Some words about Looper. The ending doesn't seem to make sense, according to the scientific laws that the story makes up? It seems even less consistent even than Jim Caviezel's Frequency, which I enjoyed.
*spoiler warning*
It is said that criminal organizations usually want to avoid killing people/loopers in the past because that might affect the "future" (their "present") too much. The movie seems to subscribe to alternate timelines and such - there are possible timelines/realities with every choice/contingency. The main character ends up sacrificing himself in order to bring about a better future, and, at the same time, eliminate the threat posed to someone else. (A double-riff on Terminator.) But is the ending consistent with the rest of the movie regarding time travel? There is no dramatic change to the timeline, though you would think there is one, since his older self no longer exists to be able to travel back in time and start the chain of events. It is a bit of a circular paradox, one that I find doesn't make much sense.
If you can accept the ending as being plausible according to the laws of that movie universe, then you'll probably think the movie is good.
No comments:
Post a Comment