MovieChat Forums > Looper (2012) Discussion > I don't think I am understanding this mo...

I don't think I am understanding this movie correctly?

posted 9 years ago by johnnyzheng212
5 replies | jump to latest

Wait, so hold up. Are yall saying that Bruce Willis wants to kill a child because he wants to get with some hot Asian chick? Yo, that is seriously *beep* up. WTF man?

[–] rainofwalrus 9 years ago

Technically he already got with the asian woman, so that is clearly not a driving factor. Only two things can be achieved and both are very fuzzy:

1. A future wherein the asian wife isn't accidentally killed (fuzzy).
2. Revenge (fuzzy).

Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.

[–] Ithilfaen 9 years ago

Wait, so hold up. Are yall saying that Bruce Willis wants to kill a child because he wants to get with some hot Asian chick? Yo, that is seriously *beep* up. WTF man?

Yeah, that's right. It's all about "getting with some hot chick". I'd pity you for not having ever known love but you probably have never had sex either so it'd be a waste of time.

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bluerisk 8 years ago

Crazy? Maybe he was just cleaning the mess up. With closing the Loopes, he would stop the killings in the future.
On the other hand it was told that he rounded up homeless and got them killed.
Maybe he is no underworld king pin but a new Hitler...but this again is contradicted by the fact that they had to send them back secretly in some abandoned industrial area.

But what I didn't understand was the socio-economic status of the US (Earth?).

On one hand modern tech, new technolgy and machines, this fancy public library especially, on the the other hand the homeless people, the rund down cars...was it just that this town that was in the state of Detroit due to the Looper take over, or was the entire country affected? And there seemed to be no public police force and or order.
At the beginning someone tried to stole something from a truck and he got killed by the owner - and nobody really cared.

China and even Europe seemed to fare rather well.

Ich bin kein ausgeklügelt Buch, ich bin ein Mensch mit seinem Widerspruch.
Conrad Ferdinand Meyer

[–] rainofwalrus 8 years ago

With closing the Loopes

Rainmaker [Closing the Loops Early] is a red herring confirmed on first rewatch. OLD JOE's 30-year-Montage proves his loop wasn't closed early, but instead precisely at the 30-year-Contract point per all Looper-Contracts.

So, The Rainmaker isn't closing loops early, BUT, someone wants Loopers to believe this false narrative that leads to unrest/uncertainty. How better to control a group of time-folding assassins other than fear, drugs, and paranoia.

Also, OLE ABE's loop is closed by a rampaging OLD JOE, but ONLY after he is seeded with the [Closing Loops Early] narrative and he actively runs his loop. Might ABE()'s loop required a special kind of closure? One where paranoid loopers are seeded with the narrative so they can go back, run their loop(s), and do their part.

Lets talk contingency; Murphy's Law suggests that you cannot have 100% loop-fidelity and that some Loops will run no matter what you do to stop them from running. So... the best measure would be Controlled Chaos; wherein you want a few Loops to run even push them towards running as another means of control.

"Go get the Doctor!" proves this wasn't an early(green) iteration. It's a well-oiled process. Perhaps we're watching the millionth iteration. We lack data.

Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.