Looper = Movie of the year | Page 7 | TigerDroppings.com
Posted by
Message
sbr2
Member since Apr 2011
13427 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year

Saw it on Friday, this was a very exciting movie that kept me guessing. I kept waiting for Kid Blue to have some significance but all he ended up doing was fricking up.


OMLandshark
Ole Miss Fan
Member since Apr 2009
42003 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
I thought it was pretty damn good and a pretty good twist on the average time travel plot. The antagonist was actually the protagonist at the same time. While in most time travel films, the past self and the future self may not like each other, they both try to preserve each other. Not so in this film.


H-Town Tiger
Toledo Fan
Member since Nov 2003
42995 posts
Online

re: Looper = Movie of the year
I really liked it, my question is: SPOILERS










People have raised the question of why close the loop by killing yourself basically, why not just have one looper kill another. My question, why aren't they putting up more of a fight in the future? You'd know its 30 years, I'd think they'd be running and hiding, holed with an armory ready to fight


NavyLSUAlum
LSU Fan
Portland Oregon
Member since Oct 2005
434 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
*** Spoliers***








quote:

People have raised the question of why close the loop by killing yourself basically, why not just have one looper kill another. My question, why aren't they putting up more of a fight in the future? You'd know its 30 years, I'd think they'd be running and hiding, holed with an armory ready to fight



I already asked that in may post above.

quote:

Fourth, why would you let a guy know when he was going to die. I think I would spend a long time preparing to kick some arse if I knew they were coming for me in thirty years. Even if they got me, I think I could take a few with me.


H-Town Tiger
Toledo Fan
Member since Nov 2003
42995 posts
Online

re: Looper = Movie of the year
Soory, didn't see that in all the Gladiator, Braveheart talk


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
vuvuzela
Alabama Fan
Member since Jun 2010
5548 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
SPOILERS




























quote:

My husband and I wondered why Sid's gunshot wound/graze didn't disappear after JGL shot himself.


Since the mother lived she was able to tend to this wound before it got infected, giving sid a synthetic jaw. Had he been left alone it would have gotten infected (remember when Emily Blunt was cleaning up JGL's wounds?). The whole point of the movie was that maternal care is needed.
This post was edited on 10/7 at 2:49 pm


barry
Cincinnati Fan
Location, Location, Location
Member since Aug 2006
40050 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
Thought it was a good movie, not POY worthy but still very good.

I was really perplexed why they brought up the TK stuff till we finally learned about the kids crazy TK skills.

Its always cool to see peoples interpretations of the future. The eye drops for drugs was original, I thought. In general they did a good job without going over the top with the futuristic world.

I thought the side story of the guy who shot of his foot(kid blue) seemed a bit distracting. For a while I thought we were going to find out that guy was a younger Jeff Daniels.
This post was edited on 10/8 at 1:35 pm


Salmon
USA Fan
On the trails
Member since Feb 2008
33427 posts
Online

re: Looper = Movie of the year
quote:

For a while I thought we were going to find out that guy was a younger Jeff Daniels.


I thought the same thing


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
JabarkusRussell
Member since Jul 2009
9961 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
Just saw it. Why did they make Bruce Willis out to be a bad guy? That little kid was a monster. Just imagine how bad he will get as an adult. If you could kid Hitler as a kid, you do it. Also, did they imply that the little kid grows up to be him? The circle line got me confused.


Gnar Cat21
Auburn Fan
Piña Coladaburg
Member since Sep 2009
11780 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
quote:

Also, did they imply that the little kid grows up to be him?



what? i think you missed something. the rainmaker, never grew up to be the "rainmaker"

so really, the little kid never grew up to be a "monster"


JabarkusRussell
Member since Jul 2009
9961 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
The kid actor was god awful and the story stalled at the farm but otherwise I liked it.


Rittdog
LSU Fan
Yesterday, all my troubles seemed
Member since Oct 2009
9955 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
DJANGO!


NOSTRODAMUS
LSU Fan
Prairieville/Dutchtown
Member since Dec 2003
11658 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
The kid actor was 5 years old and was absolutely incredible.



JabarkusRussell
Member since Jul 2009
9961 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
5? They said he was 10 in the movie.


GrandeBeli
Southern Fan
Bucktown
Member since Jul 2012
820 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
JGL was incredible in it


CP3LSU25
LSU Fan
Lafayette
Member since Feb 2009
36830 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
quote:

JGL was incredible in it


Are you gay?


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
harmonics
Alabama Fan
Mars Hotel
Member since Jan 2010
12249 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
quote:

Gladiator (2000)
quote:

Also terrible



The frick.......


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
NOSTRODAMUS
LSU Fan
Prairieville/Dutchtown
Member since Dec 2003
11658 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
The child actor was 5. The character was 5. She told the dude 10 to throw him off because she wasn't sure if he was the assassin or not.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
CP3LSU25
LSU Fan
Lafayette
Member since Feb 2009
36830 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
quote:

DJANGO!



Replies (0)
Replies (0)
15sammy34
Auburn Fan
Auburn, AL
Member since Oct 2011
15962 posts

re: Looper = Movie of the year
I found it odd that they did the eye drop drug thing for the nearer future, but then seemingly referenced heroin use thirty years after that. Doesn't really have anything to do with the quality of the movie, I just found it interesting that they went futuristic with the drug choice and then to a drug that would have been a couple hundred years old at that point in the future.


Replies (0)
Replies (0)
Page 7 of 8

Back to top

Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram