Official Rian Johnson's LOOPER Thread

[AspectRatio1986]

WE WANNA TRAILER! WE WANNA TRAILER!

[The Gunslinger]

First look at JGL in Looper

[echo_bravo]

Originally Posted by AspectRatio1986

WE WANNA TRAILER! WE WANNA TRAILER!

Cosign

[AspectRatio1986]

I don't think your image was showing up, Gunslinger.

Kinda weird seeing Levitt with that makeup or prosthetic jaw or whatever it is...this is definitely in my Top 5 most anticipated for 2012.

[SkyNet]

If by chance someone had already seen this movie, they may be inclined to say that it was a pretty bad ass movie. He may say that it had a feel that was unlike any movie they had seen before and because of that, the movie felt very fresh and original.

That is, if someone had already seen it, to which I can not confirm!!!

[Smiert Spionam]

Been patiently waiting for this film for nearly 2 1/2 years now. I don't know how much more I can take

Please, for the love of all that is Holy, give us a fuckin' trailer!!!!!

PS Did anybody even give me props for mentioning that JGL should be cast in this in the OP? 'Cuz...y'know...I did say that

[outsyder]

The chin is distracting.

[DaveyJoeG]

The makeup looks fine to me. I couldn't even tell he was wearing a prosthetic. I won't really be able to tell without a side-by-side image.

[Trilljoy]

Originally Posted by SkyNet

If by chance someone had already seen this movie, they may be inclined to say that it was a pretty bad ass movie. He may say that it had a feel that was unlike any movie they had seen before and because of that, the movie felt very fresh and original.

That is, if someone had already seen it, to which I can not confirm!!!

Name a film you think is slightly better, and a film you think slightly worse.

[Smiert Spionam]

Trailer will be released April 12!

Still too far away

[echo_bravo]

I saw a shitty cam version of the trailer not too long ago but it got taken down literally right away.

From what I saw it looks good. I like the setting of the film. Very different from other sci fi movies.

[AspectRatio1986]

Cool, classy poster:

[The Gunslinger]

Even though JGL looks cool, poster is kind of blah to me.

[DaveyJoeG]

I'm looking forward to this one, I loved Brick.

[ilovemovies]

That's a badass poster! I want it!

[Digifruitella]

http://youtu.be/PTyWAfqDrGA teaser

Ok peeps, start complaining

[DaMovieMan]

I'm sorry but this looks and sounds fucking awful.

[psycheoutsteve]

Call me crazy, but I'm on board with this one. I like the talent involved and I enjoyed Johnson's film Brick. Plus, I'm always up for a time travel thriller.

[ilovemovies]

LOL! at JGL and Rian Johnson's comments about Levitt being screwed in real life because it's Bruce Willis and the being kind comment!

I wasn't a fan of the movie Brick and I never saw The Brothers Bloom (it looked kind of meh to me), but I'm getting more and more excited about this movie, the more I hear from it.

[Mr.HyDe807]

The only complaint I have for this is the fact that it's a teaser for a teaser.

Stop toying with me!

[Digifruitella]

.

[Mr.HyDe807]

Originally Posted by Digifruitella

.

I thought you meant the quality of the movie, but you were referring to the complaints of teaser for trailers.

...and I played right in your hand.

[Digifruitella]

Originally Posted by Mr.HyDe807

I thought you meant the quality of the movie, but you were referring to the complaints of teaser for trailers.

...and I played right in your hand.

Yeah I was referring to that, but if you're quoting the empty space, it was actualy me posting another video but realizing it was the same one, just titled differently. So I just edited it all out.

Anyway here's the trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=c1ylkD2RetY film looks more entertaining than his last two films.

[Bourne101]

Looks pretty cool.

[Mr.HyDe807]

I loved Johnson's previous efforts (Brick is amazing and Brothers Bloom was very solid), and this one looks no different. I can't wait until September!

[AspectRatio1986]

Its about damn time. Cant Wait.

[DaMovieMan]

Looks average. I'm stunned at the comments in the JoBlo page.

JGL's CGI make up is bad and makes characters from Redstar games look more real.

Take a minute to think about this premise: a guy works for an agency that kills people from the future. Apparently he waits for them to appear on some kind of picnic blanket in the middle of nowhere before he blasts them. Does that sound dumb only to me?

Film looks like a pothead's premise to try so hard at mindfucking the audience into believing that the film actually has some kind of meaninful point apart from just being little more than action movie with some bad CGI.

With the disappointing Brick and now this (didn't see Brothers Bloom, though that actually looks like harmless fun), Ryan Johnson will easily become the most overrated young director working today if this ridiculous hype continues.

Best thing he did was direct an excellent episode of the stellar show Breaking Bad.

[DaveyJoeG]

Brick was a great film.

[Bourne101]

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

Brick was a great film.

Most definitely.

[echo_bravo]

Fuckin dope

[DaMovieMan]

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

Brick was a great film.

Nothing great about that film apart from JGL's performance. A storyline where high-schoolers talk like 1940s film noir characters just, you know, because it sounds cool, makes no sense whatsoever. Plus the "villain" was laughably bad.

So it's most definitely not great.

But Johnson seems to be honing in on this craft of making movies with premises that make no sense and he, for some head-scratching reason, has a fanbase.

Very strange.

[DaveyJoeG]

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

Nothing great about that film apart from JGL's performance. A storyline where high-schoolers talk like 1940s film noir characters just, you know, because it sounds cool, makes no sense whatsoever. Plus the "villain" was laughably bad.

So it's most definitely not great.

But Johnson seems to be honing in on this craft of making movies with premises that make no sense and he, for some head-scratching reason, has a fanbase.

Very strange.

Realism is not a requirement for a compelling film. The fast-talking dialogue was one of my favorite parts of the movie. I saw it as a metaphor for how teenagers are wrapped up in their own little world that is just too cool for school. They are influenced by movies and those around them, they form cliques, and struggle to define their identity. Most high schoolers are faking some aspect of their lives to a certain extent and are trying way too hard to sound cool and hip, I thought the dialogue of Brick reflected that nicely.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

Take a minute to think about this premise: a guy works for an agency that kills people from the future. Apparently he waits for them to appear on some kind of picnic blanket in the middle of nowhere before he blasts them. Does that sound dumb only to me?

Yeah, I think it's kind of goofy, but I guess the difference between us is that it doesn't bother me. The part that struck me was him saying how well-paid they were, despite the fact that, y'know, it's literally simpler work than what your average throwaway mob enforcer does. Still, I'm not looking for some life shattering metaphysical experience with a film like this, and in terms of pure action I thought it looked absolutely fantastic. Like, the directing and cinematography seemed superb.

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

The fast-talking dialogue was one of my favorite parts of the movie. I saw it as a metaphor for how teenagers are wrapped up in their own little world that is just too cool for school.

I saw it as a metaphor for trying to break into the film industry when you're at most going to command a half a million dollar budget.

[DaMovieMan]

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

Realism is not a requirement for a compelling film. The fast-talking dialogue was one of my favorite parts of the movie. I saw it as a metaphor for how teenagers are wrapped up in their own little world that is just too cool for school. They are influenced by movies and those around them, they form cliques, and struggle to define their identity. Most high schoolers are faking some aspect of their lives to a certain extent and are trying way too hard to sound cool and hip, I thought the dialogue of Brick reflected that nicely.

But do you think that a created world in a film should stay true to its own reality? What kind of reality does Johnson show us in Brick? Everything about it makes it look like a modern-day setting environment except the fact that none of kids talk like normal kids (do you honestly know anyone who talks and acts like that?). ANd it's not that the dialogue is fast paced that it bothers me, it's the fact that it's directly copy pasted from a dozen Humphrey Bogart movies from the 40s. What high school kids watch 1940s film noir? Makes no sense.

And kids trying way too hard to be cool and hip get no sympathy from me if that's the dominant thing the director is pushing in our faces. Metaphors lose all meaning when they are constantly forced and shoved down throats.

[anakinsrise]

Looks like a slick,gritty action movie.But why cant they just kill the guy in the future?

[DaveyJoeG]

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

But do you think that a created world in a film should stay true to its own reality? What kind of reality does Johnson show us in Brick? Everything about it makes it look like a modern-day setting environment except the fact that none of kids talk like normal kids

Only a few characters use the Noir-speak. Characters like Tug, Brad, Emily, and Dode speak like normal teenagers.

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

(do you honestly know anyone who talks and acts like that?).

Most movies feature highly stylized dialogue that is not realistic. From action movie one-liners to hipster indies. Look at the films of Wes Anderson, David Mamet, PTA, Terrence Malick, etc. Most people don't talk like movie characters.

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

ANd it's not that the dialogue is fast paced that it bothers me, it's the fact that it's directly copy pasted from a dozen Humphrey Bogart movies from the 40s. What high school kids watch 1940s film noir? Makes no sense.

I find it very easy to believe that self-appointed detective Brendan would be a big fan of films from that era. I was watching 60s Samurai flicks when I was in high school. We're talking about kids from a wealthy California neighborhood with too much time on their hands.

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

And kids trying way too hard to be cool and hip get no sympathy from me if that's the dominant thing the director is pushing in our faces. Metaphors lose all meaning when they are constantly forced and shoved down throats.

I don't see it as shoving anything down our throats, I see it as consistent dialogue and characterization. The tone of the movie is consistent throughout its entire runtime. Nobody who watched Brick is going to claim it's realistic, but that can be said for the majority of movies released today. However I would say that it was compelling and unique. The dialogue is obviously a stylistic choice that bothered you, but for me it was one of the best things about the movie.

[DaMovieMan]

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

Only a few characters use the Noir-speak. Characters like Tug, Brad, Emily, and Dode speak like normal teenagers.

Don't really remember these characters. Pretty minor I'm guessing?

Most movies feature highly stylized dialogue that is not realistic. From action movie one-liners to hipster indies. Look at the films of Wes Anderson, David Mamet, PTA, Terrence Malick, etc. Most people don't talk like movie characters.

Difference between all those guys and Johnson here is that their characters talk within their own contexts. "stylized" dialogue and talking as if you're born in another era with a straight face are two completely different things.

I find it very easy to believe that self-appointed detective Brendan would be a big fan of films from that era. I was watching 60s Samurai flicks when I was in high school. We're talking about kids from a wealthy California neighborhood with too much time on their hands.

OK, but I'm guessing you weren't talking, jumping up and down and scratching your beard like Toshiro Mifune.

I don't see it as shoving anything down our throats, I see it as consistent dialogue and characterization. The tone of the movie is consistent throughout its entire runtime. Nobody who watched Brick is going to claim it's realistic, but that can be said for the majority of movies released today. However I would say that it was compelling and unique. The dialogue is obviously a stylistic choice that bothered you, but for me it was one of the best things about the movie.

But you first say it's a metaphor right? It's a consistent metaphor that gets re-inforced every time one of the major characters says anything (and the minor characters who speak like normal teenagers I guess are not part of that consistency). The argument is not that Brick isn't realistic (I love all kinds of "non realistic" movies from fantasy to comics and sci-fi, etc.) but that it's not true to its own world (it's supposed to be our world right? Not Gotham, or Middle Earth, or the Enterprise) making it seem like a film about kids playing like adults.

It's a stylistic choice that you don't really see in any other film for a reason, I think. Apart from that, the film's story was weak and incredibly predictable so I was really not impressed by anything apart from JGL sticking out and some nice shot composition.

[DaveyJoeG]

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

Don't really remember these characters. Pretty minor I'm guessing?

Tug was the guy with the wife beater, Brad is the football player, Emily is Brednan's deceased girlfriend. They have a fair amount of dialogue between them all. The only characters that do the noir-speak are Brendan, the Brain, and maybe The Pin. I think more characters in this film speak "realistically" than not.

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

Difference between all those guys and Johnson here is that their characters talk within their own contexts. "stylized" dialogue and talking as if you're born in another era with a straight face are two completely different things.

I don't think the dialogue in Brick would be more at home in any era of real life. They don't take direct dialogue from 40s noir films, but come up with their own style of dialogue. Brendan's lines like "Who is Emily eating with these days" represents the social significance of lunch period in high school. Humphrey never said anything like that.

Also, my guess is that dialogue from those films is an exaggerated version of what people actually spoke like. Brick does not take place in Gotham or Middle Earth but I don't see why it's not true to the world it establishes. Plenty of movies take place in the "real world" but feature strange or surreal aspects. Mulholland Drive is set in LA but there is a lot of crazy shit going on in that movie that is not realistic. Brick takes place in a high school where the kids are so cool they have a unique speaking style. I say that Brick is true to the world that it established because the dialogue and characterizations are consistent. It's not like Brendan does his Noir-speak then switches to a hip hop rhyming pattern halfway through the movie.

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

OK, but I'm guessing you weren't talking, jumping up and down and scratching your beard like Toshiro Mifune.

I've had my moments. I don't think anybody would argue that teenagers aren't highly influenced by what they think is cool.

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

But you first say it's a metaphor right? It's a consistent metaphor that gets re-inforced every time one of the major characters says anything (and the minor characters who speak like normal teenagers I guess are not part of that consistency). The argument is not that Brick isn't realistic (I love all kinds of "non realistic" movies from fantasy to comics and sci-fi, etc.) but that it's not true to its own world (it's supposed to be our world right? Not Gotham, or Middle Earth, or the Enterprise) making it seem like a film about kids playing like adults.

I couldn't say for sure why Johnson wrote the dialogue the way that he did, I didn't really think about it when I watched the film, all I knew was that I liked it. I've seen the film twice and the metaphor I brought up is my only guess. I explained above why I think Brick is true to the world it established.

[DaMovieMan]

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

Tug was the guy with the wife beater, Brad is the football player, Emily is Brednan's deceased girlfriend. They have a fair amount of dialogue between them all. The only characters that do the noir-speak are Brendan, the Brain, and maybe The Pin. I think more characters in this film speak "realistically" than not.

What about that girl that was supposed to be the "femme fatale"? I haven't seen it in a while but I remember more than three characters speaking as if they were 30 years old and born in the 40s.

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

I don't think the dialogue in Brick would be more at home in any era of real life. They don't take direct dialogue from 40s noir films, but come up with their own style of dialogue. Brendan's lines like "Who is Emily eating with these days" represents the social significance of lunch period in high school. Humphrey never said anything like that.

True, it's not directly taken, i was exagerrating when i said it's copy-pasted from Bogey, of course Johnson couldn't have done that but the language and tone is directly taken from film-noir, I think we agree on this. Lines just like that one you quoted that make the disconnect for me. Language is a huge part of making your world believable, perhaps the most important. And when you have teenagers not talking like teenagers for no reason, how am I meant to believe?

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

Also, my guess is that dialogue from those films is an exaggerated version of what people actually spoke like. Brick does not take place in Gotham or Middle Earth but I don't see why it's not true to the world it establishes. Plenty of movies take place in the "real world" but feature strange or surreal aspects. Mulholland Drive is set in LA but there is a lot of crazy shit going on in that movie that is not realistic. Brick takes place in a high school where the kids are so cool they have a unique speaking style. I say that Brick is true to the world that it established because the dialogue and characterizations are consistent. It's not like Brendan does his Noir-speak then switches to a hip hop rhyming pattern halfway through the movie.

Mulholland Drive didn't mess with language though. It's the world of David Lynch, hyper-stylized dark version of L.A. and the Hollywood game but no one in that film spoke out of their element. Whereas Brick, where you have major characters (teenagers) being "so cool" they speak and act like adults but actually really, are just teenagers. I can't get over it. It's way too jarring and makes no sense. What's worse, there's no reasnoable explanation for it in the movie. We just have to accept it and deal with it haha.

And maybe the main difference is that you felt the kids were cool because they were speaking the way they were, whereas I have the complete opposite feeling.

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

I've had my moments. I don't think anybody would argue that teenagers aren't highly influenced by what they think is cool.

Definitely can't argue with that and I'm sure we've all had moments. But they're moments. Teenagers who "act cool" 24-7 becuause they're influenced by pop culture are hard to sympathize with. IMO.

Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG

I couldn't say for sure why Johnson wrote the dialogue the way that he did, I didn't really think about it when I watched the film, all I knew was that I liked it. I've seen the film twice and the metaphor I brought up is my only guess. I explained above why I think Brick is true to the world it established.

I'm sure you're right about the metaphor, it would be my only guess too. Apart from a general homage as well. I just think there are much smarter ways to use metaphors and homage. About the world, if you say it's true then I still don't understand why some teenagers talk normally while others don't.

I should also take this time to point out that I hope you don't mind how back and forth we're going. I find these types of conversations and debates fascinating and that's why I;m still on the boards. I've got nothing against you liking this movie, it's great that you got something out of it. Judging from your favorte movies you seem to have good taste, so I just want to understand your love for this one

[adamjohnson]

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

But do you think that a created world in a film should stay true to its own reality? What kind of reality does Johnson show us in Brick? Everything about it makes it look like a modern-day setting environment except the fact that none of kids talk like normal kids (do you honestly know anyone who talks and acts like that?). ANd it's not that the dialogue is fast paced that it bothers me, it's the fact that it's directly copy pasted from a dozen Humphrey Bogart movies from the 40s. What high school kids watch 1940s film noir? Makes no sense.

And kids trying way too hard to be cool and hip get no sympathy from me if that's the dominant thing the director is pushing in our faces. Metaphors lose all meaning when they are constantly forced and shoved down throats.

No one in the 1940's really talked like they did in film noir either, but no one complains about that. It's a stylistic choice, plain and simple.