2.5/5
Looper will get a lot of credit for being original. In a cinematic universe rife with
remakes, reboots, and retreads, indeed it is, to a degree. The premise, in which mobsters in the
future send garbage (enemies, witnesses, and patsies) back in time to be disposed
of by present day assassins, is pretty unique as far as I’m concerned. The film even casts Joseph Gordon
Levitt and Bruce Willis as younger and older versions of the same character—an
assassin (or Looper) named Joe. And
here’s the kicker: Levitt’s latest assignment is to kill Willis, his future
self, once the latter comes crashing into his time zone. Now there’s
a movie idea. Maybe one day, in
the future, a single good idea will be enough to produce a great movie (perhaps
there’ll even be an App for it).
Alas, here in the present, Looper
can’t sustain its creativity throughout, growing disappointingly derivative as
it stutters toward its confused and dissatisfying conclusion.
The movie begins auspiciously
enough, introducing a sci-fi universe that’s at the very least one for people
with working cerebrums. It’s in
the second half that the movie trips on its own convolution. The year is 2044, time travel won’t be
invented for another thirty years, and gangsters three decades on are using it
for body disposal. Loopers like
Joe wait in fields to meet undesirables as soon as they appear bound and masked
and ready for a shotgun blast to the chest. Joe has worked for Abe (Jeff Daniels), his futuristic Fagin
employer, since he was an orphan. The
world they inhabit is an anarchic, rundown dystopia full of wandering vagrants
and well-dressed thugs. It’s a
place of honest beggars and crooked millionaires. Writer/director Rian Johnson clearly has intentions to
reflect our dichotomous economic times with his inequitable milieu, a demimonde
of physical and moral decay, an extension of our environmental and cultural
trepidations.
Joe loves the perks of his
job (the clothes, cars, and drugs) but is painfully aware of the vocation’s strange
retirement policy: A Looper can be fired—or his “loop closed”—which means that
the next body he extinguishes will be his own, thirty years older, thereby
accepting his predestined demise on the way to enjoying thirty years of
peaceful retirement. Early on, we
see what happens when a Looper fails to follow this policy. In fact, that scene, in which a
middle-aged fugitive falls apart before our eyes as his younger self is
mutilated off-screen, is by far the most inventive and well-staged in the
entire runtime. It is, with the
alien abortion in Prometheus, another
recent example of a great scene in an otherwise mediocre movie. Eventually, Joe’s number comes up,
fomented by an unusual surge in closed loops attributed to a mysterious future
honcho named The Rainmaker. Joe’s
older self appears in the form of Bruce Willis, and naturally, the old man won’t
go down without a fight.
For a while, the movie is
quite compelling. There’s a
particularly fruitful diner rendezvous between the two Joes that finds great
profundity in pointing out their inherent similarities (they both order steak
and eggs instinctively) and their worldly differences (older Joe has a weary
sadness that younger Joe can’t yet comprehend). From there, Looper struggles to develop itself into anything
dramatically fluent or intensified.
For reference, imagine what Total
Recall would have been like if Paul Verhoeven hadn’t managed to transcend
the idea of virtual-reality designer vacations. It would just be an embryonic spark without a flame—a launching
pad but no shuttle. There’d be no Johnny
Cab and no three-breasted hooker.
It’s not that Rian Johnson doesn’t have a creative mind. It’s that he doesn’t know how to expand
on his premise without abandoning it completely. What begins in a fascinating metropolis where civilization
withers eventually winds up on a secluded farm, a place of intimacy but
lethargy, where Levitt’s young Joe shacks up with a pretty single mother, at
which point the movie comes to a soporific halt.
As a director who once set
a film noir in a suburban American high school, Johnson has a talent for
transmuting genre. It’s not
preternatural that his movie would begin growling hardboiled narration from
sordid streets and end up on a lonely homestead: From Blade Runner to Shane. But Looper
feels like an uneasy mélange of, not only two genres, two movies. As if directed half by Joseph H. Lewis and
half by Budd Boetticher—with influences as varied as Phillip K. Dick, James
Ellroy, and Charles Portis—Looper’s
tapestry is often crudely sewn and, by the end, nearly bisected. In the middle of Joe’s complex battle
with(in) himself, just as the movie starts to rev its engines, it gets
sidetracked onto that Kentucky farm, and into a murky subplot involving mutants
and a shotgun-toting Midwest rube played by Emily Blunt. The audience is left stranded in a
cavernous labyrinth of undeveloped ideas reverberating with echoes from better
movies: Notably The Terminator, but
also Tarkovsky’s Stalker.
Great review. But somehow the review and rating don't match. Not at all. I say this having rated it a 6/10 myself. Yours is a 7 or 8 on ten review.
ReplyDelete