Looper (2012)

Couldn't watch the last 30 minutes as too predictable. Could have been a good movie but was poorly executed.

B for originality, at least compared to what's out these days. F for gratuitous violence which completely detracts from a potentially good story line. Makes one wonder about the mind of someone who feels the need to create something like this. F for failure to create any sympathetic characters. You *want* to *like* someone, anyone! Sorry. By end of the movie I didn't care about any of them.

Looper drew me in with its interesting premise; a hired gun (Joe) who assassinates targets for a criminal mob from 30 years into the future until he comes face to face with himself. It was a unique idea and the concept of 'modern-Joe vs. future Joe' translated to film really well for the first half of the movie but at around the half-way point the barebones explanation of the details of time-travel, paradoxes and alternate timelines is waved away with a succinct "I don't want to talk about time travel shit." (yes, an actual line in a movie about time-travel) as the plot became more complex. This was a disappointment in a movie who's main draw (for me) was its potential for thought-provoking questions on its sci-fi premise, what I got instead was a more character-driven plotline within a looser framework of sci-fi concepts which, while enjoyable, still left me somewhat let down. The de-emphasis of time-travel and the minutia of its consequences contradict the grounded tone of the rest of the movie, a focus is placed on the feelings of human beings, and the world seems feasible but the hand-wavey fashion that the film deals with the core idea of time-travel (which is vital to the plot) ruined the immersion for me. It demands a suspension of disbelief so great that it softens the emotional impact of the performance of Joseph Gordon-Levitt (who is the star of the show), and the supporting cast of Emily Blunt and Pierce Gagnon (who are central to the plot) The characters are the main focus of the story but even this isn't perfectly executed, Bruce Willis' character, while competently acted, is mostly just used to further to plot and shoot things which did not make for a compelling watch.The movie suffers for its deviation from the initial premise and its confusing venture into a low-effort and ill-conceived dip into vague, supernatural thriller territory on the biological super-evolution of humans (which is about as unexpected and awkwardly introduced as it sounds) and the claims of movie's cleverness are only half true, while on the one hand it presents the motivations, desires and emotions of its characters with some skill and humanity but on the other a surprisingly low-effort attempt is made in fleshing out the mechanics behind the time-travel which I believe to be a major misstep on the writer-director's part, holding back what could have been a truly great, original movie.

The writer/director has had a reasonable and interesting concept but didn't have the writing or directorial skills to pull it off. This would have been so better given to someone actually with talent in those areas.Most of the negative reviews do correctly identify the downsides to this film, except the ridiculous one pulling is "misogyny" when it's non-existent. I'm not going to do a synopsis of the issues as others have correctly identified them.For me the summary is a film that passes time, has interesting concepts but was a wasted opportunity because of poor execution and writing.