User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1012 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Dec 9, 2012
    What an original and masterful sci fi film, the kind We've been waiting for for ages, maybe since Twelve Monkeys. Great to see Willis on form here and nailing the action genre again. From the second you start watching it you're thinking 'timeless classic.' Stick this one in the sci fi cannon without a doubt, open the gates and real her in. Prometheus is nothing compared to this. Brilliantly woven plot, great pacing, always exciting. Might be a while before we get another treat like this Expand
  2. Dec 1, 2012
    Good movie, coherent, plot-twisting, and with well written characters. This said, I thought there would be more science fiction and a little more broader view. It made me think of "12 Monkeys", which had the same scale: one city, max. 10 depicted characters, and surprising ending. To sum up, very engaging, despite the flaws.
  3. Dec 1, 2012
    Excellent movie. The cast is fantastic, Joseph Gordon-Levitt especially and the story is a real mind twister. I liked how the future is shown almost similar to the present with only details showing us that not everything is the same. However it takes some time to tie all threads into one, but once you get the point than the story fully mesmerizes you. I was also surprised with the force little Pierce Gagnon played his very demanding part.
    Finally, this movie should not be watched if you are not fully concentrated on it, as the details can slip quite easily.
    Highly recommendable.
  4. Nov 30, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What a film. I did not expect this to be as good as it was. This is not a film for lovers of light-hearted films: it is a very dark one-of-a-kind experience. The problem is that I'm writing this review quite a long time after having seen the film; so I apologize for anything that I put wrong or not quite right. This is not a film about time travel as such; as time travel has been invented in the future, and it is used to send criminals back in time to be exterminated, when upon yourself arrives to be exterminated, you must do so, or you will suffer the consequences (as someone did in a very gruesome way during the opening of the movie). That is the premise of the plot in its simplest form. When (I forget the main character's name, sorry) arrives to be killed by himself, all hell breaks loose. The complicated (yet simple) storyline is handled masterfully, not leading to any confusing moments during the whole run-time of the picture. The acting is also ace, Bruce Willis providing everything you'd want from him in role such as this, and Joseph Gordon Levitt being the perfect anti-hero. The camerawork is mind-boggingly fantastic, although perhaps a tad hard to watch at times. This is a dark, unnerving sci-fi film that provides a very smart, witty and surprise of a gem that I don't think anyone was expecting. Not for kids, Looper wins the award of the most surprising film of the year (in a great way). 92/100. Expand
  5. Nov 22, 2012
    Tried to read some negative reviews, and is it a joke? "This movie is bad, because this scene is bad, plot is bad, acting is poor, actors are awful... blah-blah-blah". Are you all 15-years old? The only thing I didn't like, is that plot is a bit dense for 2 hours, looks like writer had too many things to discuss and had to make it short..
  6. Nov 20, 2012
    If you're looking for something thrilling yet thought provoking, go no further, Looper has arrived. Rian Johnson's Looper is a bold, wholly original genre film that delves into the fabric of time travel like you hardly get see these days. The high concept story line of a man's future-self on the loose after failing to 'get rid of him' is only the tip of the iceberg. Whats left is a dizzying tale of crime, time alteration and most interestingly, parenthood, that twists and turns the audience like an intelligent thriller should. The deceptive direction may not satisfy all, but it kept the intrigue on high.The principal cast was very good, and it's also good to see Bruce Willis on form this year. Filmed with much style and edited with clockwork precision; I highly recommend this to movie-goers. Expand
  7. Nov 19, 2012
    Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis are gripping in the movie Looper.
  8. Nov 17, 2012
    Looper was a disappointing film that, having promised so much in its trailer, did not satisfy in both its uncompelling storyline, cliched acting and futuristic (borderline annoying) cinematography.
  9. Nov 16, 2012
    Pretty good, but not as good as I thought. I thought this was going to be some futuristic science fiction movie, but it barely classifies as this. The acting and characters are good, my main issue though is the plot. I was expecting a bind boggling journey into 2 futures, instead half the movie just takes place on a farm. There is less to do with science/future here, and more to do with magic. Yes, magic....and this is where the movie falls flat. There is this child called the rainmaker who has a telekenetic ability to manipulate gravity or something....essentially he can kill people with his thoughts. Its not so much I have an issue with that the story focuses too heavily on this kids magic abilities rather than the science/future/time travel aspect...the problem lies with that the movie doesnt bother to explain how or why this magic is possible. It also shows a brief portion in the future, where it appears that this future child rainmaker is killing a bunch of people and destroying a city...I wanted so bad to see that and have it be part of the movie! So half of the movie's cool futurustic, post depression society, and time traveling complexes ideas are stolen by this little boy and his magic abilities. Nothing is done to explain why this kid has magic abilities, and right when you think that this focus is going to pay off(by showing the kid in the future, destroying a city and killing millions of people), it just shows someone reading a number(boys birthdate) to Bruce Willis for no reason before he dies....Well it just happens bruce willis goes back in time so he can kill this boy, but the reader of the number didnt know that....and this is where this movie suffers in scenes like fails to explain or identify reasons, which is usually fine, but in this movie YOU really want to know the reasons. Overall You are left dissapointed and wanting more from only certain segments of the movie. It sucks you in by building suspense to show something spectacular are cool, but it only follows through half the time. It is a good movie, it is just that if certain ideas or scenes were extended or elaborated upon this would have been a perfect movie.

    Pros = Kinda futuristic, good acting, memorable characters, cool locations
    Cons = Plot holes, failure to explain/elaborate upon ideas, focus on magic instead of science, Boring futuristic art direction.
  10. Nov 16, 2012
    Okay, to be honest, "Looper" has earned the medal for the great plot and innovative ideas. The only thing that was not right was the action and bad guys' motivations. I see that the movie has its meaning, and it is really good, very interesting to see; however, the action was not quite as I was hoping it to be. Moreover, if the bad old dude that trained Joe got killed pretty easy... But still, there's a reason for that and I understand: the movie just simply circles around Joseph and Willis and the boy (the "Rain Maker"). In short, the movie is a lil' bit overrated when talking about the action aspect, but it deserves a 5-star rating over the meaning. Good movie. Expand
  11. Nov 16, 2012
    This is a thrill ride and a joy to watch up to the end. It keeps you glued to your chair the whole time until the plot unfolds and a shocking end reveals itself!!!!
  12. Nov 16, 2012
    Top of the line popcorn entertainment. Acting is good, plot holds a few surprises and most importantly the pace of the movie keeps you from looking at errors in the plotline due to the element of timetravel.
  13. Nov 14, 2012
    Pretty cool little movie. Most importantly it doesn't try to be anything its not. Its not really philosophical, its not not even overloaded on special effects. Its a story, a real good story with decent acting. In the end it was entertaining, which is exactly why I go to movies. One note, this movie gets extra points because it has Jeff Daniels as a bad guy...very cool.
  14. Nov 13, 2012
    Looper seems to suffer from over-expectation, going by some reviews. Heavily pushed as the "new matrix", I struggled to find the similarity to the Keanu Action-blockbuster. Sure, Looper is a high-concept movie but its much smaller in scale and focus - and all the better for it. There's action but its quite spaced out and rarely the showstopper that a film like the Matrix would require. Instead we get a very good turn from JGL playing his character like a young Bruce Willis. When it works, its fantastic although sometimes the eyebrows seemed a bit too much. Willis himself is great as the reluctant assassin and the two play off each other well in their scene together. The rest of the cast work well, although I would have liked a bit more of Jeff Daniels. But sometimes its better to be left wanting more. Overall though, Looper is a nice bit of sci-fi but not the picture some will be expecting. The script can feel a little clunky but its got enough nuance to carry through to the ending which, while some hated it, I quite enjoyed. Expand
  15. Nov 10, 2012
    Anyone that has not seen this movie yet, you need to see it. This movie is an instant classic. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is amazing in it. This movie will really f**k with your mind if you like that s**t. I really rec amend this movie to everyone.
  16. Nov 10, 2012
    Pretty good Sci-Fi time travel flick in the vein of 'Twelve Monkeys', starring Bruce Willis. Joseph Gordon Levitt is great here as usual, but I found the film a bit over-rated. If you've seen a lot of these time travel stuffs, you know where it's heading, and the whole film is practically a set up for the ending.
  17. Nov 10, 2012
    This is one of the best movies this year along with a few others. It is very dark and evil especially all the children, the rainmaker and Bruce Willis character killing the children. I enjoyed the movie but some people might find it confusing, if you get most confusing movie then you will get this but if you don`t you won`t. Its a great movie and i would recommend it to anyone.
  18. Nov 9, 2012
    Slightly Interesting story - a bit confused at times mixing too much diverse sci-fi into the same story. Good acting and direction. HORRIBLE violence -- its way to excessive and gory at times and un-necessarily so. It makes Tarentino look like a sissy. And that's not easy to do, neither is it a good thing to achieve.
  19. Nov 7, 2012
    Well... What to say... I think they really tried to make an intelligent movie but they kind of fail. That's too bad because the idea wasn't bad but too many things are out of place. The actors, they're not bad but not really good either, none of them is really engaging.
    I'd say go see this movie if you don't think too much and you are a bit bored because still the action scenes are not that bad.
  20. Nov 7, 2012
    A refreshing approach to the overly tired action genre. The film achieved many things right, but what really shines is by far the script. When is Looper 2 coming out?
  21. Nov 6, 2012
    One of the masterpieces of the science fiction, where we appreciate good theories abiut the future and the mafias of the future.
    The Performance of Gordon-Levitt and Willis is awesome, and we appreciate some similarities between the two actors
    This movie shows us again that the science fiction is a genre able to make excellent movies.
  22. Nov 6, 2012
    First of all, let me take a moment to praise outstanding work done by the director and writer of this movie, Rian Johnson. I have watched a lot of science-fiction films that incorporate the elements of time travel and in the beginning, this movie seems like any other typical science-fiction film but it has a lot of surprises, the amount of creativity that has been put in the making of this film. Looper is a remarkable and beautiful film, with astounding performances by Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Young Joe Simmons), Bruce Willis (Old Joe Simmons), Emily Blunt (Sara Rollins) and Pierce Gagnon (Sara Expand
  23. Nov 5, 2012
    Rian Johnson takes you from this world and pulls into the world of Looper. Johnson's films are unlike those of other filmmakers, because they are so surreal.
  24. Nov 4, 2012
    Looper is one of those films that desperately wants to be taken seriously. It tries to capture audience interest and respect in several ways -- action, inter-character and character development, even the cerebral "nature of cause and effect" conundrum. Unfortunately, it screws everything up and makes a royal mess. Its characters are, by and large, shallow to the point of one-dimensionality, generally merely character stereotypes rather than even photocopied archetypes. The primary anti-hero protagonist/antagonist (yep, it's that convoluted) probably undergoes the most development, but that's due in part to the fact that he's being played by two separate actors. By and large, the performances are wooden and unconvincing, the writing stilted to the point of being hack dialogue, and the plot so full of holes that trying to sort it all out would take much more time than this film is worth. (Consider this a note to all would-be time travel story writers: whether you decide on a deterministic or non-deterministic model of causality doesn't matter as long as you are consistent. Looper? Total flop on that.) Joseph Gordon-Levitt does a reasonably good job with what the script gives him (which isn't much), and Emily Blunt turns in a rather good performance, in part because she's the only believable character in the whole mangled mess. To be totally and brutally honest, if billing on this movie were by quality of performance, Blunt should be going first; hers is the best portrayal in the film. By the same logic, Bruce Willis' unconvincing, flat, and downright uninterested performance should earn him a credit just below the lighting intern. Frankly, Willis phoned in this performance; even with the pathetic writing, he could have done much better. Jeff Daniels turns in a decent portrayal of a boss from the future sent back to run herd on the miscreants that populate the turkey of a plot. Scriptwriting was horrendous, particularly in the area of plot. The entire film was over-the-top violence and brutality. Really, with the aforementioned exceptions to the generally poor performances, the only other people in this production that deserve a true pat on the back are those responsible for generating the setting and scenery. They, at least, did a fine job in creating a dystopian, energy-starved, socially collapsed world in which to set this train wreck of a film. (It's an unfortunate thing when the setting is outshining most of the cast in quality of performance.) Given the blasting I've given this film, it's easy to wonder why I'm giving it a 2 instead of a 0. Three reasons: Gordon-Levitt, Blunt, and the scene setting crew. Everything else? Junk. Had I known now what I was getting into, I would not have gone to the theater for this. I would've waited until it hit cable...and then watched something else. Expand
  25. Nov 4, 2012
    Looper sucked in so many ways that it's actually difficult count them all. Unlike most of the other haters, I would be willing to overlook the ridiculous plot and the inconsistencies (of which there are many), if the movie was generally well executed and entertaining. But it's not. The movie is amateurishly directed, poorly edited, and unevenly paced. 80% of the action scenes lack the slightest amount of tension and fall completely flat. There is not one single well-developed character in the entire film, so there's no reason to care when anything happens to any of them. The script is disjointed and back-fills plot lines to explain things after they happen. The last two-thirds of the movie is very boring, and is chock full of clumsy, melodramatic, and just plain corny dialogue (especially between the Emily Blunt character and her "son"). Some of these dramatic scenes are so long and awkward that when I saw it, people in the theater were actually laughing uncomfortably, unsure of how to react. Then on top of everything else, Looper is a highly derivative mish-mash of other, much better, sci-fi movies, but doesn't even do a competent rip off job (see Inception ripping off the Matrix). Instead, what the viewer gets treated to is a series of dumbed-down scenes and plot points from movies like 12 Monkeys, The Matrix, Blade Runner, The Fifth Element, Strange Days, and a host of others. In the end, Looper is a smelly turd of a Movie. The only possible explanation I can offer as to why people liking this movie is that maybe we've been starved of a truly great sci-fi movie for so long, that almost anything will do at this point. Or maybe people are just idiots. Or both. Expand
  26. Nov 3, 2012
    Good point but have neglected entertainment.
    The two actors do not look like each other.
    Should have included some persecution for some more excitement to the movie.
  27. Oct 27, 2012
    I dont usually say this but WHY are you reading this? Go out and watch this NOW. Brilliant acting, a brilliant plot where everything clicks and excellent sequences - Looper is my favourite film of the year alongside Dark Knight Rises. And it beats the hell out of The Avengers. There are minor loopholes if you think hard enough but overall, its as enjoyable as Inception and definitely, a well-rounded film on an intriguing premise. A movie with the brains and passion that you will definitely enjoy. If you love Inception, you'll love this film. It makes you think and gives you a satisfying conclusion. Expand
  28. Oct 27, 2012
    In the running for the best movie of the year, Looper definitely does not disappoint what the cast builds the hype up to be. Bruce Willis a kid killer and JGL looking more bad-ass than ever, Rian Johnson uses the actors to their fullest potential. Brilliant take on the near future down to every subtle nuance such as the solar power rigged cars and futuristic eye drop drugs. the Idea of the film was amazing, I may of been expecting a little more out of it although i was looking for it to be one of the best movies ever when I saw the previews.. The ending threw me off but did make me think which is all you can ask for in a movie. Expand
  29. Oct 26, 2012
    It doesn't meet my expectations. But, nonetheless, Looper is a smart, unique, and well written film that ranks high above other movies in the same genre.
  30. Oct 24, 2012
    Apparently the method of time travel movies is to show the same scene over and over again to see if the outcome can be changed. The effect is numbing. J. Gordon Leavitt is talented, but he is gotten up to look like Keanu Reeves and acts accordingly. Bruce Willis has only his smirk left. I lasted a bit less than an hour.
  31. Oct 22, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Good, definitely not this years Matrix, but enjoyable. TK bits seem added on to get an explanation that isn't very satisfactory. Remember there are two ways to close your loop! Expand
  32. Oct 18, 2012
    The summer brought us many blockbusters, The Avengers, Men in Black 3, Prometheus, the Amazing Spider-Man, and the Dark Knight Rises. It was a successful summer overall, but the fall season is where the Oscar contenders come out, and with that, I have Looper, which is the first fall movie of the year that looks like it can contend with the heavy weights. The story takes place in the year 2044,
  33. Oct 17, 2012
    I've pondered over this film for a few days and i still have yet to come up with a legitemate flaw. This was a great film. From the acting by the new superstar Gordon-Levitt, to the engaging and genius story, to the beautiful cgi. I just had 2 minor flaws. It got a little bit boring a few times throughout the film but it was recovered quickly each time and it seemed a bit overly long but when you think about it there really wasn't a scene you could take out so i'll give Looper a 9.5/10. This is definitely the biggest surprise of 2012 for me, i didn't expect much from this film. I just expected another dumb time-travel involved film, but this one actually had an amazing plot that was near perfectly executed. Expand
  34. Oct 16, 2012
    Truth to be told, I don't get why everyone thinks Looper is so great. Joseph Gordon Levitt's makeup to try to look like Bruce Willis is awful and makes him look like a wax figure and that's the smallest of Looper's problems. The premise is good but never fully explored. In the end, it just falls into the cliches of sci-fi, like the fake kid who talks like an adult. The boy who performs that character promises to become the new Nicholas Cage with his over-the-top acting. Emily Blunt is great as usual, but her character's relationship with Joseph Gordon Levitt's was terribly contrived. The villains are cardboard characters which you know are bad guys because they wear black clothes and are dumber than an Adam Sandler character. Joseph Gordon Levitt, Bruce Willis, Emily Blunt and the few action there is are what made Looper a barely passable movie. Expand
  35. Oct 16, 2012
    Best movies I've seen in this year is Looper and batman the dark knight rises ,my all time favorite movie's are The Godfather (1972) .Taxi Driver (1976). Carrie (1976). Scarface (1983). GoodFellas (1990) . Raging Bull (1980) .Casino (1995) there masterpiece movies, what i don't like are the silly remakes why a new carrie movie ? this is the 4th movie carrie the made it's just stupid ,Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie are absolutely perfect ,they both got Oscar nominations out of it, for God sake! Expand
  36. Oct 16, 2012
    I went to go see this movie on a whim. I'm not generally a fan of time-travel. However, Looper does incredibly well to keep the time-travel gimmick, while also being a generally good film. It keeps a steady, and never disappointing, pace throughout the film. It doesn't try too hard to explain the science behind the time travel or in what way it works. It just flat out shows you what happens. Which is better than being given five minutes of screen-time for some poorly articulated explanation for the mechanism of time-travel.

    The film has a great feel to it. A dystopian future hasn't looked this good since Children of Men and Blade Runner- and I don't think one will for a while. The layout of the film is brilliant too, with the Life in a Day scene being one of the most powerful scenes (for me at least) this year in movies. The film does share some inconsistencies in the storyline, but it's never significant enough to draw it down.

    The actors performances are brilliant as always. Bruce Willis portrays Old Joe incredibly well, you can get that sense of turmoil that he's going through. Pushed to the edge, if you will. You empathise at parts, but at the same time, you know he has lost it. Joseph Gordon-Levitt's portrayal of Young Joe is also great. Especially given the prosthetics and make-up he had to wear during his entire performance.

    Anyway, to sum it up, it's an absolutely brilliant science fiction film. It blends great themes, science fiction elements and action into an enjoyable movie. Certainly recommended to anyone and everyone.
  37. Oct 15, 2012
    The trailer for this movie gives the wrong impression. Yes there's plenty of action and violence blended in with Sci-fi elements, but it's more than that. This is a thought-provoking, original piece of work. Sure there are some influences, the biggest one seems to be Terminator, but this is as close to original as you can get in this day in age. I would like to also put out that, as I said there's plenty of action, but the movie at some points slows down. These scenes are just characters talking but they were never boring to me, but they might be to you. Half of the movie takes place on a farm but, like I said I was never bored. I have nothing bad to say about this movie. The plot and story are rich and thought-provoking. For example: If you could go back in time to kill baby Hitler would you? The screenplay is extremely well done and thought out. Sure there are some minor flaws within the time travel aspect(I can list a few but that could potentially spoil things) but that's the case with every movie about time travel. Johnson does a terrific job at plugging in most of these holes and this is probably the best and well thought out movie about time travel. Now if time travel did exist would it be something like this? Probably not but Johnson does such a good job at explaining everything that he makes us believe it, and he never breaks his own rules. You have to really pay attention to everything or else you might miss something and get lost, sort of like Inception. This is nothing like Inception by the way so those who are comparing this movie to that one are wrong. The acting in this more is terrific, but I'm sure none of these performances will get recognition from the academy which is a dam shame. Over the past couple of years Joseph Gordon-Levitt has slowly become one of the best actors working today. His performance is amazing, his impression of Bruce Willis is spot on from his facial expressions to the way he speaks he nailed it, and even though his face is covered in prosthetics he is still able to convey emotion and act. Bruce Willis is back between Expendable Two, Moonrise Kingdom and now Looper. I hope he picks these kinds of movies in the near future. He doesn't just kick was in this movie but he also proves that he's got the chops. One scene in particular, he is crying because of the terrible thing he did and even though I hated what he did I couldn't help but feel sorry for him during that scene. You'll know when you see it. Emily Blunt is great as well, I'm surprised not that many people actually mentioned her, without her the movie wouldn't have been the same. The kid is also great, he certainly has potential. He provided some humorous scenes that the film needed. The guy who plays the main person in charge of the Looper did a great job too. There really is no hero, everyone is the antihero which was a nice change as you don't often see that in movies and just adds to the freshness. The romance between Blunt and Levitt was nice, they both displayed a nice degree of chemistry. I really liked them as a couple even though they're both terrible people(I'd mention a few other things but I don't want to ruin anything). The ending to this film is brilliant, it has a lot of deep meaning behind it even though I'm sure people hated it. There's a reason why the director did this and if only people would look at the meaning behind it. This is as perfect of a movie about time travel as you're going to get. I loved everything about it. Sure you can pick away at some of the flaws within the time travel but what's the point? Every movie about time travel has some flaws within time travel. The strong script, outstanding performances, fleshed out characters, and the rich/original plot make this the best one. Johnson did a brilliant job at closing as many of the flaws as he could. This is one of the best films of the year, it's thought-provoking and original. This movie is still on my mind and though this won't alter my life in any way, I'm glad I got to see it. Expand
  38. Oct 15, 2012
    I found it to be an overall good movie, best of its genre i have seen in a long time. It developed the story very well and increased its intensity as it went. 9/10-9.5/10 is exactly what it deserves.
  39. Oct 15, 2012
    An endlessly creative mind-blowing film that captures everything right about the movie going experience. Johnson conjures up the most imaginative action/science fiction film since 'Inception.'
  40. Oct 15, 2012
    I thought this was a pretty bad movie overall. Everything is derivative of stuff you've seen before, and even if this is deliberate, the riffing on familiar themes and plot points isn't clever enough to hold your interest.

    And the overall concept sounds cool initially, but makes no sense. If they wanted to make no sense, the whole movie shouldn't have taken itself so seriously and
    been more cartoonish. As it is, there's really no reason to have the loopers in the first place--why didn't the bad guys of the future just send their victims into some volcano of the past? Expand
  41. Oct 15, 2012
    Looper is a great sci-fi thriller with an intense and intriguing story. It has good characters and visuals while using time travel in interesting ways. The third act has a shift in pace and story. In my opinion it felt a little disjointed and less interesting compared to the first two-thirds of the film. Never-the-less, it is a great experience.
  42. Oct 14, 2012
    I believe this is one of the top ten best movies of the first three years of this decade. It's very rare that a movie can be this enjoyable and exciting, have this much of an emotional impact, make a thought provoking statement, be an intelligent story throughout, and even make the viewer reflect on themselves, and question their own character. This movie does all of those things. Just about any criteria that can go into a great movie is very strong with this one. It was a very well thought out story, but it's orchestrated in the script very competently, so that every moment is able to have its full impact. From the very beginning of the movie, you're already questioning things about yourself, and that's only mild compared to the self evaluation you'll be doing towards the middle of the movie, and at the end. If you want a movie that is going to knock you out emotionally, and leave you in chills at the end, this will do it. At the same time, if you just want to be entertained, this will do the job too. This is the rare kind of movie that can be satisfying to watch no matter what mood you're in. There are times when I feel like watching a thought provoking movie, or one with a clever story, or an emotional movie, or just one that's going to entertain me. This would be a good choice for all of those moods. There are a couple of plot holes, but they are mild, and easily forgivable, when the script overall is this brilliant. The choices made by the director are also very clever, and elevate the script even further. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Bruce Willis, and Emily Blunt all give strong performances, and add depth to their characters, and dimensions to the story overall. I'm not even worried about raising people's expectations too high. I heard great things about this movie before I saw it, and I expected it to be in contention for my favorite movie of the year, yet it still exceeded my expectations, and blew me away. Expand
  43. Oct 13, 2012
    Looper mixes mind-bending time-travel craziness, bloody action, some great hilarity and very nicely-done drama, all delivered in an astonishingly creative and original way.
    Extremely well-written, shot, acted and, clearly, directed. I knew it was good -- it turned out to be good raised to the 1000, meaning insanely good. A whole new level of fantastic. I'm never using the word "amazing"
    for non-truly amazing things (those that don't match Looper's level of amazing) ever again. Expand
  44. Oct 13, 2012
    Looper was interesting, but not for so long. The concept of time traveling and the Loopers killing waste from the future seemed incredibly intriguing. But the problem is that the movie shifts from those ideals into a more standard type of movie. So the first half is fast paced and explains the concept in majestic ways, but then the second half deviates and almost completely forgets it. Its still an entertaining movie thanks to some very good acting and great direction, but the shifts in genre from action to slow drama kills what it could have been. It had the potential to be the next Inception, but the thing is that Inception never abandoned its unique concept the way Looper does. Looper feels like it lacks identity, but at the same time given what it does right, it also feels intriguing when compared to most of the movies that come everyday. Its a recommendable movie, but also disappointing nonetheless. Expand
  45. Oct 12, 2012
    Rarely you would find a science fiction movie these days not relying on CGI and action to draw audiences, this movie does not require both, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis pack a great performance, best science fiction movie I have watched in recent times.
  46. Oct 12, 2012
    Looper -- well scripted. It has a very logical and believable sci-fi. My only problem is that Joseph Levitt-Gordon and Bruce Willis are just not from the same mold. Poor casting there.
  47. Oct 12, 2012
    Looper is the most overrated film I've seen since Inception. (I thought Nolan's Batman trilogy and Memento were great, by the way). Not much happens in Looper, and what does follows from the stupid premise (never explained) that bodies produced by hit-style executions in a future 30 years hence cannot be buried "then." Under the circumstances, the ruthlessness, persistence and sheer number of bad guys seems unnecessary and poorly motivated. As for the action, it's is just a lot of gratuitous shoot-and-miss, chase 'em-around-some-more, try to shoot-'em-again emptiness. The fact that Looper has been rated so highly by both critics and audiences suggests that, in the era of the suburban multiplex, viewers who honed their critical faculties in the 50s and 60s have been leached from the vetting process. I'm no snob and like "good junk," but Looper is just bad junk. Expand
  48. Oct 12, 2012
    There are two aspects of Looper that cause it to be stifling: It tries too hard to be stylish and too hard to be deep. The production values are there, with the actors well cast - though, when it comes down to it Bruce Willis is cast as a character that is essentially himself in every single Die Hard, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt is cast as (and takes on the attempts at acting like) a younger Bruce Willis.

    Here is where an interesting facet comes into play: The most basic -simplified, if you will- premise is that one person meets themselves in the future. With the help of some keen makeup and prosthetic, Gordon-Levitt was able to be given the jaw, cheekbones, and forehead of Bruce Willis. In addition, speaking in a raspy and sort of brooding tone, the film is able to pull off a decent narration.

    However, it just tries too hard to be "cool"; too hard to be "noir."

    The director, Rian Johnson, attempts to be the next Christopher Nolan by mimicking the deep provocations of Inception but fails due to the fact that the presentation is terrible. One moment he throws a concept at the audience and before one can really figure out any profundities or even specific relations to a plot, the scene following is an elementary action scene or something that is easy to conceive, partially due to similarities with action films hitherto.

    Perhaps with another viewing, aside from gawking at visuals, the viewer would be able to construe of something that is probably not there and, the undeniably corny plot "twists" thrown in make this film more than just a waste of money but also a waste of time. Inception was deep with the only real downside being that of the latter portion of it being drawn out - Looper tries with all of its might to be Inception, but can evaluated from its ending which is, in the larger scope of cinema, a cop out.
  49. Oct 12, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The trailer for Looper had my attention, but the film did not. The first act of the film starts out very promising...set in 2030something a dark future underworld of crime where Loopers are paid to "assassinate" dudes sent back from 30 years into the future where time travel exists. Blah blah. I'm not going to spend ages writing this, because this film already owes me 2 hours of my life back. I wish everyone would stop raving on about JGL's prosthetics that are supposed to make him look more like Bruce Willis. They don't. The action is contrived, unsuspenseful, stupid and scarce. The 2nd act is boring...I could give to craps about anything that happened to any of these characters but Im forced to listen to the rubbish dialogue while this film tries to figure out what it wants to be and never does. Unimaginatively filmed, annoying subplots, too many boring characters, a child actor who is annoying and far from menacing (like he is meant to be), plot devices that are poorly used...themes that are not sufficiently explored because they are in the wrong genre of film to allow time for this to happen and actions without consequences. My biggest annoyance was how he betrayed his "best" friend in the first act and gets all sad and then this is never mentioned again. Don't waste your time on this mess of a film. Expand
  50. Oct 11, 2012
    A rarity for me, a very fun sci-fi movie that I enjoyed immensely. Why? Because this is a character and story driven science fiction film. We really grow to care about these characters in one sense or another, and the story keeps us guessing and intrigued right up to the emotional ending. Most of the problems that I have read about this movie revolve around the time travel dynamics or how the story slows in it's second half. I disagree on both counts. First I want to say that Johnson does have some obvious rules for time travel that he is following throughout this film, but I admire how he knows that if you think about time travel long enough you will find holes in any story involving something that both doesn't exist and is implausible in the real world. I love the scene where Johnson gives a wink to this idea by having Willis's character tell Levitt's, " I don't want to talk about time travel because we would be here all day." I also disagree that the film slows in the second half. I feel that the scenes at the farm are among the best in the movie, also Willis's character goes to some bad places which gets us to the more than satisfying ending. I have two issues with this movie and they probably keep this from being an all time classic science fiction movie for me. One is Levitt's performance. This is an actor that I normally like so I am going to believe that his poor performance is due to the prosthetic that were used to transform his face. Most will probably disagree with me about his performance, but I feel he is outmatched in almost every scene he shares with the other players in this movie. My second issue are the action sequences. If there is one reason for me not enjoying most action films anymore it is the implausibility of the gun fight, and Looper is no exception. I am infinitely tired of trained killers who can kill with professional precision suddenly becoming incapable of firing straight when they are shooting at a movies protagonist. This is probably nitpicking but I would rather not see the action at all than be taken out of the movie in this way. Overall this is a highly enjoyable, unique science fiction film. Expand
  51. Oct 11, 2012
    What happened to cinema, Looper is a terrible film, reasons are 1. shaky cam 2. baby being shot 3. poor writing 4. not believable. Joespeh gordon levitt really gave a poor performance as well as the others. The best scenein the film was the credits, everything was so off. It was unwacthble, do not see this, my nan approved this message.
  52. Oct 11, 2012
    Attempt at cerebral sci-fi let down by endless plot holes and a feather-headed lack of logic... First the good
  53. Oct 10, 2012
    The first half was much better than the second half. Once Willis arrives and we got to the farmhouse, I knew how the movie was going to end. The first part about the concept of looters was intriguing but could have used a little more "Blade Runner" styling. The second half degenerated into the Terminator again and was quite predictable. The film should have been focused on the unseen future instead of dragging back into the present. Daniels' character could have been expanded as well. A seven is the most I can rate this one. Expand
  54. Oct 10, 2012
    A good sci-fi story done with finesse. Watch Joseph Gordon-Levitt closely. He may not "look" like a younger Bruce Willis, but he has his familiar mannerisms and speech down: especially in a sit-down with a crime boss. For the most part, the story takes some unexpected turns but doesn't hold up in the ending, which is telegraphed in advance. Too bad, because this had the makings of a classic. Still, the acting and direction elevate this to a must-see of Fall films. Expand
  55. Oct 10, 2012
    Not the New Star Wars or Matrix. More the New Logans Run. Very good smart sci-fi, it did get perilously close to being slow towards the end but saved itself. Also for a sci-fi timetravel film the narrative held together quite nicely without masses of plot holes.
  56. Oct 10, 2012
    Seeing the trailer I thought:
    - great idea
    - great actors
    - must see
    After seeing the movie:
    - a great idea is not enough without a proper storyline
    - great actors with poor story and dialogue, poor direction and poor make-up (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) are worth nothing
    - why on Earth did I fell for the trailer????
  57. Oct 9, 2012
    Johnson deals with the subtext with no one bothers to... Looper is so original and unique, albeit not so in delivery, it is the best sci-fi yarn in years.
  58. Oct 9, 2012
    I went, I saw, I was entertained. I didn't go in overthinking every little thing, with some ridiculous notion that I was going to see a time travel movie and there would be no plot holes. No time travel movie has ever done that right. I didn't go in expecting non-stop action for two hours, either. I felt it spent just enough time on everything - action, story and characters. I still liked TDKR better, but this was an excellent movie. Expand
  59. Oct 9, 2012
    This was not a very good movie. I've already wasted too much of my time on it, so I won't write a lengthy review, but suffice it to say that SebDangerfield hit it on the head, it's a movie without an identity. Alternating between genre's and pace at the same time is a very BAD idea, it's one thing to intermix a thriller with a drama, but not if one scene of fast paced (and confusing) action is followed by several scenes of boring dialogue that do not satisfactorily explain many questions raised by the 'action,' or adequately explore the world around them. This could have been an interesting 'Blade Runner' style Sci-Fi Drama, however it fails in that regard, and as a Bruce Willis Action movie. First movie I've seen at or above 75 on Metacritic (user since 2006, this is being charitable, I probably could have gone with a 70 or even 65) that I've thoroughly disliked, I tried to convince myself after the film that it wasn't that bad, but that is a lie. Wasted talent, incredibly overrated. Expand
  60. Oct 9, 2012
    I have been waiting to see Looper for a while now & like always when a film is highly rated with many positive reviews your excitment increases day by day. I can safely say it's up there with the best sci-fi / time travelling movies, Terminator/12 Monkeys etc. I loved the story & all the cast are superb, even the little touches like Joseph Gordon-Levitt plastic face.. Cool.
    worked so a must see for all I feel.. Expand
  61. Oct 8, 2012
    This movie has an interesting premise and great actors and acting, which make up for the sometimes-lackluster action sequences. I think that if ones goes into this movie looking for simply an action movie, they will be disappointed. However, if you want something deeper: compelling characters and character development, suspense, moral dilemmas, then you will be satisfied. The film does suffer a bit at a few crucial plot points, where it's not entirely clear what happened. If you leave the theater confused, then look online for an explanation and it should make those little pieces fall into place nicely. Expand
  62. Oct 8, 2012
    A vicious and often bleak thriller involving time travel and telekinesis. To those who haven't seen the movie, it DOES sound like an awful concept. However, both Justin Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis deliver with solid acting, a script that has believable (and fun) twists and turns, interesting moral dilemas, and amazing special affects. The only bad aspect of this movie i can think of as of this writing is if you put wayyy too much thought into the time travel mechanics. So just sit back and enjoy the violence and cacophony that is Looper. Expand
  63. Oct 8, 2012
    Wow! An original idea comes out of Hollywood! Even though It bogged down a bit through the middle and took a weird left turn with the whole telekinesis plot line I confess I really enjoyed it. Of course its not possible to make a believable time travel movie so I suppose I shouldn't be offended by the endless paradoxes. My hat is off to Joseph Gordon-Levitt and the prosthetics folks on this one. I was totally sold that the kid from 3rd rock was the guy from blind date. Ripe with sequel potential. Expand
  64. Oct 8, 2012
    This movie is a masterpiece of sci-fi cinema. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis were the perfect choice of actors for the right movie. Looper is a unique and fresh film in a period of bland $200 million films.

    P.S. The movie should be seen twice in order to understand what's going on, or realise that the film gets better the more you see it.
  65. Oct 7, 2012
    A wonderful, and heartbreaking, film. Definitely see it! A fascinating contrast between youth and wisdom gained. Superb. Fantastic acting all around.
  66. Oct 7, 2012
    What bothers me about this movie isn't that it's stupid. It's that so many stupid people are calling it "smart". Right, so the Mob has time-machine technology. But instead of using it to, say, send them back football scores or manipulate the stock market, they use it to get rid of bodies. Right, that makes ALL KINDS of sense. Oh, and instead of just using the time machine (which would obviously have to also be a "space" machine, since the planet is constantly moving) to dump the bodies into the ocean, or a volcano, or outer space, they hire people in our time to kill them. *sigh* If you think this movie is "smart" or "clever" or any of the other terms currently being used to describe it, it's because you yourself are an idiot. Expand
  67. Oct 7, 2012
    The verdict is out. It appears if you are a troubled male enduring a violent life style, a woman from your past, or future, is likely responsible. If you want proof, look no further than this film. All major characters are deeply affected by females. Whether it's a mother, a wife, or a hooker, they all determine the destiny of the world.
    I won't give it away, but do pay attention to the
    various female driven pointers, from small to large. It's all there. Ladies are the oil that runs the machinery of the world.
    This was no doubt an entertaining film. The story kept me interested. Particularly because the promotional trailers did something abnormal by today's standards: they didn't give away the whole thing. I didn't expect it to follow the path that it does. Two thumbs up right there.
    It's worth mention what a fastantic job they did making Joseph Gordon-Levitt look like a younger version of Bruce Willis. Frightening.
    The one bit that often gets to me when it comes to science fiction is how you can smell the compromisse in the futuristic look. Specially when it comes to technology. Our future selves are geniuses in one aspect, like, say, time travel, but when it comes to other details of the world, like architecture or simple street signs, we dumbed down... And of course, the story does take place in the "past" version of this future. Can you hear a studio guy say: 'we gotta shoot this thing cheaper!'... Well, you can't have it All. So it does feel a bit more like an HBO production than big theatre fare, but I still had a fantastic time. Enjoy.
  68. Oct 7, 2012
    Best movie I've seen in a long time. Genius plot, awesome actors and great cinematography. Definitely the best movie of the year. I really was excited when I saw the trailer, but I didn' t expect to have been as surpised as I became.
  69. Oct 7, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Rian Johnson's latest sci-fi drama is an absolute joy to watch; not just as a well executed non-linear narrative but also as a deeply resonant love story operating on two separate plains: the past and the future. Juggling this complex series of events and organising them into a story that makes sense - let alone functions at all - is an achievement not to be snarked at. The credit truly has to go to Johnson as both writer and director, as well as sterling performances from both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis, supplemented nicely with the work of Jeff Daniels and Emily Blunt.

    Joseph ''Joe'' Simmons (Gordon-Levitt) is a Looper: an assassin in the year 2044 whose job it is to eliminate targets sent back from the future, where high-tech tagging has eliminated the possibility of effective body-disposal. The target is sent back, Joe takes him down, and then collects: it's as simple as that. The currency sent back from this dystopian future comes in the way of silver, which is no surprise given the current scarcity of rare-earth metals which shows no sign of abating in the far-future. But time travel itself is a well kept secret and, with the knowledge held by the Looper's, they are a risk to the fortunes of the mob; thirty years after they kill their last target, they are sent back themselves as the next target: thus the term ''Looper'' is born.

    But what happens when the target is yourself? Joe is faced with this exact problem, as an older version of himself (Willis) kneels at his mercy. Young Joe's hesitation causes the target to escape. Now we watch as two opposing forces begin their own personal vendetta: Old Joe searches for a merciless villain from the future named ''The Rain-maker'', who in this year would be only a small child; leaving Young Joe no option but to stop his older doppelganger and his sadistic quest for revenge. The beautiful thing about all of this is that we are watching the same person with different life experiences motivating them. Where do we lay our allegiance? We learn that Older Joe has got sufficient reason to want this future kingpin dead, but at the cost of murdering a child? in the meantime we come to understand that Younger Joe may be the key to all of it.

    A word on the supporting cast: Sara (Emily Blunt) - is the sole proprietor of a small farm. She lives alone, apart from her five year old son who possesses telekinetic abilities (TK as it is called in the film; an ability inherent in around 10% of the population). Abe (Jeff Daniels) is sent back to manage the Loopers and offers a more traditional antagonist for this picture, although part of the charm is that the dynamics of good and bad aren't particularly consistent.

    Now, you will be left with questions. And this is not an intrinsically bad thing - in contrast, I think it opens the world of the movie up even more. I was led to query the nature of the time travel itself; multiple dimensions seeming to be a plausible necessity of the time manipulation process. These questions don't detract from the movie itself, which functions smoothly and focuses simply on the story at hand: This is the world we have been presented with and this is the story being told. All other questions - albeit interesting - are not required factors in enjoying what is an excellent movie.
  70. Oct 7, 2012
    It's definitely not a bad movie. I see what they tried to do with all time stuff and for casual consumer it may be a lot to comprehend and it will take time to think this movie through. The thing is I watch Doctor Who a lot and I got used to all the time travel stuff and in Doctor Who this things a lot deeper and confusing. Can't rate performance of Levitt or Willis because i saw this movie in translation. As i said it's not a bad movie. In fact it may be very good but my familiarity with Doctor Who kinda ruins movie for me. It gets 6 out of 10. If it wasn't for Doctor Who this movie would probably got 8 or 9 out of 10 Expand
  71. Oct 6, 2012
    I am writing this review 30 minutes after I saw this movie. This movie started ok, it had a few plot holes but otherwise the first third the movie went smooth. Then it was destroyed. The rest was a mix of mass confusion that didnt add up at all. It had magic 10 year olds, and became rediculous. None of the characters were connecting with me. The entire movie I was thinking, "I dont even care what happens to these people". The movie was funny at times, but only due to the ridiculous scenes. This movie couldve been more like Inception or The Matrix, but instead of being thought-provoking, it was a bad action movie. Definitely skip this. Expand
  72. Oct 6, 2012
    I expected a twist to come at some point in the movie because everything had been so predicable. Even during the final minutes of the movie I was hoping for something to happen other than the ending I had predicted about 30 minutes into the movie. I was sorely disappointed by another derivative Hollywood cut-and-paste sci-fi.
  73. Oct 6, 2012
    Intelligent. Entertaining. Unique. Violent. Emotional. Disturbing. Sentimental. I loved it. I hope it gets a nomination from the academy.
  74. Oct 6, 2012
    This movie is very hard to score out of 10, as the first half was as brilliant as the second half was disappointing, so I've opted for a 5.

    In my opinion, it would have been far more satisfying without the inclusion of the "Rainmaker" subplot, which bogged it down and stretched the limits of credibility to breaking point.
  75. Oct 6, 2012
    I liked this movie way better back when it was called the Terminator. Seriously? A movie about a time traveler coming back in time to assassinate a child who will change the future? Gee whiz, where have I heard that before. And then a movie where the protagonist goes back in time to watch himself get killed? Does that sound familiar? It should because Bruce Willis already did that one in Twelve Monkeys too. Bruce Willis blatantly tells the audience "Hey, don't think to hard on this time travel stuff or your head will explode." What he really means is "The writers of this movie are too lazy to worry about filling in all the plot holes, so just accept it and we can move on." The action scenes seem to be added in to distract you from the terrible acting and boring dialog that drags on for the second hour of the movie. Bruce Willis' character seems to only exist for comedic effect.
    Skip this one, go rent Terminator and Twelve Monkeys and watch the movies this one tries so hard to be.
  76. Oct 5, 2012
    This review contains spoilers. Looper is a movie that epitomizes how an ending can make or break a story. Looper is the complete and utter opposite of what we saw happen with the Mass Effect franchise. Whereas the ME series was fantastic up until the last 10 minutes of ME3, I found Looper to be "just okay" up until the last 10 minutes - and then it blew my freakin' mind. Without getting "spoily," I will be completely honest - I almost walked out on Looper about 45 minutes in. Why? I have a personal problem with disturbing/graphic violence. I'm very sensitive and have trouble dealing with certain kinds of violence (not so much guns and shooting, but the kind of violence that haunts the imagination). The first 45 minutes or so has a LOT of that. There were parts I couldn't watch, while there were other parts I COULD watch but freaked the hell out of me (hint to people who have seen the movie: Old Seth. I can't get it out of my mind). However, when the movie gets to the point where we're introduced to the young version of the Rainmaker, I decided to stay - and I'm glad I did. Whereas the Mass Effect ending completely ruined the franchise for me, the ending of Looper completely redeemed the convoluted blood bath that went before. My initial thought when the credits rolled: "I hated it - and it blew my freakin' mind." My feelings about the movie as a whole are mixed. I admit my bias against graphic violence plays a huge role in these mixed feelings, so I will put all of that aside and say that the premise is fantastic, the acting is superb (the kid in this movie was outstanding) and DESPITE the violence, the story of this movie is well-written and mind-blowing. It reminded me of the original Terminator movie (one of my favourite movies of all time). I probably won't watch it again because of my sensitivity to violence, but for those of you who can deal with it, it's a story that's both touching and profound will leave your jaw hanging open when the credits roll. Collapse
  77. Oct 5, 2012
    I absolutely loved it. This is a great movie. Performances, direction, script: all are top notch. Not as much action as the trailer makes out but it doesn't matter because it's a proper, intelligent sci-fi movie. Makes a nice change from all the empty spectacle of most blockbuster films these days
  78. Oct 5, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. GREAT MOVIE, loved it superb acting and awesome story the only reason i give it a nine is the fact that it really doesnt make sense. it started off really solid but then went down hill when they implemented the multiple universe thing. so one scenario when bruce willis gets killed and one where he doesnt. this means that there are two versions of the same person. meaning that killing or maiming an alternate version of yourself would have no effect on you. so when levitt kills himself it should have not done anything to bruce willis because hes from a different time line. this is a result of the version of bruce willis who gets away when he goes back in time is tied to a different levitt. essentially bruce willis invaded a different universe. almost a polar opposite version of reality. which means he should have no coorelation to levitt. even though they are the same person they're from two different time lines so they should not tie into one another. the same goes for the guy who got dismembered he was from a different time line so he should not of started losing limbs when his younger self got cut up. think of it as two sides of a coin. BUT...i love it when a movie really makes me think and come up with this kind of conclusion. havent had this much fun with a movie since inception. Expand
  79. Oct 5, 2012
    To even begin watching Looper one has to discount the glaring plot hole which should make the film redundant. Then once you have gotten over this, you must suspend your disbelief once again and just accept the ride (less a rollercoaster, more a long boring motorway in a spluttering old volkswagen golf) without questioning further the plot as the director has quite cleverly written the film in such a way that any bizarrities that might pop up throughout can be never fully explained; only through vague guesses can one try to make sense of whats happening. The film itself is paced so unevenly that it made me uncomfortable, sometimes moving so fast as it aims to confuse, at other times crawling at a pace that makes snails look like time travellers. The world that is created is as one-dimensional as the characters. The director has a chance to delve deeper into the decaying society of the future, yet we know practically nothing; all we are given is about 30 seconds worth of lazy city shots and some extreme poverty, which is enough to get one interested but is inexplicably never expanded on. JGL is the stereotypical young reckless man, Bruce the stereotypical older and wiser man. What we are to learn from this is unclear and is about as deep as the main characters get (except at the end when for some reason one character has a change of personality over the space of a day or so). Blunt and JGL are not terrible actors in any way shape or form, and neither is Bruce Willis for that matter, however the direction results in some fairly hammy and uncomfortable acting and some scenes are plain unwatchable without seeing them in a humorous light.

    All in all, this is a sci-fi film without a coherent sci-fi plot, a drama without character development, a thriller without the thrills and suspense and an action film without much action (apart from one scene which, again needs suspending disbelief to watch, where Bruce seems to think he is Die Hard, or even more likely the Expendables.)
  80. Oct 3, 2012
    Looper was quite an enjoyable movie. The story seemed pretty original, though a little slow in the middle. I thought the performances of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Emily Blunt were excellent and whoever did the make up on Joseph's face did a great job making him look quite close to a younger Bruce Willis. I think Looper was a very good blend of a mob story and sci-fi all rolled up into a nice cozy burrito. P.S. If you want a future car just attach some solar panels and wires to the outside of your car and you will be driving a car from 2044. Expand
  81. Oct 3, 2012
    Seen Looper tonight. Does it live up to the hype? Not really, but I don't think that is the movies fault. The trailer makes you think its an action flick but its not. Its a concentrate and work out the plot and time travel paradoxes flick, however in my book thats a good thing! I didn't get the Joseph Gordon-Levitt make up as I don't think it made him look like Bruce Willis but watch out for one of the best child acting performances in recent memory. Even though I seen the main "twist" coming a mile off I still really liked the film. Like Inception I'm sure multiple viewings will make it even better. This is a real thinking mans Sci-Fi movie. Expand
  82. Oct 3, 2012
    It's very interesting thriller. Everything is perfect. It's "hard" movie and age rating is right. The story is very interesting and it's difficult to keep track of the story cunningly. I think it's one of the best movies of 2012.
  83. Oct 3, 2012
    This is one of those scifi flix with a cool concept that falls flat in execution. Joseph Gordon-Levitt kills people who are sent back from the future to be executed. Complication arise when his older self (played by Bruce Willis) is sent back to be offed. This takes place in one of those futuristic worlds where much is rundown and little is neat and modern. It starts off well with some solid action and interesting dialogue, but bog down to a standstill with too much talk and not enough action. There are a few worthwhile moments, but the best performance goes to the kid. Expand
  84. Oct 2, 2012
    I dont like this movie. its too much like bladerunner and is not original at all. It was the biggest waste of 9 dollars and two hours of my life. No one should see this movie.
  85. Oct 2, 2012
    I hate to say it, but a lot of people just didn't get Looper. Honestly, the way it was marketed made is seem like a generic action thriller, something akin to In Time. I was astonished that the main conflict to the movie was never featured in any of the previews making it a pleasant surprise. The first thing to understand is there will never be a perfect time travel movie because there is always the idea of the paradox. With that aside I found Looper to be well grounded in its logic and a thrill to watch. People complain about over wrought violence, but this movie is about the mafia so it is par for the course in any overly violent/sexual nature. It pushes the age old tradition of the dangers of crime, and the violence it can bring. Most of all it pushes the idea that we can be a totally different person in 30 years time, with different motivations and understanding. Looper is just as brilliant as Rian Johnson's other films (Brick, The Brothers Bloom), and is surprising from start to finish. Expand
  86. Oct 2, 2012
    Definitely one of the best movies of 2012, and most likely the best science-fiction movie of this year. With movies such as The Dark Knight Rises and The Hunger Games, Looper still manages to shine and delivering one of the best movie experiences of the year. A must see, surprisingly good. 9/10
  87. Oct 1, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Time travel stories are tricky. No matter how much you try to put it all together, there always are loose ends. As good as this Sci-fi story may be, it suffers from this problem. Einstein called this "the time travel paradox". While travelling in the future is concievable through time dilation, traveling in the past is an other story.

    In Looper, Old Joe comes back in time to prevent the death of his love. However, Old Joe is a different version of the Young Joe in the movie. Old Joe who actually killed his older self 30 years ago, now escapes from his younger self. This is a time paradox : if old Joe escapes, young Joe will not follow the course of events that leads him to become the old Joe who loses his wife and travel backs in time. The very fact that Old Joe saves himself denies his very existence. The only way the old Joe can exist with altered Young Joe is if we suppose that 2 different versions of our universe can co-existe. If looper sticked to this theory, it would actually make sense. Unfortunately, it doesn't. At some point, you see that everything Young Joe does to himself affect old Joe. If Old Joe is from universe B and Young Joe is from universe A, than whatever Young Joe does to himself is unlikely to affect Old Joe, since they both come from their own universe. However, Old Joe is affected by Young Joe, and can only possible if there can be only one universe that auto-corrects itself. The writter of this story conveniently switches between two VERY opposite theories of time travel to push the story forward.

    I'll take the ending as an example to make my point. Old Joe's quest to kill the child version of rainmaker ironically leads him to create the tyran version rainmaker of his own futur. The very one he wanted to change. old Joe nearly fulfills his destiny as he shoot the child rainmaker in the jaw and is about to the mother. Young Joe sees the never ending loop that he must now break. So he takes his own life, detroying Old joes very existence in the process. Does it make sense? Not really... If old Joe very existence disappears, so should every of his actions. He never, came back from the futur, escaped, gave the adress of the barn to young Joe who thus never meets the child version of rainmake and so he never kills himself to save his mother. Yet... the childs jaw is still wounded, and yound Joes body is still there. So how can Old Joe very existence be erased and the consequences of his actions still exist? The ending just dosn't make sense. By killing himself, only two things could have happened : A) Old Joe doesn't disappaer because he is from a different universe in which he killed his older self B) The only one universe either collapse on itself, or "corrects itself". If it does correct itself as the movie suggests at some key points, then at the very moment young Joe killed himself Child rainmaker's wound would disappear, he and his mother would be back in their house enjoying some tea. None of them would remember Young Joe or Old Joe.

    I enjoyed the movie, and overall the story is very "enjoyable". I am not saying it's bad, but the way this movie exposes time travel is choppy.
  88. Oct 1, 2012
    The first half of the film is extremely stylish and ambitious, but the second half just gets far too narrow in plot. There are a host of really nice time travel touches, but nothing that wasn't already covered with aplomb in Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey. I give the film credit for attempting to go big with the attempt. Again, the story of the boy is really interesting, but I expected a grander path for the film after the first hour or so. It's great to see Piper Perabo in a slightly racier role than her Covert Affairs persona. Expand
  89. Oct 1, 2012
    I loved this movie. It has an original take on a dirty future that does not require old blade runner sets remade. It handles the time travel stuff perfect. Not to mention it has Bruce Willis and a some machine guns, what is not to like.
  90. Oct 1, 2012
    Don't waste a minute of your time or a nickel of your money on this silly lightweight schoolboy shoot 'em up. I cannot imagine how low the bar must be for reviewers who manage to find some kind of 'artistic value' in this train wreck of a poorly plotted movie. The worst thing about this truly terrible film may be that it takes itself so seriously...not one light moment, not one original scene, not one fresh line of dialog. BEWARE!!! Expand
  91. Oct 1, 2012
    Best sci-fi I've seen since maybe Inception, although I wouldn't call Inception a strictly sci-fi film. As far as time travel movies go, which there really aren't very many of, let alone good ones, this is the best I've seen in years. As with any movie based on time-travel, you have to accept a few rules presented by the specific movie or you WILL make the film fall apart. Thankfully this film only has one major rule, and it's easy to accept and let go of your reality. It's hard to talk about the story without giving anything away but you will be very entertained. There is not a dull moment in the film's entirety and there are twists and turns throughout. The acting is fantastic (JGL is only getting better and better, and Bruce Willis is captivating as usual), the cinematography is engaging...this is a very well made and meticulously thought-out film. Definitely worth a visit to the cinema to see it on the big screen, and if not, absolutely worth a rental or even a place on your shelf in your collection. Expand
  92. Oct 1, 2012
    I'm confused and a little shocked at the reviews. I heard a rave review on NPR and so my husband and I went to see it. We both found it boring and a mix of too many not very interesting things. It never really made up it's mind what it wanted to be. I should have watched the trailer first. My advice would be to skip it. Emily Blunt and the kid were the only redeemable features for us.
  93. Oct 1, 2012
    Wow! The most original movie I've seen since Inception. Very intelligently written! This movie is the complete opposite of most movies that come out today, which aim to please the easily entertained. You'll definitely be thinking about this movie for awhile after you see it. It's an instant classic sci-fi film, which I'll have to add to my collection for sure when it comes out on video.
  94. Oct 1, 2012
    I love Sci Fi, and like all the actors in this film, so I was looking forward to seeing it. It was a mixed bag for me. The film kept me interested, but turned out to be more about the telekinetic kid than anything else. The child, played by Pierce Gagnon, is one of the best child performances I've ever seen in a film. He is absolutely mesmerizing. Unfortunately, the film ended up feeling more like a "demon seed" scary film rather than an intriguing Sci Fi film. I did not care for the whole telekinesis angle which seemed tacked on, and there is a sex scene in the film which was ridiculous and unnecessary. There was also inconsistencies which made no sense. The younger looper always shot and killed the future loopers the instance they appeared, and for some unexplained reason when the older version of himself appeared he hesitated before shooting. There was also some very slow moments throughout the film. Not a bad film, but it won't be a Blu Ray purchase. Expand
  95. Oct 1, 2012
    The overall movie is fantastic, excellent acting, special effects, and story all-around. The dissappointing ending was the only drawback, which made me subtract from the score.
  96. Oct 1, 2012
    Looper was good. It wasn't great, but it was good. It was really heading in the right direction except that inconsistencies with how "future" works was silly. Some of the characters are pretty annoying, too. You aren't ever actually sure what characters you are supposed to "like" and "dislike". That can be good sometimes, but by how the characters were developed and built, it fails. The movie had good ideas and concepts, it just wasn't pieced together that well. It's a pretty good movie if you only look on the 'outside'. If you want it to be logical and well done science fiction, then perhaps this isn't the greatest of movies. What separates a movie like this from Moon is that it Moon is perfectly structured and has very little to nitpick at. I suggest seeing it, but don't have super high expectations. It is only a B or C level sci-fi movie. But there are boobs Expand
  97. Oct 1, 2012
    Ok, let me preface this by saying that I dislike most movies. I find that the majority of movies released these days are full of plot holes, are poorly written, have no character development, and contain mediocre to bad acting. You get the gist - i think most movies suck....but Looper is simply spectacular. It is probably the best movie I have seen in 10 years - great concept with spectacular writing and execution. It has everything - drama, some humor, great character development (which makes you actually care what happens), great action, suspense, cool effects. I really can't find anything wrong with this movie, and I'm very picky when it comes to movies. Someone else compared Looper to Terminator with the style of Inception, and that is pretty accurate. A lot of the basic concepts are taken from Terminator (time travel, etc.), but it's definitely it's own movie. This will go down as one of the best movies of this decade, and it's sure to be considered a Sci-Fi classic among the best of all time (Alien, Terminator, The Matrix, etc). Expand
  98. Oct 1, 2012
    I base great films on whether I am still thinking about them the next day. I was still thinking about Looper the next day. While I may watch something like "The Avengers" over and over again to go to sleep to and enjoy on a semi-regular basis, Looper is perhaps the best film so far this year (but far less re watchable as background noise while you are cooking dinner). Superb acting, casting, and overall directing. Expand

Universal acclaim - based on 44 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 42 out of 44
  2. Negative: 0 out of 44
  1. Reviewed by: Anthony Lane
    Oct 1, 2012
    For all its mayhem, runs like a mad and slightly sad machine, whirring with hints of folly and regret, and the ending, remarkably, makes elegant sense to a degree that eludes most science fictions. How to describe it, without giving anything away? Scrambled, but rare. [1 Oct. 2012, p.84]
  2. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    Sep 28, 2012
    Looper felt to me like a maddening near-miss: It posits an impossible but fascinating-to-imagine relationship...and then throws away nearly all the dramatic potential that relationship offers. If someone remakes Looper as the movie it could have been in, say, 30 years, will someone from the future please FedEx it back to me?
  3. Reviewed by: Andrew O'Hehir
    Sep 28, 2012
    I'm not ready to proclaim Looper a sci-fi masterpiece just yet; let's let it sit awhile. But it's a lean, mean, smart, violent picture with a bit of Stanley Kubrick edge, fueled by the terrific Gordon-Levitt.