If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Film.com)   'Looper' explained in an Infographic   (film.com) divider line 79
    More: Amusing, love child, kingpins  
•       •       •

8936 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 04 Oct 2012 at 10:37 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



79 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-04 10:18:34 AM
It wasn't so complicated as to need one.
 
2012-10-04 10:41:02 AM
***SPOILERS***

The film left it ambiguous as to whether Sara's influence was going to be enough to prevent Cid from becoming a violent adult. The audience doesn't know because Joe isn't alive to see the result of his actions. Just putting Sara and a well-adjusted Cid at the end of the third timeline misses one of the major themes in the movie--his future is still cloudy, and we have no idea whether Joe's sacrifice was worth it.
 
2012-10-04 10:46:05 AM

Forty-Two: ***SPOILERS***

The film left it ambiguous as to whether Sara's influence was going to be enough to prevent Cid from becoming a violent adult. The audience doesn't know because Joe isn't alive to see the result of his actions. Just putting Sara and a well-adjusted Cid at the end of the third timeline misses one of the major themes in the movie--his future is still cloudy, and we have no idea whether Joe's sacrifice was worth it.


MORE SPOILERS:

Also, when Old Joe is zapped back and killed the first time around, presumably he wasn't the cause of Cid's becoming the anti-Christ, right? Something else contributed. So what's to say Young Joe's sacrifice was wasted? I imagine we are meant to believe that nurture wins out just because the alternative makes for a very bleak ending....
 
2012-10-04 10:52:13 AM
...you know, a caddy, a looper, a jock.
 
2012-10-04 11:06:24 AM

Purple_Paramecium: Also, when Old Joe is zapped back and killed the first time around, presumably he wasn't the cause of Cid's becoming the anti-Christ, right? Something else contributed.


Correct. Something else, probably in the vein of Cid having trouble dealing with many things that happened both before and after his encounter with Joe.

So what's to say Young Joe's sacrifice was wasted? I imagine we are meant to believe that nurture wins out just because the alternative makes for a very bleak ending....

Not sure how that statement follows the first, as whether Joe's sacrifice was wasted or not isn't known by the end. We can't assume it was, just as we can't assume it wasn't. It's left to the viewer to figure out a possible outcome. I think that if you believe that we are "meant" to believe that nurture wins out, that you have overstepped what the filmmakers were trying to give us.
 
2012-10-04 11:07:12 AM
*SPOILER*

Ok, so I don't see why the Rainmaker is bad. Maybe I was too drunk when I watched it, but I thought the Rainmaker only killed Loopers?
 
2012-10-04 11:11:43 AM
What a great movie. Saw it last night. I'd put it at movie of the year, over even The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises. Sure, there are bound to be plot niggles with time travel, but it had so much other stuff going for it too - great worldbuilding, atmosphere, acting, etc. Definitely one I will watch again (and probably again).
 
2012-10-04 11:11:54 AM
MORE SPOILERS

Bruce Willis is left handed, but Joseph Gordon-Levitt is not.
 
2012-10-04 11:13:32 AM

Samwise Gamgee: What a great movie. Saw it last night. I'd put it at movie of the year, over even The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises. Sure, there are bound to be plot niggles with time travel, but it had so much other stuff going for it too - great worldbuilding, atmosphere, acting, etc. Definitely one I will watch again (and probably again).


Lets not go crazy here. Cabin in the Woods is still the best movie of the year.
 
2012-10-04 11:15:59 AM
*SPOILER*

Kansas looks a lot better 62 years from now.

/really good movie though. If you haven't already, watch Brick on netflix streaming. Not time travel, but same director and JGL doing film noire in a highschool
 
2012-10-04 11:18:29 AM

the money is in the banana stand: *SPOILER*

Ok, so I don't see why the Rainmaker is bad. Maybe I was too drunk when I watched it, but I thought the Rainmaker only killed Loopers?


And anyone else who crosses him. That is why he is called an unholy terror I guess. That he took over several cities single handily and eliminated everyone who got in his way while trying to keep himself safe in a psychotic type of way.

Or another typical Bruce Willis time travel flick where we seen it done before many times over.
 
2012-10-04 11:21:21 AM
qph.cf.quoracdn.net

/amateurs. 
//link to bigger
 
2012-10-04 11:25:26 AM

The All-Powerful Atheismo: [qph.cf.quoracdn.net image 485x303]

/amateurs. 
//link to bigger


First thing I thought of, as well.

Now, there's a movie you need to watch a few times before understanding it
 
2012-10-04 11:28:39 AM
But does Bruce Willis have a dog?
 
2012-10-04 11:31:49 AM
I never got why Joe B (to use this graphic's terminology) had a different outcome than Joe A. If it was a Loop, why was Joe A able to be sent back and killed by Joe B, but Joe B decided to fight back against Joe C? Theoretically Joe A had also already killed a previous Joe in his past, so he knew the end result and was able to be captured and sent back anyway.. Did Joe A never meet the Chinese woman and fall in love? And why not?

Also yeah, the Rainmaker Cid that killed Joe B's Chinese wife would have existed in a world where Joe A never came back and killed Cid's mother, and Joe B never stepped foot on his farm. What would he have against Loopers? The infographic just assumes the mother dies in the A timeline but never really explains how.
 
2012-10-04 11:33:39 AM

Hoboclown: I never got why Joe B (to use this graphic's terminology) had a different outcome than Joe A. If it was a Loop, why was Joe A able to be sent back and killed by Joe B, but Joe B decided to fight back against Joe C? Theoretically Joe A had also already killed a previous Joe in his past, so he knew the end result and was able to be captured and sent back anyway.. Did Joe A never meet the Chinese woman and fall in love? And why not?

Also yeah, the Rainmaker Cid that killed Joe B's Chinese wife would have existed in a world where Joe A never came back and killed Cid's mother, and Joe B never stepped foot on his farm. What would he have against Loopers? The infographic just assumes the mother dies in the A timeline but never really explains how.


www.sanjosedublin.org

I hate temporal mechanics.
 
2012-10-04 11:38:10 AM
* Spoilers *

This movie kinda mixes it's time travel models here. Usually sci-fi goes with parallel time streams, time stream splits or a single time stream.

The first two are used to avoid the standard paradox of going back in time and killing your father. You are either going into a different stream so you still were alive in your stream to go back or your change caused a timestream split ... the original time stream exists where you were born but a new one is created where you were never born.

The problem here is that, for most things in the movie, they are going with the single time stream model ... changes in the stream are instantly reflected - cutting off limbs, scaring, changes to memory (to a degree). But, the moment that Old Joe is not terminated, Young Joe's life should have been radically changed. The chance of him ever meeting the asian wife drop to near zero so, in the single stream model, Old Joe's motivations fade away. Then the plot of the movie fades away.

Don't get me wrong ... loved the movie.

I think they could have changed the plot and avoided the issue (OJ = old Joe, YJ = young Joe):
- for the future to work out like OJ wanted, YJ needs to close his loop and get his golden payday and therefore live the same life
- so OJ should have looped back with a plan: work out deal with YJ to play both sides, work with Jeff Daniels to get OJ (but secretly give OJ enough time to complete mission), kill OJ and get golden payday (i.e. OJ is willing to sacrifice himself to preserve his wife's future (except she survives because of his mission to eliminate kid)), live life as OJ did except wife lives
- then the plot returns to the movie's plot because YJ bails on the plan when he finds out secret mission is to kill a kid (and that it causes the problem in the first place)

Still has problems but I think it is a bit more consistent than the movie version
 
2012-10-04 11:39:21 AM
 
2012-10-04 11:39:47 AM

bulldg4life: The All-Powerful Atheismo: [qph.cf.quoracdn.net image 485x303]

/amateurs. 
//link to bigger

First thing I thought of, as well.

Now, there's a movie you need to watch a few times before understanding it


I believe the Primer guy was a consultant on this movie.

/I assume that graphic was for Primer
 
2012-10-04 11:46:10 AM

DamnYankees: Samwise Gamgee: What a great movie. Saw it last night. I'd put it at movie of the year, over even The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises. Sure, there are bound to be plot niggles with time travel, but it had so much other stuff going for it too - great worldbuilding, atmosphere, acting, etc. Definitely one I will watch again (and probably again).

Lets not go crazy here. Cabin in the Woods is still the best movie of the year.


I have to say that I can't argue. I loved it as well. I guess I should refine my statement to say that Looper is the best action blockbuster-type film of the year. We'll see how good Skyfall is next month...
 
2012-10-04 11:47:20 AM

Samwise Gamgee: DamnYankees: Samwise Gamgee: What a great movie. Saw it last night. I'd put it at movie of the year, over even The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises. Sure, there are bound to be plot niggles with time travel, but it had so much other stuff going for it too - great worldbuilding, atmosphere, acting, etc. Definitely one I will watch again (and probably again).

Lets not go crazy here. Cabin in the Woods is still the best movie of the year.

I have to say that I can't argue. I loved it as well. I guess I should refine my statement to say that Looper is the best action blockbuster-type film of the year. We'll see how good Skyfall is next month...


I still think its only third best - both The Avengers and TDKR are better. This has been a good year for movies so far, and the fall looks absolutely tremendous.
 
2012-10-04 11:47:21 AM
Pooper (NSFWish)
 
2012-10-04 11:47:39 AM

The All-Powerful Atheismo: [qph.cf.quoracdn.net image 485x303]

/amateurs. 
//link to bigger


Came looking for a primer reference.

leaving satisfied
 
2012-10-04 11:50:30 AM

Hoboclown: I never got why Joe B (to use this graphic's terminology) had a different outcome than Joe A. If it was a Loop, why was Joe A able to be sent back and killed by Joe B, but Joe B decided to fight back against Joe C? Theoretically Joe A had also already killed a previous Joe in his past, so he knew the end result and was able to be captured and sent back anyway.. Did Joe A never meet the Chinese woman and fall in love? And why not?

Also yeah, the Rainmaker Cid that killed Joe B's Chinese wife would have existed in a world where Joe A never came back and killed Cid's mother, and Joe B never stepped foot on his farm. What would he have against Loopers? The infographic just assumes the mother dies in the A timeline but never really explains how.


I believe it was Seth's actions that led to the timeline diverging.

Joe lives his life, goes to France. In 30 years, he is sent back to be killed by himself. This would have happened in a loop if it were not for Seth...

Seth's escape led to Abe interrogating Joe. In this interrogation, he advises Joe to go to China instead of France. Joe takes this advice, meets his future wife... sees her killed, and therefore is motivated to escape so he can alter the past and save her life. This broke the loop.
 
2012-10-04 11:51:15 AM

Purple_Paramecium: Forty-Two: ***SPOILERS***

The film left it ambiguous as to whether Sara's influence was going to be enough to prevent Cid from becoming a violent adult. The audience doesn't know because Joe isn't alive to see the result of his actions. Just putting Sara and a well-adjusted Cid at the end of the third timeline misses one of the major themes in the movie--his future is still cloudy, and we have no idea whether Joe's sacrifice was worth it.

MORE SPOILERS:

Also, when Old Joe is zapped back and killed the first time around, presumably he wasn't the cause of Cid's becoming the anti-Christ, right? Something else contributed. So what's to say Young Joe's sacrifice was wasted? I imagine we are meant to believe that nurture wins out just because the alternative makes for a very bleak ending....


My thoughts are that they deal with the time travel paradox inherent in the ending by showing ld Joe going back three times. He intermittently is killed and escapes. When he escapes it causes him to be killed on the next iteration, when he is killed it causes him to escape... etc. Hence seeing him go back three times and die twice and escape twice, sorta....
 
2012-10-04 11:51:44 AM
Hoboclown: I never got why Joe B (to use this graphic's terminology) had a different outcome than Joe A. If it was a Loop, why was Joe A able to be sent back and killed by Joe B, but Joe B decided to fight back against Joe C? Theoretically Joe A had also already killed a previous Joe in his past, so he knew the end result and was able to be captured and sent back anyway.. Did Joe A never meet the Chinese woman and fall in love? And why not?

The future is changed because of the time travel. Every time the time travel occurs the future is rewritten although it may be only imperceptible at first. Clearly one of the thousands of cases of time travel between Old Joe being killed and Old Joe being sent back changed the fate of Joe A into Joe B. It might not even have had anything to do Joe or the Rainmaker.

Also yeah, the Rainmaker Cid that killed Joe B's Chinese wife would have existed in a world where Joe A never came back and killed Cid's mother, and Joe B never stepped foot on his farm. What would he have against Loopers? The infographic just assumes the mother dies in the A timeline but never really explains how.

I didn't think he had anything against loopers it just that when you're the guy in charge time travel does nothing but endanger your stranglehold on power. The rainmaker couldn't just shoot the old loopers because that would create paradoxes, so he tried to close all the loops. And yea, we don't know what happened to Mom in timeline A.
 
2012-10-04 11:53:05 AM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: The All-Powerful Atheismo: [qph.cf.quoracdn.net image 485x303]

/amateurs. 
//link to bigger

Came looking for a primer reference.

leaving satisfied


Was it good for you too?
 
2012-10-04 11:53:13 AM

Hoboclown: I never got why Joe B (to use this graphic's terminology) had a different outcome than Joe A. If it was a Loop, why was Joe A able to be sent back and killed by Joe B, but Joe B decided to fight back against Joe C? Theoretically Joe A had also already killed a previous Joe in his past, so he knew the end result and was able to be captured and sent back anyway.. Did Joe A never meet the Chinese woman and fall in love? And why not?


Timeline B can be assumed as the first time line in which time travel effects frrom the time travel of Timeline A effect it. Say Timeline A is the first time Bruce willis killed his former self and its the first time he got the golden pay day (as in there is a zeroth timeline). That could effect the outcome of the next timeline.
 
2012-10-04 11:53:52 AM

busy chillin': ...you know, a caddy, a looper, a jock.


My first thought. I was wondering why it even need to be explained.
 
2012-10-04 11:55:52 AM

DamnYankees: This has been a good year for movies so far, and the fall looks absolutely tremendous.


Can't farking wait for The Hobbit
 
2012-10-04 11:59:12 AM

The All-Powerful Atheismo: DamnYankees: This has been a good year for movies so far, and the fall looks absolutely tremendous.

Can't farking wait for The Hobbit


Argo
Seven Psychopaths
Cloud Atlas
Skyfall
Flight
Lincoln
Anna Karenina
Life of Pi
Killing Them Softly
The Hobbit
Zero Dark Thirty
Django Unchained
Les Miserables

Some of those may stink, but a couple will be brilliant and the rest should be very good.
 
2012-10-04 12:06:16 PM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Hoboclown: I never got why Joe B (to use this graphic's terminology) had a different outcome than Joe A. If it was a Loop, why was Joe A able to be sent back and killed by Joe B, but Joe B decided to fight back against Joe C? Theoretically Joe A had also already killed a previous Joe in his past, so he knew the end result and was able to be captured and sent back anyway.. Did Joe A never meet the Chinese woman and fall in love? And why not?

The future is changed because of the time travel. Every time the time travel occurs the future is rewritten although it may be only imperceptible at first. Clearly one of the thousands of cases of time travel between Old Joe being killed and Old Joe being sent back changed the fate of Joe A into Joe B. It might not even have had anything to do Joe or the Rainmaker.

Also yeah, the Rainmaker Cid that killed Joe B's Chinese wife would have existed in a world where Joe A never came back and killed Cid's mother, and Joe B never stepped foot on his farm. What would he have against Loopers? The infographic just assumes the mother dies in the A timeline but never really explains how.

I didn't think he had anything against loopers it just that when you're the guy in charge time travel does nothing but endanger your stranglehold on power. The rainmaker couldn't just shoot the old loopers because that would create paradoxes, so he tried to close all the loops. And yea, we don't know what happened to Mom in timeline A.


Just my $0.02, but I had assumed that he saw his mother killed and and his jaw was blown off (as Old Joe told the story to Young Joe). Maybe it was someone else who killed her and wounded him, and that caused his rise to power. Old Joe was on his way to fulfilling that early. Young Joe prevented that from happening, and at the end we see that Young Joe's silver was spilled when the truck was knocked over. I would assume that Sarah was smart enough to take the silver and use that to keep her and Cid safe and to help nurture him and raise him to control his power and use it for good. Maybe turning him into a new Messiah type, or at least using his powers for good insteand of evil.
 
2012-10-04 12:07:10 PM

the money is in the banana stand: *SPOILER*

Ok, so I don't see why the Rainmaker is bad. Maybe I was too drunk when I watched it, but I thought the Rainmaker only killed Loopers?


SPOILERS

Which made the ending make no damn sense at all.

It wasn't like Joe was concerned for the other Loopers - he sold out his buddy awful quick. So it could be said that he was trying to saving himself, but that made no sense because of what he did at the end. So all that leaves is that he was just trying to give the kid a chance at a better life.

This explanation would make more sense if (A) we saw just how evil this kid became in the original timeline, and (B) we saw what happened to him in the new timeline.

This is the problem with time-travel movies that play with paradoxes: they never get satisfactorily resolved, as there are multiple loose ends. What of the first kid Old Joe offed?
 
2012-10-04 12:08:18 PM

Samwise Gamgee: I believe it was Seth's actions that led to the timeline diverging.

Joe lives his life, goes to France. In 30 years, he is sent back to be killed by himself. This would have happened in a loop if it were not for Seth...

Seth's escape led to Abe interrogating Joe. In this interrogation, he advises Joe to go to China instead of France. Joe takes this advice, meets his future wife... sees her killed, and therefore is motivated to escape so he can alter the past and save her life. This broke the loop.


I'm pretty sure it was Joe C we see getting the France/China speech from Abe, so it wouldn't affect how Joe B lived his life. I just figured that meant some major disaster is in store for France that Abe knows about (being from the future), so he advises Joe C to learn Mandarin instead of French. I assumed this same eventual disaster is how Joe B ended up going to China.

To The Escape Zeppelin!: I didn't think he had anything against loopers it just that when you're the guy in charge time travel does nothing but endanger your stranglehold on power. The rainmaker couldn't just shoot the old loopers because that would create paradoxes, so he tried to close all the loops. And yea, we don't know what happened to Mom in timeline A.


Yeah but Joe B makes some comment about how he heard Rainmaker had a jaw made out of steel or something, and had seen his mother killed right in front of him. Those are both a result of Joes B and C coming to his farm, neither of which happened in Timeline B.
 
2012-10-04 12:11:03 PM

DamnYankees: Samwise Gamgee: What a great movie. Saw it last night. I'd put it at movie of the year, over even The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises. Sure, there are bound to be plot niggles with time travel, but it had so much other stuff going for it too - great worldbuilding, atmosphere, acting, etc. Definitely one I will watch again (and probably again).

Lets not go crazy here. Cabin in the Woods is still the best movie of the year.


This.
 
2012-10-04 12:15:10 PM

the money is in the banana stand: *SPOILER*

Ok, so I don't see why the Rainmaker is bad. Maybe I was too drunk when I watched it, but I thought the Rainmaker only killed Loopers?


His goons killed Joe's wife, and Joe was mad about that. Apparently mad enough to kill 3 children, which I thought was ridiculous.
 
2012-10-04 12:17:44 PM
SPOILERS


You have to figure that the Seth-as-Rainmaker plot is going to be a little derailed by the giant truckload of gold bars that Momma ended up with....
 
2012-10-04 12:18:24 PM

Starhawk: SPOILERS


You have to figure that the Seth-as-Rainmaker plot is going to be a little derailed by the giant truckload of gold bars that Momma ended up with....


er, not Seth. the little kid. whose name has suddenly escaped me.

/oops.
 
2012-10-04 12:20:31 PM

Starhawk: Starhawk: SPOILERS


You have to figure that the Seth-as-Rainmaker plot is going to be a little derailed by the giant truckload of gold bars that Momma ended up with....

er, not Seth. the little kid. whose name has suddenly escaped me.

/oops.


Cid.
 
2012-10-04 12:30:41 PM
All I know is, they picked the lame ending. That movie had such potential for a great ending, and they went with the lame ending.
 
2012-10-04 12:34:55 PM

basemetal: All I know is, they picked the lame ending. That movie had such potential for a great ending, and they went with the lame ending.


enlighten us
 
2012-10-04 12:44:28 PM

dj_spanmaster: MORE SPOILERS

Bruce Willis is left handed, but Joseph Gordon-Levitt is not.


This. Seems like a pretty big oversight for someone who spent 3 hrs in the makeup chair everyday look like a young Brucie.
 
2012-10-04 12:52:04 PM

moothemagiccow: basemetal: All I know is, they picked the lame ending. That movie had such potential for a great ending, and they went with the lame ending.

enlighten us


Everybody live happily ever after by killing yourself? It's too obvious, sterile and boring. It's the kind of ending soccer moms voted for in their screenings and focus groups.
 
2012-10-04 12:56:53 PM

basemetal: Everybody live happily ever after by killing yourself? It's too obvious, sterile and boring. It's the kind of ending soccer moms voted for in their screenings and focus groups.


You can see it that way, but there was a large character struggle going on there. I talked with the person I watched it with and we thought that was the pivotal decision in the movie. The built up the idea that young Joe was selfish and wanted his life and what was his. At the end he saw that the love he gets will be lost no matter what, his life ends no matter what, and that bad things happen unless he makes the sacrifice.

The super happy test screen ending would of had him, emily blunt, and cid counting gold and silver bars and moving to France.
 
2012-10-04 01:02:59 PM
I'm sure its an interesting infograph... and I'll look at it sometime in the future.

/bookmarking since we're going to see the movie soon
 
2012-10-04 01:07:00 PM

basemetal: moothemagiccow: basemetal: All I know is, they picked the lame ending. That movie had such potential for a great ending, and they went with the lame ending.

enlighten us

Everybody live happily ever after by killing yourself? It's too obvious, sterile and boring. It's the kind of ending soccer moms voted for in their screenings and focus groups.


I mean tell us your great ending that you can't think of
 
2012-10-04 01:11:28 PM
Rainmaker sounds like the second coming of Wyatt Halliwell. Shrug.
 
2012-10-04 01:12:27 PM

DamnYankees: The All-Powerful Atheismo: DamnYankees: This has been a good year for movies so far, and the fall looks absolutely tremendous.

Can't farking wait for The Hobbit

Argo
Seven Psychopaths
Cloud Atlas
Skyfall
Flight
Lincoln
Anna Karenina
Life of Pi
Killing Them Softly
The Hobbit
Zero Dark Thirty
Django Unchained
Les Miserables

Some of those may stink, but a couple will be brilliant and the rest should be very good.


Argo is good.

Seven Psychopaths is a mess of a movie but great actors onscreen doing their thing ... so worth a watch.

Cloud Atlas is a boring hunk of crap. Something like 8 different stories, most not interesting, cut back and forth between all of them without rhyme or reason, tied together by the fact that the same actors are reused in each story more than any actual plot reasoning. Save yourself 3 hours and $12 and skip this one.
 
2012-10-04 01:17:28 PM
tiretownsulphursprings.com
 
2012-10-04 01:19:00 PM

Farking Canuck: Cloud Atlas is a boring hunk of crap. Something like 8 different stories, most not interesting, cut back and forth between all of them without rhyme or reason, tied together by the fact that the same actors are reused in each story more than any actual plot reasoning. Save yourself 3 hours and $12 and skip this one.


Wait, did you see it? I thought it wasn't out for another 2 or so weeks.

/can't wait for argo
 
Displayed 50 of 79 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report