• Looper - A scifi action movie staring Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis. As the same person. Fro
    341 replies, posted
He could [sp]kill himself in more comfortable circumstances years later and still have change the timeline in Cid's favour. If Old Joe's existence depends on Young Joe's existence now, then this dependence must continue for as many as 30 years before he can decide to off himself to change everything for the better.[/sp] [editline]20th October 2012[/editline] This isn't to say it didn't make for a better movie for things to turn out the way they did. It could just so happen that there are several timelines and Joes behind the scenes and at least one of them did exactly what you wanted.
This film went with the whole "solid future" type of time travel, where the people who go back in time are instantly affected by the actions of their "past" selves, which really makes no logical sense anyway . By travelling back in time, you effectively enter an alternate universe so your younger self is technically a completely different person. The whole argument is stupid, he [sp]kills himself[/sp] because it's poetic redemption and justice and fucking [I]pathos.[/I]
So uh. What are the vagrant wars?
[QUOTE=Nikota;38117651]So uh. What are the vagrant wars?[/QUOTE] Nebulous backstory to make the world feel like it has history, kind of like what the clone wars were before they were ruined.
Just saw this, I really enjoyed it. As far as the TK goes, [sp]they could've had the same kid, with anger issues like that. Didn't really need things flying around the room and people exploding.[/sp]
you guys saying that if he shot his hand off he would pick up the gun with his other hand and shoot sarah are wrong. In the plot of the movie, he only shot sarah because he thought it would penetrate her and kill the boy, so with the boy clearly gone he would have just like punched her in the face or something and ran after him? Please correct me if I'm a little confused here, I've come to accept the ending for what it was, however I'm not sure the disputing logic of this potential ending is correct with the characters intent.
All in all it was [sp]more a matter of principle, not logic. What matters is the self sacrifice, not the technicalities related to it.[/sp]
[QUOTE=NanoSquid;38119729]Nebulous backstory to make the world feel like it has history, kind of like what the clone wars were before they were ruined.[/QUOTE] There needs to be a prequel involving tons of bums fighting each other.
[sp]When you think about it, it's not even a happy ending. Nothing has changed, that kid is still growing up with his mother just like he was before. He'll still grow up to be a shit. The only difference is he won't be able to fuck up Joes life.[/sp] There's a sort of message there about accepting the past and not trying to change the future. [sp]Maybe Old Joe should have killed the kid... But then again would you kill baby Hitler if you had the chance? I wouldn't. WW2 led to a massive cultural revolution If we go back in time and kill Hitler as a baby none of that would happen when it should.[/sp]. [editline]21st October 2012[/editline] uh fuck this film. It's awesome.
No. The point is [sp]he potentially prevented the kid from becoming evil because he needed his mother to help him control himself. He said he saw a loop and ended it. The loop involved the mother dying and the kid becoming a helpless and angry orphan. The ending was meant to stop the kid from being evil. I know time-travel yadda yadda how did he turn evil in the first place. They just want you to go with it. They also explained how old Joe's memories were more like potential outcomes and were never 100% certain. So maybe it took Joe to turn the original outcome into a new one.[/sp]
I felt stupid as shit because I kept thinking that Sid and Joe were the same. The way Joe talked about not knowing his mothers face and his whole backstory and all.
In the correct sense of time travel where the past affects the future and so forth; Young Joe realising that old Joe killing Sarah causes the Rainmaker to exist would have been enough for old Joe to disappear, since he would already know this information and have no reason to go into the past.
[QUOTE=BlazeFresh;38141102]In the correct sense of time travel where the past affects the future and so forth; Young Joe realising that old Joe killing Sarah causes the Rainmaker to exist would have been enough for old Joe to disappear, since he would already know this information and have no reason to go into the past.[/QUOTE] [sp]Maybe Young Joe sacrificing himself was agreed on as a better ending as opposed to Old Joe going: "You know what? I'm done, this was a bad idea. Sorry guys." and then walking off[/sp] You're still right, though.
[sp]WHen young joe killed old joe in that loop then young joe grows up to be old joe and doesnt get killed can someone fucking explain it.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Lexinator;38184913][sp]WHen young joe killed old joe in that loop then young joe grows up to be old joe and doesnt get killed can someone fucking explain it.[/sp][/QUOTE] that particular happening looped an infinite number of times until that particular old joe decided to break the loop causing the movies events.
[QUOTE=ZF911;38129552]No. The point is [sp]he potentially prevented the kid from becoming evil because he needed his mother to help him control himself. He said he saw a loop and ended it. The loop involved the mother dying and the kid becoming a helpless and angry orphan. The ending was meant to stop the kid from being evil. I know time-travel yadda yadda how did he turn evil in the first place. They just want you to go with it. They also explained how old Joe's memories were more like potential outcomes and were never 100% certain. So maybe it took Joe to turn the original outcome into a new one.[/sp][/QUOTE] But he hasn't really changed anything. [sp]The original Rainmaker that started closing all the loops never had his mum killed by Joe so he was probably not an angry orphan in the first place. The only difference is the money that Joe left but that doesn't necessarily mean he wouldn't turn into an asshole anyway.[/sp]
Like I said it's [sp]time-travel complications they don't want you to think too hard about. Remember Old Joe said his memories were only possibilities for the future. In the past loop, a number of things could have happened to cause the Rainmaker's mom to die or leave.[/sp]
I finally got off my ass and saw this. What an excellent movie. Once in a while Hollywood actually does spit out something that isn't a shit sequel, prequel, or remake. Loved it when [sp]old Joe went all Rambo and slaughtered everyone. Did not see that coming.[/sp]
still dont get why every badguy used the gats (the bigass 6 guns) yet they clearly had a sizable arsonal of semi-auto and automatic weaponry that worked alot better inside and in close quarters, did any1 else think the blunderbuss was a singleshot until [sp] the part where he unloaded like 20 shots into the pavement [/sp] the movie itself seemed to work exactly like how joe explained time travel, [sp] as the movie went on, more and more irregularities and problems popped up, such as how joe's friend escaped, and he somehow kept going on with missing limbs, because without any appendages, how would he have run from his past self in the first place? just seems like the mob has no respect for relativity. I think honestly for things to make sense though, you need to think that old joe was from a parallel reality, startrek TNG did something like this one episode, where they ended up redoing everything until things finally went right [/sp] the TK mutation seemed rather mundane though, seems like one could find many more uses for it than just lifting a coin... like say uncocking a hammer on a gun when its pointed at your face? or tripping a safety on said gun... or deflecting said gun........., or even just making the guy's hand twitch................or simply bending the fireing pin................................................... that being said, being able to put my hand out and have a diet coke float over to it would be awsome
[QUOTE=Sableye;38216519] the TK mutation seemed rather mundane though, seems like one could find many more uses for it than just lifting a coin... like say uncocking a hammer on a gun when its pointed at your face? or tripping a safety on said gun... or deflecting said gun........., or even just making the guy's hand twitch................or simply bending the fireing pin................................................... [/QUOTE] That's the whole point - TK is so pathetically weak in most people that they're only capable of using it for parlour tricks.
I would have liked it far more if they left out the whole TK stuff and the rainmaker was just a genius who used time travel to control all the syndicates by being a genius and stuff.
rejoice, for i have finally seen this movie! totally awesome, my one question is [sp]elder Joe: exactly how does he come to exist? at first, he appears, knocks out young Joe and disappears. then all of a sudden, what i assume to be the next day, young Joe goes through with the kill and elder Joe is created, allowing the first scenario to be created. was this a clash of alternate realities? also too lazy to read through the thread to find an answer, if someone can answer that'd be great.[/sp]
no dude it was the same scene but it was bruce willis' outcome that's why it showed him going back in time to the exact scene where he knocks out JGL its not the next day wtf that make no sense [editline]2nd November 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Robber;38291851]I would have liked it far more if they left out the whole TK stuff and the rainmaker was just a genius who used time travel to control all the syndicates by being a genius and stuff.[/QUOTE] I thought it was a lot more effective for him to be a super genius and insanely powerful to boot when joe shoots him in the mouth and he just gets up and glares at him, shit is terrifying
[QUOTE=Robber;38291851]I would have liked it far more if they left out the whole TK stuff and the rainmaker was just a genius who used time travel to control all the syndicates by being a genius and stuff.[/QUOTE] But then Cid would just be a kid with nothing special about him, and it'd get kinda boring.
[QUOTE=Pops;38292067]what i assume to be the next day[/QUOTE] lol are you actually serious f- for comprehension
If that had been the next day the entire movie would make absolutely no sense. I thought that whole sequence was fantastically done though. The way it loops back onto itself, then shows what happened all in the one shot.
[QUOTE=Itachi_Crow;38292271]I thought it was a lot more effective for him to be a super genius and insanely powerful to boot when joe shoots him in the mouth and he just gets up and glares at him, shit is terrifying[/QUOTE] But it was strictly (soft) science fiction. Why introduce magic just for one or two scenes? It completely changes everything we think about the universe the movie plays in.
idk I don't feel it took away from anything at all and it wasn't any more magic than fucking time travel
Great movie, watched it a few weeks ago. The ending was a bit too much for everyone in the theater who watched it, when it ended there was just utter silence. 9/10
every single time I saw this movie some faggot was like "OH WOW BULLSHIT" when it ended people around here hate it if there's no epilogue I don't understand
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.