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 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
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Looper More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 15 of 65: [Prev][10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [Next]
Index 642 reviews in total 

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Can be better

8/10
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

8/10
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!

8/10
Author: Tejas Nair from Economic 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: tejas.you@gmail.com

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

6/10
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

4/10
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!

6/10
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?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

i have to agree with all the negative reviews

5/10
Author: grumpy-3 from london
20 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

once again critics have reviewed the director and not the film very much like Blink this is so overrated. funnily enough his middle film Brothers Bloom was better than this and Blink and yet it was ignored. Very little happens apart from Both Joes killing people, the time travel is utter nonsense, to make the film work older Joe has to come back twice, and get this instead of being killed the first time so that he gets the money and goes to china, he escapes the first time, then ten minutes later for no reason the scene is repeated and this time he get killed, then we go back to young joe out to get and kill old joe. then halfway through we go into another plot the shooting stops for a while and the film tries to get deep and serious. full or pretension and utterly boring.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Enjoyable blockbuster science-fiction movie

9/10
Author: Esa H from Finland
19 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

-SPOILERS!- I got chance to see this movie before it's release here at Finland, and I after having to suffer Taken 2 on the same week, Looper was highly enjoyable.

Now I am not saying that Looper wouldn't be good if you have still bad taste in your mouth from last movie you saw on theater, but so far as I have seen Avengers, In time, Cabin in the woods, and other fictive movies of 2012, some of them more or less disappointing, some of them actually good, Looper clearly takes the lead as best fictive movie of 2012.

Looper is smart science fiction movie, a good example of what should be more. Looper doesn't go overboard like Inseption, it doesn't try to be more than it is. It uses theme of time traveling well, making it really interesting, leaving many possibilities open, some questions behind. It is smart, however, if you start to think few things in the movie with logic, some of the scifi stuff may feel like huge cliché, but I think after seeing movies like Transformers and In time, those clichés are minor.

Looper also has nice old noir gangster feel to it, that mixes nicely with the scifi parts of it. At times, I bet that there are stories behind characters, maybe caused by a lot further messing with time that haven't been explained, especially at the very end of the movie.

As for actors, we have good old Bruce Willis with his known gritty look on his face, with well chosen Joseph Gordon-levitt who actually looks like, acts like and feels like lot younger versio of Bruce Willis. Hell, at times, I bet Jopesh even spent daily hour or two in front of mirror, trying to imitate that gritty look of Bruce Willis, succeeding.

Highly recommend.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Lets do the Hollywood Checkoff List, Shall We?

2/10
Author: charlesbeutt from United States
11 January 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

1. Interracial sex/flirting, check 2. All characters are trash, Hollywood's war on morality. Check. 3. Terrible action sequences with one guy beating up 4 by himself, no problem, no reality. Check. 4. No kids. Remember. Hollywood hates kids, especially white people's kids. Kids die but no one has kids. Ya no one has kids over 30 years DUH. Check. 5. China is the center of the world in the future. Where they pay slave wages and have forced abortions. FU Hollywood. 6. People whisper and then there are loud explosions. Over and over. Annoying as hell. 7. The Asian woman cleans up the loser druggie man. Men are kids, and helpless, and bad. Women are wise leaders. 8. Another ripoff remake as others have pointed out. Made worse. 9. Weak ending. Shouldve paid the writers during the writer's strike. 10. "Organized crime" and not fascist police states like what America is turning into, is somehow the thing to worry about in the future.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 15 of 65: [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 Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history