A-/B+

I need to see it again and gather my thoughts...but this will be one of the most discussed films of this year among movie fans and will be talked about and mentioned over and over over many years.

Oh and Joseph Gordon-Levitt does a really good Bruce Willis impression, even aside from the makeup. The mannerisms and the facial movements are spot-on. Willis hasn't been this badass in a long time, forget The Expendables. Emily Blunt has one of her best roles in years.

Of course it is a time travel flicks, so once you start thinking more about it, there are a lot ofm logical flaws, but that is basically because time travel in itself doesn't make much sense, so you just need to buy into its concept and then the plot is pretty well-executed.

Oh and it's quite violent too.

Color me even more excited!

Holy fuck this movie was awesome. I loved it even more than I expected to. It's visually stunning, completely original with great performances from the entire cast and some truly intense action sequences that pull no punches (there are more than a few scenes of shocking violence here). It also has a fair amount of heart and features characters you really care about. Really enjoyed the performances from Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Emily Blunt, and I agree that Bruce Willis hasn't been this badass in a long time. It's a must-see. It's definitely the most satisfying sci-fi flick I've seen since Inception. A

Those who have seen it...

I didn't get that feeling AT ALL from the film.

No not at all Lecter.

This is the best we've seen Bruce Willis in years. He really does kick ass. I also liked the JGL look and mannerisms. Thought it might be off putting but its far from it. Blunt, Daniels, Dano and Perabo are all great in supporting. Its a cool film, always engaging, great action and underlying messages and themes. It could have fallen over in some of the farm scenes but the ending wraps it up nicely.

Grade: A/A+

My only real complaint is that this was a lot simpler and smaller than I was expecting, both plot- and theme-wise. It spells out everything very clearly, and makes it pretty obvious where the film is going. I guess I just wanted something bigger, more complex, and more thought-provoking.

But it's still really good, hinging on great. The best sci-fi works create a universe that feels lived-in and plausible, and this does that very well. Plus JGL does a terrific Willis impression, as Lecter mentioned.

Didn't like it, and I don't know how making JGL look like a young Alec Baldwin was supposed to help the transition for us

I think it gets the thought provoking part right. There are a number of themes to think about and discuss afterwards but perhaps the action and narrative thrust overshadow it a little. It does spell things out though which would usually bother me, but not so much with this film.

In terms of scope - it certainly focused on one story in the Looper universe. Feels like there is much more to tell - from different Loopers to the story of the Rainmaker.

I did love the year by year sequence with JGL/Willis. Beautifully done.

INSTANT CLASSIC!

Seriously loved it. I still can't get over how much JGL emulated Willis. It was freaky. Also, my friend's wife brought up what Lecter brought up... I don't agree, but it's odd that so many people think it.

Indeed, Jeff Daniels' and Bruce Willis' characters pretty much state that it's all kind of crazy and nonsensical anyway, so no reason to get into it.

Fact is that time travel as it is usually presented in movies is inherently illogical, so you either buy into the whole idea of it and accept it or you don't.

An almost great science fiction film.

I have a few complaints. One has concerned me since the first trailer, and it does not fly in the film either: Joseph Gordon-Levitt's face, tightened and transformed in a failed bid to resemble a youthful version of co-star Bruce Willis. The alien result is unpleasant and serves more to limit Gordon-Levitt than recall charismatic, macho Moonlighting era Willis. In a way, this misguided creative decision, this unusual nod to the stars' physical divergences, is indicative of the film's main flaw, one not too surprising considering its writer/director: it feels a shade self-satisfied on the whole, its obvious love for its own clever construction threatening to becoming a hindrance. The entire enterprise has a bit of a strange rhythm and an inconsistent scope. (Don't read this as savage criticism; I just found it challenging now and then to settle in.)

Otherwise, though, the film is satisfying and at times even powerful. The time-travel storyline, however paradoxical, is fascinating. The performances are solid, with Emily Blunt stealing the second half of the film as a concerned mother. And the fact most of the plot unfolds in a futuristic vision of rural America versus a Blade Runner style urban space is an intriguing change of pace for the genre.

B+

I'm not sure I ever entirely invested in one of the core plot elements: the whole idea of this international crime syndicate, headquartered in Shanghai and Amish country, allowing their former elite hit men to go wild for 30 years (traveling the world even) and then finding them when they are old farts to go through the belated, "YOU KNOW TOO MUCH! DIE!" motions. Forget time-travel paradoxes; this contrived, extended, arbitrary way of dealing with past employee goes against a certain common sense and indicates a very dysfunctional organization. And can't dead bodies just be incinerated in the future?

I suspended my disbelief to enjoy the film, though.

Finding them all again was due to the new boss though, correct?

And the dead bodies thing in the future is explained in the beginning of the film.

Also, every time JGL was on screen, all I could think of was how similar he looked to Willis. Wonderful job.

Is it? My impression was "loop closing" was always part of the equation, a fact of life accepted by the loopers the way the clones accept their fate in Never Let Me Go; the new boss was simply accelerating the process, closing loop after loop after loop in short order.

And I know it's "explained," but placing a body in an incinerator in the present tense rather than in the past would seem to have the same result. I can forgive this, though. It's a fun and suspenseful concept: time-travel assassination.

More questions/comments:

1. Is "Kid Blue" (cringe) Jeff Daniels' character's son?

2. For a man so dead set on living and loving and being free, older Joe should have done more to protect his wife. He knew his old gang would come to close the loop one day.

Awesome movie! Great performances, cool action scenes and thought provoking. 9.5/10 (A)

Blunt gives my favorite performance in the film. And I dig the Witness vibe to her scenes. In general, I prefer the second half of the film.

Apparently

It is great, lingering on fantastic but it could of easily taken a bit more risk. The entire cats is fantastic though.

It's a smaller movie than I was expecting in terms of scope, but it didn't make the film any less compelling. Looper is a movie about cycles and how hard it is to break them. It took me until the ending (which was beautifully executed) to realize that.