Looper (Sci-Fi-Action-Thriller von Rian Johnson)

[StS]

Director: Rian Johnson  ("Brick")
Screenwriter: Rian Johnson
Starring: Bruce Willis, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Emily Blunt, Paul Dano, Noah Segan, Piper Perabo, Jeff Daniels
Imdb

In the futuristic action thriller "Looper," 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 (Joseph 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. The film is written and directed by Rian Johnson and also stars Emily Blunt, Paul Dano, and Jeff Daniels. Ram Bergman and James D. Stern produce.

[DisposableMiffy]

Wäre ja an der Zeit, dass Willis wieder in einem wirklich guten Film zu sehen ist. Klingt jedenfalls schon mal nicht uninteressant.

[Jerry Garcia]

QUELLE: moviecarpet.

Hier ein erster Teaser:

Looper Movie Teaser # 1

[Angelus Mortis]

Das sieht ja mal ganz nett aus. Rian Johnson ist bisher allerdings völlig an mir vorbeigegangen, zumindest Brick scheint sich ja zu lohnen ... letzterer wird mal geordert, auf Looper wird gespannt gewartet. :D

[Moonshade]

Brick UND Brothers Bloom lohnen sich - die etwas anders als erwarteten Filme, ich hoffe, das schwingt in "Looper" noch ein bißchen mit...

[Angelus Mortis]

Ah okay, ich werde mir erstmal Brick zu Gemüte führen, Brothers Bloom setze ich aber auch auf die Liste. :icon_smile:

[Hitfield]

Ich bin gespannt, denn "Brothers Bloom" von Rian Johnson war spitze. Eine tolle Mischung aus Komödie, Melodram, Krimi und Liebesfilm mit einem der besten Drehbücher der letzten Jahre, hervorragender Besetzung und tollem Soundtrack (8/10). "Brick" habe ich noch nicht gesehen.

[StS]

"Brick" ist einer meiner persönlichen Lieblingsfilme - von "Brothers Bloom" war ich dagegen (vielleicht entsprechend) enttäuscht. Ich hoffe einfach mal, dass "Looper" nicht Johnson´s "Source Code" wird...

[StS]

Nun der vollständige Teaser-Trailer:
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=89137

[Discostu]

Gute Schauspieler, gute Idee und Style scheint der Film auch zu haben. Jetzt muss man nur noch auf ein akzeptables Drehbuch hoffen  :icon_smile:

[Pinhead_X]

Wird geschaut ;) Weiss man was das für ein Song im Trailer ist?? Schockt total :-D

[StS]

[Robi]

New International Trailer:

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=91998

[blade2603]

der Trailer gefällt mir!

[StS]

Neuer US-Trailer:
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=92064

[blade2603]

Comic-Con Interview: Looper Director Rian Johnson
Source: Edward Douglas July 18, 2012

Friday was a crazy day for ComingSoon.net at Comic-Con as we had back-to-back interviews with a bunch of different directors, though the one interview we were really looking forward to was with Looper director Rian Johnson.

We first met Johnson while he was doing promotion for his first movie Brick and then again during the long process of getting his second movie The Brothers Bloom released, but fans of Johnson's work knows what a creative and talented filmmaker he is, often combining rather diverse genres to create movies unlike others.

Looper does just that by combining classic gangster movies with a science fiction element. Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays a "looper," a gangster hitman working out of a rural area of the Midwest, who takes care of mob targets that have been sent back through time to be disposed of. It pays well and the job's going great until Bruce Willis shows up in front of his shotgun to be killed and he realizes that the guy he's been assigned to kill is himself from decades in the future.

It's a very different movie for Johnson due to the genre, the fact there's a lot more action in it and that it's getting a major studio release across the country, unlike his previous two movies which never played in more than a couple hundred theatres. We're pretty excited that more moviegoers will be able to experience Johnson's creativity on the big screen.

Unfortunately, our beloved Flipcam died right as we started the interview, but you can read our brief chat below, and hopefully we'll have a chance for a more in-depth interview after we've actually seen Looper.

ComingSoon.net: The first time we talked about this movie was in Toronto when you there with The Brothers Bloom...
Rian Johnson: Yeah, I was working on it.

CS: So has the idea changed a lot over the ideas or have you kept most of that script you were writing?
Johnson: I honestly can't remember at Toronto where I was at. The basic premise of it, just the plot device of what the whole thing hinges on, I wrote as a short film like 10 years ago, back before "Brick" actually, and I never ended up shooting it. It just sat in a drawer, and then it was around the time of Toronto when we were putting Bloom out that a couple bigger ideas and themes attached themselves to this idea and that's when it kind of took off as a feature. I'm guessing I was pretty well down the path by the time we talked then.

CS: When you first were writing it, was it going to be a smaller indie movie like "Brick" or did you always know this would need a bigger budget?
Johnson: We knew because of the sci-fi stuff, we would need a bigger budget. My producer Ron Bergman is great in that when I'm writing, he tells me to not think about budget or sale, "Just write the story that you want to tell," so I wasn't thinking in those terms, but in the back of my head, I knew we were going to need a bigger scale for it. Also, it has action in it, it has gun fight sequences and chases. It's got some stuff that I really wanted to play around with, and that takes a little bit more money.

CS: You've had action in both "Brick" and "Brothers Bloom"...
Johnson: Yeah, sure.

CS: But when you start bringing Bruce Willis into an action movie...
Johnson: It's a whole 'nother level.

CS: You've worked with Joe before, but how did you go about approaching Bruce about doing this? Just sent him the script?
Johnson: Yeah, just sent the script to him. We had Joe in it, I'd written the part for Joe, so he was in it before the beginning, and then Bruce was the first piece of the puzzle to fit in. We sent him the script, he was really into it. It was shockingly easy. I just sat down with him and we really dug each other and we were off to the races. Yeah, Bruce just threw himself into this movie. He was awesome to work with, we had such a good time together working on set, and he was really selfless in terms of his approach to the part. He had no ego and he was just willing to go work wherever the part needed him to go. I think he gives a really vulnerable and credible performance in it. I'm really excited for people to see it, it's so good.

CS: One of the things that really sets "Brick" and "Brothers Bloom" apart is the dialogue, which is very distinctive. That's definitely one of the takeaways most people have from your movies, so have you been able to fit that level of writing into this sort of sci-fi action movie or did you noticeably change your style of writing?
Johnson: Well, the answer is you do what each story requires. "Brick," there were really specific reasons we had that ornate language and "Bloom," the same thing, but this, I actually wanted to do that much less. I wanted to make this much more stripped down and less stylized in terms of the language, and I was frankly just trying to use less dialogue. I was trying to say more with less, that was my challenge to myself with this one.

CS: Did that change once you started shooting or was that something you predetermined going in?
Johnson: No, that was in the script phase, and then you get in the editing room and you end up cutting out even more of the dialogue. It really becomes about how little you can say and still have it be completely effective, and that was the game for me on this one. It wasn't about being verbose, it was about being economic.

CS: A lot of times with science fiction movies, you need exposition to explain the concept, and it's funny because I just spoke to "Total Recall" director Len Wiseman, and Philip K. Dick is a perfect example where the concept is fairly complex. Was this a concept that was easier to explain?
Johnson: No, well that's the thing. It had a tricky concept that I knew we had to explain, but I wanted to get that out of the way very quickly. I wanted to get past that very quickly and get into the meat of the story. I kind of made the decision to just explain it at the beginning of the movie to the audience, to have voiceover at the beginning with Joe, and from the very first draft of the script, that was the approach I had to take. I was like, "You know what? Let's just state the complicated things and get them out of the way and get the story started." That's the approach we take and it's kind of the equivalent of the opening scroll on "Blade Runner," but with Joe doing it in voiceover.

CS: Bruce has a lot of experience with action so when you start doing those scenes, was it helpful to have him around, since he's probably done anything possible when it comes to action, I'd imagine?
Johnson: Yeah, he showed Joe the ropes. There's a scene where they have to fight together and Bruce has Joe in a half-nelson, dragging Joe across the floor of this diner, and Bruce was like, "Do it this way" and Joe did it and his eyes just went wide and he went, "Holy sh*t, Bruce Willis is showing me how to take a punch!" It was pretty cool, but you're in good hands when you've got Bruce. It was exactly what I wanted also because you don't cast Bruce Willis in a movie and not listen when he has an idea about an action scene.

CS: I'm really happy that Sony is getting behind this movie, because I remember with "Brick," everybody loved the movie but it just didn't connect theatrically, and "Brothers Bloom" was the same. How is it having a big studio behind "Looper" and doing such a big push at places like Comic-Con?
Johnson: It's a whole 'nother ball game, it's exciting. This is the first time I'm going through this. It's the first time, like you said, where I've had a movie where the studio really loves the movie and really feels they know what to do with it, they know how to get it out there. It's weird to have a movie in an environment like Comic-Con that people are paying attention to, it's pretty cool! (laughs). It's a whole new ball of wax, but also, I'm really proud of the movie. I'm just excited for people to see it, and the idea that more people will get to see it, that's really exciting to me.

CS: Do you think the people who go see "Looper" who then go back to check out your earlier movies will be thrown off by how different it is?
Johnson: Oh, I don't know. I've got no clue. They're such different movies. You have to tell me after you see it. I guess there's connective tissue between them but they're all three so different. I honestly don't know.

CS: Do you have any idea what you want to do next and have you developed anything between the last two movies?
Johnson: I wish, I wish. If I had half a brain, I would have been developing it. No, we finished this thing and I'm trying to figure out what the next one's going to be.

CS: I guess you're pretty busy with promotion between this and WonderCon and earlier this year.
Johnson: Yeah, there's a lot of stuff to be done, but I still have time to figure it out. I have a couple ideas I've been working on, but honestly, I had such a good time making this, I wanted to be in production making a movie very quickly after this one. I actually read a lot of scripts and I read a lot of really good stuff. Honestly, I read a lot of stuff that was better than anything I could ever write, but I realized in reading it all that's what turns me on about all this is finding something from the beginning and seeing it through to the end. It's just kind of what I'm in it for, so for better or for worse, that's what I gotta do.

CS: Which basically means you'll have a movie every three or four years.
Johnson: Yeah, I want to figure out a way that I can get faster at writing or maybe to write two at once. I want to get one ahead so I can be doing these a little faster, 'cause making them is the fun part, writing sucks.

CS: That seems to be the general consensus with many writer/directors I've spoken to where they want to do their own stuff but unless you're Woody Allen where you can write and direct one movie a year...
Johnson: Yeah, Woody Allen churns them out, he's a machine. He's Woody Allen!

Looper opens nationwide on September 28.

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=92620

[StS]

[StS]

Animierter Trailer:
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=95141

[StS]

8-)

[Dionysos]

Der Film kommt bei den Kritikern offenbar sensationell an:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/looper/ (derzeit 92%)
http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=136821 (5/5)
http://www.filmstarts.de/kritiken/101944-Looper.html (4,5/5)

[blade2603]

Wow... find den Trailer und die Idee schon richtig gut... aber das das Gesamtprodukt dann auch so gut erscheint, ..... hervorragend!

[Riddick]

War zuerst etwas skeptisch, da es ja inzwischen genug Zeitreise/Sci-Fiction-Streifen gibt. Nach dem Trailer, welchen ich bei uns im Kino auf einer sehr gr0ßen Leinwand gesehen habe, und den positiven Meinungen bin ich aber nun doch sehr gespannt. Freitag gehe ich rein.

[StS]

Mit ,,Looper" hat Regisseur und Drehbuchautor Rian Johnson (,,Brick") einen ebenso sehenswerten wie nachdrücklich weiter zu empfehlenden dramatischen Science-Fiction-Neo-Noir-Action-Thriller geschaffen, der sich erfreulich ansprechend vom sonstigen ,,Mainstream-Allerlei" der Traumfabrik Hollywoods abhebt. U.a. mit einem originellen Konzept, einer clever ausgestalteten (mehrschichtigen) Erzählstruktur, inspirierten Kamera- und Regiearbeit, unaufdringlich arrangierten Special-F/X, die mit Ausnahme eines ,,Flugs" durch ein Zuckerrohrfeld zudem von durchweg hoher Qualität sind, sowie einer rundum überzeugenden Besetzung gesegnet, punktet der Film vor allem im Bereich seiner stark ausgearbeiteten Charaktere, für welche sich der Verlauf (zwischen regelmäßigen Härten und Action-Sequenzen) immer wieder genügend Zeit einräumt. Obendrein wird der Zuschauer mehrfach von speziellen Offenbarungen, moralischen Zwickmühlen sowie Veränderungen der Plot-Entfaltung überrascht – wobei sich die Story (per se) auch nicht davor scheut, zum Teil echt düstere inhaltliche Pfade zu beschreiten. Statt einer gelackten, stromlinienförmigen Studio-Produktion kann sich der geneigte Betrachter somit an einem wohltuend ,,kantigen", smarten, kreativen und verdammt unterhaltsamen Werk erfreuen, das seinen unverkennbaren ,,Indie-Touch" gleichermaßen stolz wie ergiebig zur Schau trägt und (im Grunde zweifellos) mit zu den Film-Highlights des Jahres 2012 gezählt werden darf...  8,5/10

[elpadro]

Stimme Dir in vielerlei Hinsicht zu - Kameraarbeit, Abgrenzung vom "Mainstream-Allerlei" sowie das präsentieren moralischer Zwickmühlen.

Aber ich fand viele Szenen dann doch zu langgezogen, bewegungs- und Tonfrei.
Geradezu sinnbildlich, dass in meiner Vorstellung ein Mann mit voller Inbrunst die ruhigen Szenen mit schönstem Schnarchen untermalt hat.
Er war offensichtlich ohne Begleitung da, und es hat sich niemand Fremdes getraut, ihn mal anzustubsen.  :doof:

Und nun etwas, was ich dann echt nicht nachvollziehen kann, um nicht sogar zu sagen, für eine gefährliche Botschaft halte:

Spoiler: zeige

Das Kind zu retten ist absolut verantwortungslos in meinen Augen.
Seine übersinnlichen Kräfte sind erklärterweise nicht vollständig kontrollierbar - die eigene Mutter benötigt einen Überlebenssafe, um sich vor den unvorhersehbaren und dann auch in ihrer Wirkungskraft unkontrollierbaren Zerstörungsanfällen zu schützen.
Schon ein Stolpern oder eine kurze emotionale Spannung genügen, um eine absolute Vernichtungsorgie in Gang zu setzen.
Da fällt mir spontan ein Vergleich ein - man nehme ihn mir nicht übel:

Ein (wir unterstellen mal unheilbar) borderline-erkrankter Hund, der seinem eigenen Halter gegenüber in aggressiven Episoden Schaden zufügt oder zufügen zu versucht - ja, soll es geben.
"Ist doch meistens so ein toller und liebevoller Begleiter. Man muss ihn nur zu nehmen wissen oder in Ruhe lassen, wenn seine Stimmungsschwankung ihn mal in Richtung Aggression treibt."
Leider aber hat er ganz schön gesundheitsschädigende Kräfte und Werkzeuge.
Solch ein Tier gehört - bei aller Liebe - entweder absolut sicher Isoliert, was ihm nun wirklich selbst nicht gut tun muss, oder eben eingeschläfert.

Aber ein Kind mit telekinetischen Fähigkeiten, wo auch keine Gitterstäbe viel gegen ausrichten können, da hört's dann auf.

Um auf den sekundären Vorteil des Rettens dennoch einzugehenn: Was auch immer der "Rainmaker" später auch Gutes durch das Auslöschen irgendwelcher Gangster tun mag - das immanente Risko der unberechenbaren Aggression Unbeteiligter gegenüber bleibt.

Daher bin ich bei 6/10. Wegen der Mischung aus einer nicht vertretbarer Botschaft am Schluß sowie fehlenden Tempos an einigen Stellen.

[Drunterstehn]

@elpadro

Verstehe deinen Einwand, aber mal auf das hier und jetzt heruntergebrochen sind solche Fähigkeiten in der uns zur Zeit herschenden Physik ja sowieso unrealistisch.

...und in einer Welt in der es funktionieren würde wie im Film gezeigt, stimmt ja dann sowieso was nicht !?!

Film bekommt von mit 7/10

Rein Storytechnisch sollte man sich was das Zeitreisenund Verbrechen angeht, dann lieber nochmal "TimeCop" zu Gemüte führen.

[Riddick]

Ich fand den Film auch sehr gelungen. Die Story war "mal was anderes" und fernab vom Mainstream. Action und Optik passten ebenfalls. Besonders gefallen hat mir Bruce Willis, der nach sehr vielen 08/15-Rollen sich mal wieder von seiner besseren Seite zeigen konnte. Lediglich im Mittelteil (Farmszenen) hatte der Film ein paar kleine Längen, welche aber zu verkraften sind.

8/10

[DisposableMiffy]

Gerade gesehen. Im Prinzip ein bewährtes Gangsterfilm-Thema, aber anders als gewöhnlich erzählt und inszeniert. Dank eines guten Drehbuchs, das der "Killer jagt Killer"-Story noch ein paar weitere Facetten hinzufügt und die Figuren vor (schwerwiegende) Fragen und moralisch-ethische Dilemma stellt, die über das eigene Überleben hinaus gehen, und das zudem ohne haarsträubende Logiklöcher aufwartet, unterhält der Film bestens und bleibt immer spannend. Verzichtet wird auch auf übertriebene Action. Die kommt zwar vor und auch nicht wenig, wird aber nicht zum Selbstzweck eingesetzt, was man den Machern positiv anrechnen darf, da der Film durchaus Momente hat, wo andere Drehbuchschreiber und Regisseure evtl. den "billigen" Ausweg genommen und in wilde Baller- und Krawallorgien abgeglitten wären. Ebenfalls verzichtet wird auf stylische Hochglanzzukunftsklischees, 2044/74 sehen eher dreckig und gewöhnlich aus. Dazu spielen Levitt und Willis überzeugend, gerade letzterer zeigt deutlich mehr als in den meisten seiner anderen Action-Rollen der letzten Jahre. Das Ende ist auch super, weil konsequent und schlicht. Dass sie das verkacken, war vorher meine größte Befürchtung, die sich jedoch als grundlos erwiesen hat.

9/10

Zusammen mit "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy" mein bisheriges Jahreshighlight.

[RoboLuster]

[StS]

Zum letzten Poster: Naja. Schön, Piper auch mal etwas prominenter im Werbematerial vertreten zu sehen - aber was soll die Explosion und der Wagen? Kam der überhaupt im Film vor? Sieht irgendwie uninspiriert "zusammengeklebt" aus...

[RoboLuster]

Das muss bei dieser Art Poster doch so sein.^^