Looper

Looper

93%

Critic Review - MediaMikes

Kind of a reverse-"Terminator" without any of James Cameron's wit (or wisdom),

October 9, 2012 Full Review Source: MediaMikes | Comments (28)
MediaMikes

Comments

Josh Fehr

Josh Fehr

Fuck that and fuck you

Oct 10 - 09:52 PM

Ryan Duggan

Ryan Duggan

Vulgarity is not a substitute for wit. If you have a valid reason for disagreeing, you should convey why, rather than resort to mindless personal attacks.

Oct 12 - 04:03 PM

Phillip Collette

Phillip Collette

Agreed. Your conduct just makes us all lose respect for you.

Oct 15 - 04:00 PM

Usman Khawaja

Usman Khawaja

these abusive remarks should be removed by RT ,i saw someone calling goldstein a f...... b.... ,a review is an opinion and does not call for this sordid behaviour by anyone .

Oct 17 - 05:46 PM

Usman Khawaja

Usman Khawaja

mister smith you are spot on , this is filled with loopholes galore ,i cannot believe the critics who are praising it as it is both dumb and a damned pastiche ,and it's far from intelligent and very dull ,time travel and telekinesis and love story with vandettas dont make for a viable genre formula but rather a messy sci -fi ,no match for terminator at any level .

Oct 11 - 10:22 AM

Usman Khawaja

Usman Khawaja

mister smith you are spot on , this is filled with loopholes galore ,i cannot believe the critics who are praising it as it is both dumb and a damned pastiche ,and it's far from intelligent and very dull ,time travel and telekinesis and love story with vandettas dont make for a viable genre formula but rather a messy sci -fi ,no match for terminator at any level .

Oct 11 - 10:23 AM

Mike Roberts

Mike Roberts

You are an idiot. You missed the forest for the trees. Way to half-ass a review also.

Oct 12 - 04:21 AM

Charlie Goins

Charlie Goins

I could not agree more. Never thought I would feel the same as a critic.

Oct 13 - 07:41 AM

Jon Martin

Jon Martin

Such an idiot that failed to comprehend the movie at any point!!

Oct 13 - 10:57 PM

Mike Porter

Mike Porter

Mike Roberts - Half-ast you half wit. Please demonstrate to us your lack of education by your demeaning remarks with no basis to your comments.

Johnathan Martin - What's to comprehend? This movie is so flawed it's almost unbearable.


And the end leaves you with a bad taste in your mouth stating the obvious, This doesnt make sense. The reason loops were closing was because the rainmaker was closing them. He closed them bc one of them (Willis) killed his mother. Willis only returns to kill him bc the rainmaker had his wife killed, leaving you to wonder what came first the chicken or the egg. Also Willis would already know what was going to happen bc it was him in the past. He knew he had a gun pointed at himself under the table but didn't see his own suicide? His general appearance in the past would already trigger a chain reaction of a new future. The plot was not thought out.

Oct 14 - 01:09 PM

Austin Bishop

Austin Bishop

I'm sorry, you just told someone they were giving demeaning remark, yet you demean them in return. I think there is a saying about a pot and a kettle, you should look it up.

There's a million ways to defend your issues, but I didn't make the movie so they're not the "right" answer. It might be that the suicide was such a split second decision that it didn't have time to formulate in Bruce's head. Or the fact that Bruce was so tense with wanting to kill The Rainmaker that he didn't see the memory. Like I said, there's a million ways to defend, but I'm not here to change your mind, as it's probably impossible.

Anyways, have a nice day and I hope you enjoy your next movie. :)

Oct 16 - 12:33 AM

Joe Donahue

Joe Donahue

What does "half-ast" mean? Are you trying to say "half-assed"?

Oct 17 - 07:57 PM

Daniel Van Cortlandt

Daniel Van Cortlandt

A. It seemed to me that Willis knew Levitt had a gun under the table because he knew that's what he'd do in his shoes. Seemed more like a solid hunch than a memory. And then he goes on to say in that very scene that he remembers changes in the timeline only after Levitt enacts them, and that everything else is just a hazy collection of multiple possibilities that either crystalize into memory or disappear completely. AND he says not to worry about "the time travel stuff" which should be any viewer's cue to either accept that this movie doesn't take the mechanics of its time-travel components nearly as seriously as it's philosophical and emotion components, or get up and leave.

B. The thing about the internal logic of the movie that people like yourself seem to miss is that Cid didn't become the Rainmaker because a Looper killed his mom. I believe that Levitt's vision at the end was of a path which would be more likely to lead Cid to become the Rainmaker, but there was no preordained cause and effect revealed at the end, it was just a vision of one increasingly likely scenario. We have no real evidence for why Cid became the Rainmaker other than rumors and legend, which admittedly hint at some kind of origin like the scene at the end of the film but are more of a red herring, a cinematic sleight of hand if you will. The chilling fact is that even after Joe's self-sacrifice at the end, Cid might still become the Rainmaker. Some might call this sloppy writing, but I think you'd be missing the point. The deeper questions this film is asking revolve around the true nature of altruism. For instance: do you sacrifice your life to save a child and his mother because it might prevent the child from becoming a monster in the future? Do you do it to save your future wife? Or do you do it because saving a child and his mother is the right thing to do no matter what "might" happen? And then if you dig a little deeper you start to ponder the age old questions of free will vs destiny, or nature vs nurture. Probably more interesting stuff to think about than why this or that time travel scenario lacks consistency.

Nov 2 - 10:58 PM

Tom Wilson

Tom Wilson

I pity the critics, who can't enjoy film anymore.

Oct 14 - 03:15 PM

Dillon DeWitt

Dillon DeWitt

I have to disagree with you completely sir. I thought there was more to it than you obviously did. I'm still not going to bash your intelligence or opinion. Fanboys can be ridiculous. Haha.

Oct 15 - 05:24 AM

Phillip Collette

Phillip Collette

Way to disagree without being mouthy. You are worth listening to.

Oct 15 - 04:01 PM

Dillon DeWitt

Dillon DeWitt

Thank you. It's all relative anyway. There are always going to be people that dislike any given thing.

Oct 27 - 09:51 PM

Andy Smith

Andy Smith

Plot holes galore, bad direction, bad cinematography, dull dialogue and an odd cgi/make up JGL

Oct 15 - 05:25 PM

Usman Khawaja

Usman Khawaja

exactly andy ,illogical and dull ,levitt might by some miracle look like willis in 130 years but how come his voice changed too ,did hollywood do a vocal cord transplant that two men who are the same talk to each other in different voices face to face ,extremely clumsy and irreverent .

Oct 17 - 05:41 PM

?ric Güldenstern

?ric Güldenstern

"Kind of a reverse-"Terminator" without any of James Cameron's wit (or wisdom)," or cheese.

Oct 18 - 10:48 AM

Tristin Breakfield

Tristin Breakfield

Thank you! This movie is very boring. It is a powerful drama movie, but not an action movie by far.

Oct 22 - 05:12 AM

Eric Recchia

Eric Recchia

I'm not the type of guy that bashes someone simply for having a difference of opinion, but the logic behind yours is staggeringly stupid. How is this like the Terminator? They're really nothing alike except they have time travel. I loath these kinds of criticisms, a film shares one vague similarity to another famous film, and some idiot think he's giving a valid criticism by yelling "rip-off!" If you're privileged enough to be payed for your opinion, make sure it's an intelligent and informed one for fuck's sake.

Oct 24 - 05:34 PM

Dillon DeWitt

Dillon DeWitt

Sure the loopholes are there, as in almost any sci-fi film. But the themes of the film, and the performances are worth watching the film alone. Levitt was fantastic, Willis delivered by far my personal favorite performance, and the supporting cast also delivered grade A performances. You are entitled to your opinion, along with everyone else in the world, but I'm also entitled to disagree. I think James Cameron substitutes a lot of wit and wisdom for flashy special effects. Johnson offers more credit to the story then anything else. Which I think worked out in his favor. Highly original, and backing itself with a lot of heart. I definitely recommend watching.

Oct 27 - 09:48 PM

Lee Jackson

Lee Jackson

The wit of James Cameron? Are you fucking kidding me?!

Nov 1 - 05:48 AM

Find us on:                 
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile