Although the premise of Looper is beset by a strange logic all its own which raises all sorts of questions without ever really addressing them, it is remarkably consistent, which is a huge plus.  The story must be consistent, or otherwise it wouldn’t make any sense at all.  Just following the story isn’t enough; this movie demands that one consider the ramifications of the present on the future, and if the past can be changed by actions in the future (it’s all about time travel, you see).

Mob assassins called “loopers” dispatch people sent back thirty years through time, so that the victims will never exist in the future.  Things go awry when first one looper (Paul Dano) fails to kill his future self; then the same situation faces another looper (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) when his future self (Bruce Willis) arrives.  The plot then segues to the mystery as to why the loopers are being sent back through time to be killed, which involves a woman (Emily Blunt) and her son (Pierce Gagnon).  Yet even here, all is not what it appears to be.

Rian Johnson’s Looper reminded me of Christopher Nolan’s Inception, another mind-blowing quasi-science fictional maze of mischief.  Looper is a film which demands high concentration and probably repeated viewings in order to fully appreciate all of the nuances of the script.  Yet for all of its intricate plotting, decent acting and neat special effects, I was not blown away by the film as I was with Inception.  I like it, but I don’t love it.  But I’ll certainly be thinking about it, and I’ll try to see it again at some point to clarify my thoughts about it.  ☆ ☆ ☆.  17 October 2012.