Looper

Looper

93%

Why did his limbs fall off?

I enjoyed the movie but was puzzled by a couple of things: why did the man who escaped being shot by his younger self, start having his limbs fall off and his nose disappear?

And at the end of the movie, how did the looper watch Emily Blunt being killed and then go back in time so that he could kill himself before she was shot?
joe s.
11-23-2012 05:50 AM

Thread Replies

Please log in to participate in this forum.

Johan Liiv

Johan Liiv

Everyone calls this movie "smart" and whatnot, but there were literally so many holes in it for me. One of those was the actual logic behind the past/present/future incarnations of the people being somehow always connected, so that when they travel in time, they're affected by what's done to them in the past. Logically, it makes no sense. What physical phenomena manifests in the bodies of the people that makes their limbs and nose fall off?

Also, if young Joe killed himself and made old Joe disappear, that technically means that old Joe would've never been there to begin with, and young Joe wouldn't ever have had a reason to shoot himself. Then again, if he hadn't shot himself, old Joe would still come back in time and do the same stuff, but if young Joe shot himself and made him disappear then why was he there in the first place?

Also, why do the people from the future need to overcomplicate things and hire loopers, manage paying them and have to put effort into sending them back to the past if they could just send the people either way more back in time (before modern civilization where they either wouldn't survive, or wouldn't be a problem anyway) or put their time machine on a newly-built, I don't know, oil tanker or some kind of facility built in a place so that when they send them back in time, they send them into conditions where they can't survive (middle of the ocean, the Arctic, middle of a huge desert). I mean, they send the people back in time to multiple loopers, right? Maybe I missed something, but they seem to have some control over where they send them. And I know they send the people back in time to specific spots, like how young Joe kept driving to that one spot, but...why? Why that spot? How many time machines are there to send people to all the loopers that there are? Why don't none of those time machines just send people into the middle of oceans or seas (which, mind you, make up over, like...what was it, 70 percent of the Earth's surface?)?

Even if you excuse time-travel paradoxes, there are still a lot of dumb things about this, more than I tackled here, but those were the main things I noticed.

Like one review I saw on the professional reviews page here is that Looper still succumbs to time-travel paradoxes, and it does. It has so many illogicalities and paradoxes, and thus, I don't really think it's that "smart" a movie.

But it is entertaining and "cool" and unique, and I do like it. I just don't think it's that "smart". Only vaguely smart thing is the end revelation where young Joe closes the cycle or knot or whatever he called it, but in terms of time travel movies, it's still kind of trite.

Jan 27 - 07:05 AM

Alex Ball

Alex Ball

keep watching till you figure it out.

Jan 21 - 08:04 PM

Panhandle

Steve Ebert

Why did his limbs fall off? He was trying to hold on to his credibility.

Jan 20 - 12:54 PM

This comment has been removed.

hollis m.

hollis mills

um do you possibly work at a cable company

Jan 12 - 09:10 PM

Alex M.

Alex Maverick

Fuck you! Stop advertising Blockbuster!

Jan 14 - 03:34 PM

James T. Gilmore

James T. Gilmore

His limbs fell off because Young Joe turned Seth in and they cut off Young Seth's limbs causing the future Seth's limbs to also disappear. And at the end he was just having a premonition of what was going to happen if he didn't kill Old Joe so he killed himself to stop his premonition from coming true. Pay attention dude

Jan 1 - 05:13 PM

hollis m.

hollis mills

you are not very smart

Dec 28 - 08:27 PM

Jim Lawter

Jim Lawter

The fingers, nose, feet, legs, arms, etc. falling off was a contrived show of special effects. If they wanted to kill the old guy, kill the young guy. Period.

Dec 27 - 12:13 PM

Trevor Seelig

Trevor Seelig

They mentioned several times in the movie that killing the younger version can have major consequences in the future, hence why they just removed parts instead. Jeff Daniels character even said that they were going to do "something dangerous" when Joe asked because they took the chance of accidentally killing the younger version.

Jan 1 - 04:10 PM

John Brune

John Brune

Wow. It was pretty freakin' clear what was going on. The reason it's not spelled out like lesser movies is what makes this movie so awesome.

Dec 22 - 10:09 AM

Frank Cabanski

Frank Cabanski

LOL. He would have never been able to sing the song that got him free if his tongue cut off. He would have never been able to run away in the first place without legs. If they cut off his young version's legs shortly after the future version escaped, then the future version wouldn't have had legs to escape. That's poor writing - it seems clever until you think about it for a second.

Dec 29 - 11:23 PM

w@velength

In Your Dreams

Wrong. The movie established that alterations to your younger self affect your older self in real time, especially if you both exist in the same frame of time. There was nothing confusing about it. The mobsters dismembered his younger self so his older self would suffer and make his way to them so they could dispose of his body. As opposed to just having a dead guy from the future lying around raising eyebrows where they can't locate him. OP's observations skills are less than astute.

Jan 1 - 12:29 PM

Zach Thomas

Zach Idiculla

Way to spoil the story bro....

Nov 29 - 06:46 PM

Zach Wisz

Zach Wisz

then don't click on the thread!

Dec 30 - 09:51 PM

Gabriel Lopez

Gabriel Lopez

The characters limbs were falling off because the present form of him was having his limbs taken off by his employers. In doing so the man became scared and went back to the location his employers had written on his arm.

As for Emily Blunts Character being shot, it didnt actually happen. Gordon-Levitt's character had imagined what was going to happen. After understanding what would happen in the case that she did die, he took the liberty of shooting himself in order to "end the circle."

Nov 23 - 01:53 PM

Frank Cabanski

Frank Cabanski

If his legs were gone then he never would have been able to run. That plot device - more an excuse for special effects - seems clever unless you think about it for a second.

Dec 29 - 11:24 PM

w@velength

In Your Dreams

They didn't take his legs, retardo. I don't think you even watched the movie. Obvious hater is obvious.

Jan 1 - 12:30 PM

Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | API | Licensing | Mobile