February 11, 2013


I remember the first time I saw Looper I thought, "Wow. This movie is a lot darker than I expected." There was a certain grim about the movie's presence that was a little disturbing. How does a man kill his future self?  What will be the repercussions of doing so? What will be the consequences of not doing it? What happens next in either scenario? These were the main question that drove the story of Looper, a story about a hired killer who executes people from the future with the invention of time travel. In this case, the powerful tool was used by top crime syndicates to eliminate their enemies. In some instances, Loopers had to kill their future self.

The concept of it was great and the story line created around the concept was even better. At first it seemed like the movie Jumper, the 2008 movie of Hayden Christensen. It had almost the same premise of time/space travelling with people pursuing them. The basic structure of Looper was a little too similar to Jumper but the plot and core elements were different. There was the idea of self-conflict in Looper, a personal dilemma of choosing one's fate, which will inevitably affect the people of the future. The concept of it was intriguing at the very least. It's a constant battle of what the Looper must do next. There's an anticipation of what would happen next. It kept the movie alive and running even during it's down moments. Something was always just waiting to happen.

I have to say though that the idea became a bigger piece of the movie than the actual execution itself. The concept and story was the driving force of the movie for me; the reason I kept watching. While the cinematography and directing were also good, I was just dazzled by the idea behind the whole thing. It wasn't disappointing though. In fact, it was very impressive. The idea was consuming, yes. But the execution of the idea was not a let down. Rian Johnson, the writer and director,  truly grabbed the opportunity to create something exciting and provoking. It made several references to moral dilemmas of doing or not doing certain things. There's been talk about the silver in play and how it references the Biblical character Judas. I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case, as depicted in scenes early on in the movie.

Emily Blunt shone in this movie. She was captivating and relatable. Very human in that subject. Her character, though portrayed as a heroine, had her own faults, and Blunt made sure to showcase those as well. Vulnerable yet tough. That's how I'd describe her performance. The two main guys also delivered. It was thrilling to see both Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon-Levitt battle it out in a survival of the fittest kind of game. Johnson directed these stars perfectly. I guess it's good that the writer also turned out to be its director  to enable him to pursue how he has visualized this movie. He had authority and control, and like a good leader, Johnson brought this film to a success.

**Side note: It was surprising and amazing to see Garret Dillahunt and Piper Perabo in the movie. Just thought I'd include it.

You can follow me on twitter @sirfilmreviewer or email me at mrfilmreviewer@yahoo.com. You can also follow this blog by checking the right side of the page.

No comments:

Post a Comment