We see three flavors of Loop in the film: Closed, Running(Open), and Annihilated
Here is a visual aid I made in 2012:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/a/img854/6020/looperloop.png
I'm not sure I understand this concept, or why it was important that the looper kill his future self, rather than just having some other looper do it.
It's important because of the Temporal Immunity the younger self has when the older self tries any funny business. Kill your younger self and you vanish. Kill a non-self young looper and you have a NEW problem: Loose Prescient(someone who knows the future) *and* dead young looper.
The middle manager known as ABE has a job, and that is to kill ALL prescients instantly. ABE can be the only prescient in this PAST. That is his primary task.
If you kill your future self, does this mean for 30 years you are guaranteed to live? No car accidents, cancer, etc. You could throw yourself off a building and remain intact because you know you will only die by your own hands on a specific day and time?
Yes and No.
Going into ANY time-travel story, a question(q1) must be addressed: Can the Past be Changed?
IF [(q1)==yes] then NO, nothing is guaranteed and you can throw yourself off a building and still die. Leaving an annihilated loop (no ACTION (event) of travel). This is called Many Worlds or Branching Timelines.
IF [(q1)==no] then YES, you are destined to live another 30 years and if you try to throw yourself off a building; you already did this... and lived somehow (perhaps rescued). This is called Self-Consistency Principle.
Another question - wouldn't it make more sense to have someone else kill you? That way you don't know you're going to die, so you won't be preparing to somehow escape or mess it up?
Nope. A loose prescient AND dead looper are still worse than a loose prescient alone. And it gets better... Via the tethered updating (vanishing limbs, scar messages), the middle manager ABE has a mechanism for control over the loose prescient.
If they always send you back to be killed by yourself. They know who the loose prescient is. If they use anyone to kill anyone, how could they even be sure which Looper is loose?
Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.
reply
share
cynthmauch
10 years ago
Wow, ok, thank you. Very thoughtful analysis.
reply
share
rainofwalrus
10 years ago
My pleasure. Looper, on first visit, does a wonderful job of downplaying how important ABE's nested, Parent Loop actually is.
The logistics of the "Mutilation Contingency" also suggest that this isn't the first time (any) ABE has cut into a young looper in efforts to track and kill a loose prescient. It's a brilliant mechanism; for if the Running Looper is driving a car when his braking foot vanishes, he might crash into a crowded market and send Police/Rescue radios a'buzzing. Scan the Police/Rescue channels and viola.
How would ABE get so smart? Easy, SEED your young double with knowledge from multiple, changing futures. Even when OLD ABE is shown to be dead (his loop now closed), he is not vanished, suggesting his younger double is still alive.
Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.
reply
share
10 years ago
[deleted]
rainofwalrus
10 years ago
Z is future-self. X is present-self.
X moves forward in time, 30 years.
X is sent back in time, in the form of Z.
Z is killed by X.
Z is dead. X is alive. And will now go forward 30 years.
On paper, yes. But per events in Looper:
Z is old old. X is old. X kills Z.
X moves forward in time, 30 years.
X is sent back in time, similar to Z.
X escapes Z-2 (the "Z" X cannot possibly be; flux).
Z-2 is caught (Young Seth).
Z-2 is cut up (Mutilation Contingency).
X should be immune to this forced-flux to Z-2; but is somehow tethered (magic; soul).
X follows tethered scar-message into Trap.
X is killed; closing Z-2's loop (tethered).
Z-2. damaged beyond repair. is killed.
B (Young Abe) moves forward in time, ~30 years.
B restarts looper paradigm.
Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.
reply
share
10 years ago
[deleted]
rainofwalrus
10 years ago
Glad you liked the diagram.
Yup, from a middle-management POV, you cannot possibly reduce "running loopers" to a 0% chance. No matter which paradigm you choose. "Self Termination (Temporal Double)" is logistically cleaner.
Many argue against the paradigm as if [0% failure] is possible; it is not.
Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.
reply
share
awkemp
9 years ago
Why use loopers at all? Why doesn't future mob boss just teleport his victims to the middle of the Pacific Ocean?
reply
share
rainofwalrus
9 years ago
Why use loopers at all? Why doesn't future mob boss just teleport his victims to the middle of the Pacific Ocean?
Really good question with a simple answer: Confirmation of Dead Prescient.
One of the purposes of the GOLD BRICK retirement is to confirm that a loop has been closed (dead future looper).
If the machine teleported the TARGET to some form of inescapable deathtrap (volcano, deep ocean, etc), how do we achieve Confirmation of Dead Prescient?
This introduces new problems in an ever-changing Past.
Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.
reply
share
PlayView
8 years ago
The loopers are necessary to make sure they are dead and the body disposed off without trace.
reply
share