The trailer for the upcoming futuristic action thriller "Looper," starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt (The Dark Knight Rises) and Bruce Willis, will be released online on Thursday. And each day (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday) leading up to the release, Sony Pictures has been unveiling new footage. Check out all three videos below.
Plot: In the new movie, time travel will be invented – but it will be illegal and only available on the black market. When the mob wants to get rid of someone, they will send their target 30 years into the past, where a "looper" – a hired gun, like Joe (Gordon-Levitt) – is waiting to mop up. Joe is getting rich and life is good... until the day the mob decides to "close the loop," sending back Joe's future self (Bruce Willis) for assassination.
"Looper" is written and directed by Rian Johnson (The Brothers Bloom, Brick), and co-stars Emily Blunt, Paul Dano, Noah Segan, Piper Perabo and Jeff Daniels. It is set to hit theaters on September 28th.
minkowskiwrites: on April 10th, 2012 at 7:19:39 PM
I like the idea, but revealing this much of the film smells of desperation. And bad, cheap marketing.
minkowskiwrites: on April 10th, 2012 at 7:41:08 PM
Having said that, I think this'll be a good movie in it's own right, though it may not be for mainstream consumption just as Brick was a truly fine film imo, though it hardly registers with the average moviegoer, and to see Bruce back in the time travel saddle after 12 Monkeys, well I know this won't be that great, but I hope it's good enough.
Idea seems cool, trailers looked cool, don't really understand how it seems desperate though... JGL is a great up and coming actor and i think him and Willis together will equal a success
minkowskiwrites: on April 10th, 2012 at 7:54:10 PM
The marketing seems desperate. It's like they don't have enough faith in the film to market it properly through the typical venues and methods. It smacks of John Carter, which IIRC *whistling* didn't do so well in theaters even after Disney gave away a considerable fraction of the film online.
I just don't see how they are giving away too much. The ending isn't given away, none of the other supporting actors are really mentioned, just the major plot points... I wonder if Jeff Daniels is trying to make a comeback.
minkowskiwrites: on April 10th, 2012 at 8:02:41 PM
Maybe. Both TDK and TDKR advanced the film's opening, but then those were/are highly anticipated films, this, not so much.
I think someone in marketing said "interest tracking in Looper is well outside the bounds, we need to do something NOW to infuse fresh interest", and then the other guy said "I know, we'll give away the beginning online!"
Not a bad idea, but for a film not really on most people's radar, it isn't giving me the best impression.
I'd prefer this than actually releasing the first 5 minutes as TDK and other movies did
minkowskiwrites: on April 10th, 2012 at 8:12:28 PM
Well, it Looper doesn't come out till September 28, 2012, so perhaps there's enough time to get some interest going for it.
I think the one thing Looper has in it's favor is the competition. Dredd opens one week before, and I don't see that stealing any box office thunder, and Resident Evil a week before that along with Nemo 3D. The same week, the 28th, Sandler's Hotel Transylvania opens.
There's good opportunity here for them, then, with the weak competition. The only thing I can see hurting Looper is Sandler's film. People are suckers for 3D and Adam still has a little BO appeal for some reason. OTOH Levitt isn't all that well known and Bruce, well, Bruce is Bruce and all that implies.
minkowskiwrites: on April 10th, 2012 at 8:21:27 PM
I think Levitt has already done far more than other actors, actors who are a-listers and in pretty much every film out there, like Sam W, who never earned the right to helm Avatar, but I digress, so I think Levitt is just one of those quietly successful actors who does quality work and has respect for himself and his trade. That's all that matters to me anyway.
"But i have hopes for this flick, mainly because i like people involved in this project."
Me too. I just hope we get a little Brick in the script/dialogue/story. Beautiful film imo.
Ya I've been a JGL fan since I was a young pup watching angels in the outfield. He almost reminds me of Ryan Gosling in that they were both able to establish themselves as good actors in movies that they weren't suited to when they were younger. Like brick for JGL or United States of Leiland for Gosling. I think JGL is only one more succesful role away from being considered for as many big time roles as Gosling is now
minkowskiwrites: on April 10th, 2012 at 8:34:23 PM
I think as long as they both treat their jobs like art, and they don't abuse what I see as a privilege (acting), and as long as they treat all their projects, no matter how inferior, with respect, and as long as they do the best job they can, they have my support.
When they start acting like spoiled children, like Lohan and that other chick that was in the news recently, Manda something, then I'll lose respect for them.
And so far, neither Gosling nor Levitt have done anything but act more like actors of yesteryear, the ones we all call legends.
Good to some class on this side of the pond for a change.
BadChadB33writes: on April 10th, 2012 at 9:17:53 PM
I agree this trailer for trailer bullsh*t is getting a tad bit much. I'll still see this though.
I'm consufsed now: I remember in Back To The Future that the rule in time travelling was to never come too close to yourself with the danger threat of annihilation. It kinda made sense.
With Looper, they don't have that problem and the question is: if time travelling was a possible action according to the Einstein's theory, how can you interfer with yourself in the past without endangering the immediate consequences of your future? And the actions you've accomplished with others directly or indirectly? One changed action implicates to alter the future of incalculable people's destiny with unpredictable consequences, good or bad. Then, if that was possible, we would be living in a loop, a perpetual present without any possibility of evolution...
Still, the concept has always fascinated me, therefore I'll be watching this!
I saw this at a screening a few months back and it was really awesome.
Just hope they don't give too much away before it opens.
minkowskiwrites: on April 11th, 2012 at 6:46:56 PM
@Bullit: Einstein's field equations actually allow for time travel. One solution to the equations involves an infinitely long rotating cylinder with of course infinite mass. Other solutions exist, and it is now thought possible that with enough mass, you could warm space back upon itself, but you could never go farther than the 'location', within the space-time block, where and when the time machine was created, and thus no paradoxes because the space-time manifold and all actions along it are fully consistent.
The point: there's no way, within understood physics, known to travel back before the creation of the time machine.
Another issue is whereby you have a wormhole with two 'mouths', one of which you accelerate near the speed of light. Because if time dilation, one of the mouths is now separated time-like, i.e., one mouth is in the future relative to the other, and the other is in the past relative to the other mouth. Now, someone at the future entrance can actually travel back in time to the past, but again, you can't go farther back in time than when the wormhole was established.
Finally, David Duetsch and others have suggest that if you could travel into the past, you would be traveling into the past of an alternate universe, a quantum-separated universe almost identical to our own, and thus you wouldn't change your past but that of the quantum-separated universe.
Hope that helps.
minkowskiwrites: on April 11th, 2012 at 6:52:34 PM
MINK, i listen to Coast2coast every night and Dr.Michiokaku(srry if my spelling sux) was explaining that the collider in Switzerland was close to being on the road to"sending the wall street journal into the past". I have one of his books and theres also this black scientist working hard on time travel.
I dont think we could travel to the future but maybe the past and there might be a cap on how far we could travel and also the amount of matter that could be transported
minkowskiwrites: on April 11th, 2012 at 8:43:29 PM
You can actually travel into the future, pornfly, it's easy, just travel at a large fraction of the speed of light. Time speeds up relative to your motion, and the closer you travel to the speed of light, asymptotically, the farther you travel into the future.
As for Michio Kaku, he's written some interesting books, but he's considered something of a quack in the physics field. He believes in UFOs and in general spends far too much time reading Whitley Strieber and entertaining Art Bell, which for Kaku may just be fun, but it hurts his reputation while his colleagues collect the awards.
As for the black physicist, yeah, I read his book. He decided to research building a time machine because of the death of his father. He thinks he can travel to the past and meet him again, and though that's moving and heart-warming, it isn't realistic, because even in his own book, he states that he doesn't think he can go any farther than the point at which his time machine becomes operable.