Looper represents the third feature film from writer-director Rian Johnson. Arguably, the strength of this film allowed Johnson to secure his next project, which will gain him worldwide renown: helming the next two Star Wars movies (after Episode VII). When Looper was released, before I became seriously interested in cinema, I wanted to see it. Something about the trailer seemed intriguing to me. Having finally seen it, I can confidently say that I am excited for Johnson’s take on the Star Wars Saga and my younger self judged correctly.
Looper takes place in 2044 and 2074. In 2074, time travel has been invented, outlawed, and used by the mob as means for disposing of bodies. When organized crime wants someone dead, they simply send this unfortunate individual back in time where a looper kills him. A looper is someone in 2044 who kills those who the mob sends back, disposes of the body, and collects a hefty payment. Eventually, however, the mob wants to end their contract with loopers. To do so, they send back an older version of the looper to be killed, along with an exorbitant last payday. This is known as
…show more content…
Everyone deserves a few sentences, but for the sake of space I will limit my praise. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is great as Joe, bringing a humanity and likability that is essential to the character. Bruce Willis gives a good performance as Old Joe, being both merciless and passionate in his actions (not to mention being a beast). Emily Blunt gives perhaps the most layered performance as Sara, conveying sexual longing, anger, frustration, fear, motherly love, and resolve. Paul Dano as Seth and Jeff Daniels as Abe both make their relatively small roles memorable with their dedicated performances. Perhaps the most memorable performance of Looper, however, comes from Pierce Gagnon as Cid, the creepiest five year old ever. Gagnon shows talent beyond his years as he perfectly balances childish innocence and creepy cognizance and
... Finch and J.B. Biggley stood out the most to me because they showed that you really don’t have to be very smart to make it. Biggley stood out because he didn’t seem to do a lot of work, he was just there to fire people and Finch stood out because he used charm and just the book to advance in the company. I think young adults and adults who are into economics, how companies work or even realistic plays would like the production that was put in. It was simple and gave a clear point.
Overall, the actors chosen to play each role were well picked. All of them portrayed the role they were supposed to very well. In particular, I think the best two were Ruby Archuleta and Ladd Devine. Ruby is a strong character in general, with obvious weaknesses, like her stubbornness in what may not have been the best times to be stubborn, making her well rounded. Ladd Devine is a good ‘villain’.
Their acting chops were very impressive whether it was comedic, emotional, or just stunning overall. Yet, on the other hand, some minor characters weren’t as well heard as others. I feel as the play could be better if some of the minor characters had projected their voice more, allowing their character to be known. However, although some voices were much stronger than others, all actors were full of talent, capable of dealing with script’s requirements, and did a good job
One of the main products of this movie that popped out to me was the stars. They all seemed to be great actors even though I only knew one of them. For example, I thought that Ian Michael Smith did a great job portraying Simon Birch. He made the movie cute and funny all at once. I also thought that Joseph Mazello did a great job portraying relatable feelings in the movie. You could tell by his facial expressions what his mood was. All the actors did a great job and I can’t pinpoint one of them who did worse than the
All characters in the movie were played well by the actors in my opinion. They
I thought Sling Blade was written and filmed well. It did get slow in parts, but overall it kept my attention. I picked up on minute details that on a regular basis I wouldn’t have. This paper made me see the underlying aspects such as the music, lighting, and script. It made me pay attention to what the characters were saying and how they were relating. I now look at film in a new light. I don’t just watch the surface. I dig deeper and watch for everything.
The acting was superb! James Stewart will always represent the good guy trying to make his way through life in an honorable way.
Motion Pictures have always had a strong influence in today’s culture, but maybe none as prevalent as Star Wars. Originating with Episode 4 A New Hope, the series boomed from 1977 to 2005 with yet another addition coming in 2015. The strongest of the series was the original trilogy episodes 4, 5, and 6, all generally released in the 1980s. As one of the strongest film francaises still today, it’s impact within the 1980s was only the tip of the iceberg. Children and adults alike still anticipate the new edition of this seemingly endless journey. If any singular film series still holds prevalence in its future decades it is Star Wars: Original Trilogy.
Dir. George Lucas. Perf. Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, and Hayden Christenson. Lucasfilm Ltd, 2005.
The imagined world created in Looper gives free play to the imagination. The futuristic composition of this made up world gives the feeling that the normal balance of nature can be altered, with time travel, telekinetic abilities given to people, and highly advanced technology. The narrative structure of this film makes the main character, Joe, the protagonist. His objective in this movie is to do his job by killing whoever is sent back to him from the future.
Cruncher's grave robbing graphically illustrates the theme of resurrection: he literally raises people from the dead. One of the plot's biggest surprises is based on Cruncher's uunsuccesful attempt to unearthed the body of Roger Cly, the spy who testified with John Barsad against Charles Darnay. In France, years after his graveyard expedition, Cruncher discloses that Cly's coffin contained only stones and dirt. This information enables Sydney Carton to force John Barsad, Cly's partner, into a plot to save Charles Darnay's life.
As Oskar Schindler, Liam Neeson does an outstanding job of portraying a savy buisness man and a caring human being. Ben Kingsley plays his part with heart and cleverness. Ralph Fiennes is so completely believable as Amon Goeth. I would have never wanted to cross the path of that man. The people who played the jews were so convincing in their parts. This film truly has the feel of a documentary.
I liked the way Mary Elizabeth Winstead who played Wendy took her part so seriously and you could actually feel the fear she had after her premonition. Also Kris Lemche who played Ian McKinley acted the scene where they was at ‘build it’ really well because he was throwing everything Wendy says right back at her. When she tells him about ‘deaths design’ he then replies with “Ok. Ok, what if, for example, the last in line were to make the utilitarian choice. Kill themselves. Well, wow, that's pretty much gonna ruin any plan deaths put in motion. And even better, I think that's gonna save, five skipped lives. Any takers?” He says it so seriously that it made me think he was a bit tapped in the head.
The actors consisted of many different people and characters in the movie. Some of the actors were John Travolta (Danny), Olivia Newton- John (Sandy), Jeff Conaway (Kenickie), Michael Tucci (Sonny), Barry Pearl (Doodie), Kelly Ward (Putzie), Stockard Channing (Betty Rizzo), Didi Conn (Frenchy), Jamie Donnelly (Jan), Dinah Manoff (Marty), Lorenzo Lamas (Tom). There is more as well but those are the main actors I’d say. I think the main actor/actress, Travolta, and Newton-John did the best and played their parts well. The other actors/actresses did well too, but I really liked the performance from the main 2.
Novels and film go hand-in-hand in today’s culture because it is so easy to compare a movie like the Hunger Games to the novel the Hunger Games, but it is not so easy to compare a novel and a movie that on the surface seem to be so different. Chinua Achebe’s novel Arrow of God takes place in 1920’s Africa in the country of Nigeria. Achebe weaves the tale of a tragic hero, Ezeulu, conflicted against his native religion and duties and the new Christian religion that was being brought over by the Europeans. On the other hand, Star Wars: A New Hope, directed by George Lucas, is a film about a young boy named Luke Skywalker who is brought into a foreign “religion” and taken on a journey with a variety of other characters.