murderer called Joe lives a life of pre arranged shootings and wild drug parties,until one of his suddenly materialising victims turns out to be an older version of himself. How we know this is because that's how the film has been advertised not because of any thing like a resemblance . Which bring us to the heart of my problem with the movie,Joseph gordon levitt has been made up (badly)with a rubber nose and contact lenses to try and resemble a young bruce willis .They really ,truly failed. Every single time I looked at the weird eyes of JGL it broke the reality of the film for me. Creepy, bright and totally out of place. oh dear I'm sure it was good other wise even if almost everyone in the cinema guessed the ending long before the punch. Shame i couldn't enjoy it felt like it was constantly holding up a sign saying Sack the make up department

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Terrible from the get go

2/10
Author: Marc Colten from United States
13 July 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'll confess to being very judgmental about films and TV shows. If, in the first minutes, you see that the entire premise is absurd, I'm against the whole thing. From the minute you are told that people in the future send their contracts back 40 years to be killed by over-paid people who themselves are later killed, by themselves - the entire movie goes off the rails. Once you ask yourself why they don't send them back 10,000 years, or to the middle of the ocean - you're done.

All the rest, the TK, the Terminator rip-off, the "One" rip-off of The Matrix and others - well, it's just crap piled on crap. The time travel concepts are ridiculous. Okay, so a guy is sent back and then his current self is mutilated, which appear instantly on the older guy. So how did he spend all those years without his limbs to be sent back intact? No, I call no way. Same with the ending. So young Joe kills himself, which erases old Joe from the time line. So all the criminals he killed and the loopers are okay now? How is the kid still wounded?

Just really lousy.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Puts characters in right place, and looks good. Still not a big success story

6/10
Author: moviesrme10
24 June 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This film was really an interesting film to watch. And I mean it. When it was released back in September 2012, I had no such interest in watching it. For me the film just looked lame. I know you should never judge a book by its cover; I was just totally uninterested in this film. For starters it had that gangster's vibe going for it. And I just don't like gangster movies, for one and the fact that it involved killing people randomly, which I like, but this film kind of (for me) seemed to go over the edge and get a little too extreme. When I watched it, it had a very realistic and dark thing about it. What got me threw it all was the mesmerizing performances, by lead Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and supporters, Noah Segan and Emily Blunt. Okay so the issues with this film include Bruce Willis, length, and ending. Bruce Willis. The man behind Die Hard. I don't know what to say, the guy has lost it. He just can't act anymore, why he does it most likely now is to put food on the table. Whenever he's on screen he just doesn't seem to be n it, he doesn't have the same momentum he used to have. The dude unlike Sylvester Stallone just can't do it anymore. He's given up trying. His scenes were very poorly acted. The length of this film is way too long. I can think of a couple of scenes that should have been cut, or shortened more. It's just way too unbearable. This film could have made for a decent Hour and a half film, but instead the people behind it added un- necessary additions to the film such as the half naked women in the bed scene, and the "kid blue" getting his knuckles cracked scene. Those were lengthy additions that made little difference to the story. The ending to this film was also a bit of a disappointment for me. It ended with Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character killing himself so that the crazy future him, Bruce Willis wouldn't kill the kid. It was a very poor ending. The kid should have just been killed and Levitt's character ending it by killing the future him. The kid was freaking nuts, and would end up being a ruthless killer. The kid killed people, he was already a lost cause, and Emily Blunt's character man was she a freaking air head. She should have killed the son. Heck with it, I would have, he was nuts. Well now to the good things. It includes the acting, special effects, and character development. The acting as I already explained was very good. Memorable you could say. Joseph Gordon-Levitt nails another role in the head. He is most likely one of the best actors of today. Every film I see him in is more un- forgettable then the last! He is excellent in his role, and adds depth to his character. And a few supporting cast members as I've already stated were excellent as well. The special effects, while minimal, are excellent and sharpened to the tip. The character development is by far the best thing. All of the character's back stories are told neatly and well. All of the character's had an emotional back story, and you felt something for each one, good and bad. You felt their issues and problems, big and small. Every character was proved to be realistic and had something about them that at least one person could relate to. All in All, Looper might not be a big success, but it puts its characters in the right place and just seems realistic, and emotional. C+

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Loopy

7/10
Author: John Smith from Australia
26 April 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Looper is set in a mob controlled society in the not too distant future. The mob use 'loopers' to carry out death sentences by transporting the victims back in time to a pre-arranged time and place. When their usefulness is over, loopers themselves are transported back in time to be terminated by their younger selves (closing the loop). If a looper fails to complete the termination, the looper then becomes a target. A new mob leader takes over all 5 mob syndicates and orders all loopers to be terminated. This leads to an attempt by one looper to use time travel to prevent the mob leader taking over.

Overall the movie is good. There is action, suspense and good acting.

What irked me was the variable theory of time travel used. On one occasion a looper fails to close the loop and later on is killed. After being killed the looper is taken back to the point where his older self is transported back in time to be terminated. This happens again, when Bruce Willis fails to prevent his younger self falling from a fire escape and being killed. It took me a while to figure it out - what they are saying is that this is a time travel paradox and the paradox is not allowed to happen. However the movie ending had the looper die and this time the looper's older self disappeared. I am OK with the latter case (its similar to the grandfather paradox and in line with one of the theoretical solutions). In the first case, I did not find the approach particularly intuitive. The movie offers no explanation.

The second issue is the makeup and prosthetics used by Joseph Gordon-Levitt to look like Bruce Willis 30 years younger. Everyone knows what Bruce Willis looked like 30 years ago from Die Hard (well 25 years ago). Gordon-Levitt looks nothing like him. The makeup failed for me.

Some of the story elements are far fetched such as the complicated way the mob uses to dispose of people by transporting them back in time to be killed.

So what score to give it. Has a few deficiencies but Bruce Willis is in it - 7/10.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Weird yet original

8/10
Author: ChristianUnchained
23 April 2013

The Short: A twisting science fiction thriller with brains, brawn, and originality that doesn't disappoint in the slightest.

Looper. Where to begin? Rian Johnson has directed an incredibly quality science fiction film that is truly original. It starkly goes against the grain, focusing on strong characters and an unique premise to drive forward one of the more intense and perplexing sic-fi action films since 2009's incredible genre bender District 9.

The first great element of Looper are the characters. Both main characters, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis, are complex character studies and are anything but the cut and dry sci-fi heroes (or anti-heroes) we have seen lately from other films (such as the recent Dredd). The true surprise here is kid actor Pierce Gagnon, who no doubt has a bright and versatile acting career ahead of him. Emily Blunt plays a great character as well, both strong willed and independent. The chemistry of all these actors is very strong on screen, and it truly makes for one completely unexpected but incredibly well presented casts that is serious, funny, intriguing, and scary all at the same time.

The true, and albeit unexpected, success is the incredible plot. It is told with finesse, executed and told in a manner that is both complex but comprehendible - it puts the latest box-office success films to shame. The time traveling premise is and old story telling feature, but Looper uses the time travel premise very differently and to a great effect - it's both perplexing and entertaining to see where the movie is going to go next. It is no doubt complex, but the way the story is told and presented is ingenious and leaves no one behind.

And with all the amazing premise and creativity of Looper, it would be easy to simply let all of the artistic value be a side thought. But Looper goes against the grain even in this area. While being tremendously entertaining, Looper is never short of being artistic - it is directed with attention paid in all departments.

With all of the brilliance this film offers, it must stumble somewhere, right? Aside from a mildly cheesy part and a minimalist backdrop (both subjective opinions), Looper is darn near perfect. The only nagging flaw that Looper has is some decidedly understated scenes that, in comparison to the rest of the film, feel low budget. But in context of the plot the cheesiness is explained thoroughly and makes sense, and the intended display of a darker, but much more approachable and realistic future (and a scary one) for a wider range of audiences, Looper delivers.

And everything else in-between is just as good. The action is strikingly violent and explosive, but none the less realistic and important to the main character of Joe and his metamorphosis throughout Looper. There is one rather strong scene of innuendo, but again it's used artistically - it's a huge character turning point for Joe and a massive stray away from his current life - one that he so desperately is conflicted to live.

In the end, Looper is a redemption story. One of sacrifice, death, life, and choice. It's anything but the cut and dry we have come to know and accept in film lately, and Looper is a refreshing science fiction action that has smarts and character to boot. The only nagging flaw are just a handful of low budget scenes that needed more umph.

Despite that single gripe, Looper is without a doubt the best science fiction film since District 9 and most likely the best time traveling movie ever made.

Strong Recommendation - 4/5

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 15 of 69: [Prev][10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

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