Looper

Time travel films open up all manner of questions because of the paradoxes every action and reaction produce. If X occurred, surely Y would happen, which means X wouldn't happen after all… And so it is with Looper.

Alas, to avoid dishing out hugely unpopular plot spoilers I need to skirt around the concerns, so you'll just have to come round with cake and we can discuss it in private. But there are some pretty substantial issues with Looper that cause questions to be asked and lead to more than a couple of possible explanations as to what exactly is going on. Don't see it alone; you'll need a friend around to discuss it on the journey home.

Equally, don't be put off. You don't need to be Einstein to enjoy Looper, as some of the audience proved…

In 2072, time travel is both possible and illegal and murder is more easily solved because corpses are harder to lose. However mobs and Mafiosi types are prevalent and have ingeniously devised a solution: tie your victim up and send him back in time to a location where a looper will be waiting to blow his/her brains out. However, when a looper's contract is up, they find themselves blowing the brains out of their older self. Except when looper Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) stares down the barrel at a version of himself that is thirty years older, Old Joe (Bruce Willis) outsmarts him and so begins a cat and mouse chase where there are multiples of each species and most of them aren't called Joe.

Confused? Good. Don't think any more or you'll confound yourself with your wondering and wandering along all the possible flows and tributaries that lead from them. Like, Is he actually... Dammit.

Along with the quirks, possibilities and matters left to interpretation, there are one or two clear boo-boos that cut against the rules writer/director Rian Johnson (Brick, The Brothers Bloom) has set himself. I'm sure you can work out from the subject matter that there are occasional murders so I'm giving nothing away by stating that a particular murder in 2027 cuts against the rules. It's not a major problem in terms of enjoyment but it does cast a shadow over everything if minor errors are not avoided.

There's only one way to watch Looper: suspend all disbelief, put your logic in stasis and get on with enjoying the romp. With that frame of mind employed, it's a superb film. No, it's not as intelligent a film as Inception, but it kicks the ass of Wanted and Gordon-Levitt is potentially a bigger star in the making than either Leonardo DiCaprio or James McAvoy.

I'm not sure that I buy Gordon-Levitt as a young Willis but the transition is simple and effectively executed and it needn't stand in the way of a couple of hours of great entertainment. He's matured as an actor and, though he's been stamping around Hollywood for a good couple of decades, it's the last five years or so that have really seen him ascend the ranks and there's no sign of his climb slowing with both Spielberg's Lincoln and Don Jon's Addiction (which he also wrote and directed) in the can and Premium Rush earning plaudits on both sides of the Atlantic.

As for Willis, it's good to see him earning his fee again in a film worthy of his presence rather than phoning it in for a fat wad in the truly awful The Expendables 2. Emily Blunt (Sara) and Jeff Daniels ably provide support, the former, sadly, barely stretched and the latter, as Abe, the loopers' boss, clearly enjoying himself. Equally, Paul Dano gives a wonderful, trademark sniveling wretch performance that is all too brief. But Looper belongs to Gordon-Levitt and One Tree Hill's Pierce Gagnon as the child, Cid, whose middle name is probably Damian. Unnerving is an understatement!

There is a very strong argument that the best person to direct a film is the writer because s/he knows it better than anyone. Clearly that wasn't the case with Maximum Overdrive (Stephen King being the fine writer who should never be allowed either in front of or behind a camera again) but with Looper it's a very strong case in point.

Johnson, though he bends his rules, has created a multi-layered, rapidly paced trip that is littered with bodies and to-die-for quips, to wit, "I cleaned you up. And put a gun in your hand." He juggles the time zones effortlessly and maintains the excitement while allowing sufficient moments for us to pause, cogitate and catch up before whipping us to the next sprint, jump or shoot-out. Though he has nothing (publicly) on the slate, there'll be plenty more from him in the next few years.

As is increasingly the case, my biggest complaint with last night's viewing has nothing to do with the film itself but with the screening, namely the blown speakers all along one side of the auditorium (big thumbs down to Cineworld) and the moron in front who played with his phone and gave muted shrieks of excitement every time there was a shot or splatter of blood, even taking the time to relive it with his friend. Who are these people? Why are they allowed to breathe? When will time travel come to my aid? Ah, but these are niggles and hopefully you won't be subjected to such when you watch Looper. And do see it. Maybe you'll absolutely hate the confusion it causes you, but if you don't mind giving a film some real thought and you enjoyed the possibilities of Inception, then Looper is for you.

Just don't think too hard. As Abe laments, "This time travel crap; just fries your brain like an egg…"

For more reviews subscribe to www.thesquiss.co.uk

Like the Facebook page: http://on.fb.me/RpitOG

"This time travel crap just fries your brain like an egg." (Abe)

Not since Children of Men (2006) and Source Code (2011) have I been as jazzed up as I am now about Rian Johnson's Looper. Here's sci-fi that will happily fry your brain as you figure out the implications of changing the future by altering the present. Also throw in thoughts about Christopher Nolan's Memento and Inception to get the flavor of Looper.

But as Sinatra sings, "Regrets I've had a few, but then too few to really mention," this film challenges you to think of the implications of reversing those regrets or keeping the future the same because you kind of like the way things went.

Joseph Gordon Levitt's Joe is a "looper," an assassin who goes into the past to murder someone needed to be absent in the future, 2072. The Mob, headed by a very relaxed and dangerous Jeff Daniels as Abe, determines to eliminate all loopers, and Joe is next on the list to kill himself by flashing back. Yes, it's existentially a difficult task, and therein lies the drama of this satisfying sci-fi.

With less CGI and few glitzy machines (in fact most of the vehicles look shabby 2012 and the loopers' weapon is a sawed-off Steampunk shot gun—how's that for past and future?), this thriller relies to an effective degree on the excellent cast to relay the challenges inherent in altering any past.

Because it's an intelligent tale, the overall theme of responsibility for our actions (the existential part) flows quietly from the action, be it as simple as running from the bad guys to the complexity of deciding on the sacrifices willing to be made to alter the future.

A leitmotiv of this film is that no one is immune from the effects of the past, Sinatra notwithstanding in his apparent satisfaction with how things turned out. For Looper, cult status is its future.

i always approach a film especially when it is classified as scifi with liberal suspension of disbelief. because it is only through that that i was able to appreciate such scifi gems as Stargate and Fifth Element and many other that were otherwise written off by these so-called critics.

Looper is one of those films that should be appreciated by its message more than its genre. it uses the science fiction medium, complete with action stunts and wonders, as an apt and well-sculpted vehicle to a very beautiful message of self-sacrifice and positive reinforcement parenthood. the film goes to extra length to make the story plausible and solid and the actors, including the 'rainmaker' child, did a marvelous job of pulling it off.

i've always believed that the soul of any film, even as i appreciate great plot twists and great special fx and great acting and direction (yeah, i said great too many times!), is the message and/or portrait it intends to get across. Looper made a kill for it.

Rian Johnson (The Brothers Bloom, Brick) is the writer and director of this sci-fi film. Like his other projects, this has original if slightly off-kilter thinking in its story. It is not a regular sci-fi movie. There are some crazy ideas going on here. Time travel is not enough. There is also telekinesis, post collapse apocalypse, mob killings, and pre-planned suicide for hire (yeah figure that one out). Does it all make logical sense? I can't tell. But it sure was fun trying to follow it. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is great as the young Bruce Willis. Emily Blunt is refreshingly new. Also staring is Paul Dano and Piper Perabo.

Sitting here the day after viewing Rian Johnson's Looper, parts of it are still falling in to place. Standing out amongst this years crop of mostly underwhelming sequels and comic book adaptations, Looper thunders onto the screen, showing, much like Inception did two years ago, that there is a place in 2012 for fresh material and just how good it can be when it's done right.

The film tells the story of Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a hit-man for an organised crime syndicate tasked with assassinating targets sent from the future. After being confronted with his future self (Bruce Willis) and failing to perform, Young Joe is forced to track down Old Joe and finish the job before being tracked down himself by the nefarious mob led by Abe (Jeff Daniels). However there is much more to the story than the basic premise, and Johnson isn't afraid to keep details close to his chest until later in the film than most movies of this type, so I won't spoil them here.

While certainly paying subtle homage to its predecessors, Looper is a stunningly original sci-fi masterpiece, vastly superior to any of the higher profile action releases this year. While certainly made on a much larger playing field than Johnson's previous work (Brick, The Brothers Bloom), there is still a small-scale, independent feel to the film, and it benefits from clearly staying completely under the control of the young director. Delivering excitement sprinkled with thoughtful themes of personal sacrifice, he offers us much to chew on.

Johnson understands that a successful action film doesn't need an explosion every ten minutes, and allows ample time for developing character and story, something which will likely divide audiences. Looper is very deliberately constructed, and after the highly charged opening establishing the intricate time-travel premise and direction of the plot, Johnson scales back the action almost too much as he ambitiously juggles the many and varied story elements he has created. Thankfully, any weakness in the middle of the film is largely overshadowed as Johnson launches the third act with such ferocity that the stark change of pace leaves you breathless.

Despite the problems in the middle of the film, Looper overcomes its flaws purely by being that rare beast in Hollywood nowadays, the totally original script. Not an adaptation, not a sequel or remake, but a fresh idea from the mind of an immensely talented young film-maker. In a perfect world, Looper would be the game changer it deserves to be, slapping Hollywood studios across the face and announcing that not everything has to be a PG-13 franchise based on a comic book. It's unlikely that this will the case, and it remains to be seen whether or not the film will even be a success, but it's encouraging to see that there are young auteurs at work who are fighting to craft new and exciting stories, even if we only get to see the results every year or two.

tinribs27.wordpress.com