Looper (dir. Rian Johnson; Gordon-Levitt, Willis)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Apparently Rian Johnson has been influenced by JJ Abrams too, jeez louise at the lens flares!

iboGVltzssoPpf.jpg
 
Trailer was ok. I still wanna see this movie because I think the premise is pretty awesome and so is the cast. Could have been a better trailer though.
 
I liked the trailer, looks good. I think they did a pretty decent job on Levitt to make him look like Bruce, even though it feels like there's something a bit off with the eyes/brows at times.

I hope this doesn't go the route of Surrogates.
 
Awesome trailer, but sometimes JGL looks like a young Bruce Willis and other times he looks like Michael Angarano from Sky High.

h9Nzp.jpg
 
I'd be more interested if Willis weren't in it. He's been a pretty shitty actor for a while now. All he seems to do these days is smirk and mumble. I'll still check it out on Netflix though.
 
I'm glad the 2 minute 'teaser' made the movie look as awesome as it sounded.
 
The trailer was the first I'd heard of the film, but it looked good. The concept and JGL are both great, so I'll definitely be seeing it.
 
That pan of JGL running across the room (and out the window) seemed cheesy to me at first but now I find it to be one pretty badass shot.

See, in my mind, Bruce Willis did this whole thing years ago when he was in JGL's shoes, so he knows what happens....

But that subscribes to Whatever Happened Happened. Lets just see how it unfolds.
This is exactly what I'm expecting.
 
I like time travel movies, but the idea that the only use for time travel they have is to hide corpses seems ridiculous.

Sure, let's send our enemies into the past because back then it was easier to dispose of evidence. What could possibly go wrong?

I still want to see the movie, though.
 
Has there been word for why they don't just send guys to get eaten by dinosaurs or is that something we're assuming will be dealt with in the movie?
 
Has there been word for why they don't just send guys to get eaten by dinosaurs or is that something we're assuming will be dealt with in the movie?

this...is actually a good question, LOL. Hell send them to a couple of billions of years ago, when there was nothing.
 
Has there been word for why they don't just send guys to get eaten by dinosaurs or is that something we're assuming will be dealt with in the movie?

probably a QUANTUM LEAP-esque rule, i.e., can only time travel within one's own lifetime. or maybe it's not addressed. but if i were rian johnson, i would reference QL here.
 
this...is actually a good question, LOL. Hell send them to a couple of billions of years ago, when there was nothing.

I guess they are worried that anything major like that could affect history and evolution itself? Sound of Thunder etc.

best to send it to some place where they are certain someone will get them so they'll have as little impact on history as possible.
 
I like time travel movies, but the idea that the only use for time travel they have is to hide corpses seems ridiculous.

Sure, let's send our enemies into the past because back then it was easier to dispose of evidence. What could possibly go wrong?

I still want to see the movie, though.

I tried to convince my friends of that. Seems pointless.

Will still see the movie as it looks decent.
 
Has there been word for why they don't just send guys to get eaten by dinosaurs or is that something we're assuming will be dealt with in the movie?

this is from an on-set feature in empire's june 2012 issue:

johnson admits that his own challenge was the time-travel element, some details of which have been pared back since the first assembly. "it was hard," he admits. "but the approach that i took to it was really similar to the first terminator movie, where time travel sets up the premise and then gets out of the way. it was much easier on my brain to set up the circumstances and then have the characters take over and try to resolve this big problem that time travel has caused."

"i guess for the most part, the freeing thing was realising that time travel was never, ever going to make sense. it just doesn't make sense. so my job was not to make a version of time travel that does make sense but to somehow fool the audience into not noticing that it doesn't make sense. and that's what every successful time-travel movie actually does. it's just a magic trick."
 
this is from an on-set feature in empire's june 2012 issue:

johnson admits that his own challenge was the time-travel element, some details of which have been pared back since the first assembly. "it was hard," he admits. "but the approach that i took to it was really similar to the first terminator movie, where time travel sets up the premise and then gets out of the way. it was much easier on my brain to set up the circumstances and then have the characters take over and try to resolve this big problem that time travel has caused."

"i guess for the most part, the freeing thing was realising that time travel was never, ever going to make sense. it just doesn't make sense. so my job was not to make a version of time travel that does make sense but to somehow fool the audience into not noticing that it doesn't make sense. and that's what every successful time-travel movie actually does. it's just a magic trick."

Hope he succeeds. The only film involving time travel that didn't have me scratching my head was Back to the Future, as they did it expertly. Terminator is a bit more complicated, as a lot of plot holes arise. However, this film has gotten a lot of critical acclaim and JGL can do no wrong, so I'm definitely looking forward to this one. I haven't seen enough of Rian Johnson's work to be hyped for him, but I've only heard good things. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom