Joseph Gordon-Levitt (with a brand new Bruce Willis nose) and Bruce Willis (with his existing Bruce Willis nose) in "Looper." |
"Looper" was great. You should go see it.
I mean, unless you're a small child or something. If you're a small child, don't go see "Looper," you'd find it disturbing. Also, stop reading my blog, it contains bad words that are only intended for grownups.
Finally, we have a time travel movie that's smart enough to stop wanking about the deep paradoxical ramifications of what it would mean if you could go and become your own damn grandfather or something, and instead recognizes that time travel, among other things, is a plot device that can be used well or poorly. "Looper" uses it well. The rules are clearly explained, and then they end up being important in terms of difficult choices the characters must make. Butterflies flapping their wings and setting in motion cascades of events that alter the course of human history are not mentioned, because who gives a shit, really?
So it's 2044, and time travel hasn't been invented yet but it will be soon. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a looper, which means that organized criminals in the near future send victims back through time to a prearranged location where he's waiting with a gun. He shoots them and disposes of the bodies. Nobody in the present is looking for them, and nobody in the future can find them. The victims arrive hooded and unrecognizable, with the looper's pay strapped to them in the form of silver bars. The hood is important because eventually the victim will be an older version of the looper himself, loaded up with a big final payday in gold instead of silver. By shooting himself, in the terminology of the movie, the looper "closes his loop." After that, he's rich and he has thirty years until the mob finds him and sends him back to be executed by himself. Why send loopers to themselves? There are several possible answers to this question and one is that it makes quite an interesting premise for a movie.