Movie Review: Looper (2012)

Recently, it seems that Joseph Gordon-Levitt has been riding an increasing wave of popularity with release after big release. Some of them have been very good, such as the Chris Nolan films Inception and The Dark Knight Rises, as well as 50/50, while some have been questionable, like Hesher. But it seems that he is not yet big enough to command that other actors conform to his image. In Looper, he plays the younger version of Bruce Willis, being made up to have somewhat similar but unconvincing facial features. Even though he doesn't look like a real person, I somewhat like the caricature-esque face, which makes it almost more play-like. It is not written for the live performance format, though, as it is a science fiction thriller set in 2044. Gordon-Levitt plays the role of Joe, a looper, which is an executioner. Time travel is invented in 2074 and by this time body-tracking has made it difficult to dispose of bodies, so what the mafia does is send them into the past to be killed by a looper. However, a looper has only a limited-time contract with the mafia until their future selves of 30 years are sent back to be killed by themselves, which is called "closing the loop." After this they are allowed to retire and enjoy the next 30 years. The reason for closing the loop, if it was explained in the movie, was missed by me (nor was the reason for the prevalence of such anachronistic weapons given). It simply seems to be a poor business practice. And what happens is a case in point: Joe fails to kill Old Joe, played by Bruce Willis, who escapes and wants to keep the undesirable events of the future from happening. Like any good sci-fi film, Looper clearly has a very interesting concept, but unlike movies such as In Time, it develops this concept into a good story. It is more than just an action film, blending themes of difficult moral decision making involving selfishness and loyalty, as well as being disturbing enough to leave me a little trippy while walking out of the theatre late at night (I thought that one time through the loop was enough). At no point is it boring; I was engaged throughout. In addition, Looper seemed like classic Bruce Willis, in that the action scenes were more like the ones in the first Die Hard rather than the outrageous ones in the sequels. Sometimes simple plausibility in these matters is more appealing than the MacGyver/van Damme/Brock Sampson who can kill legions with only a pair of chopsticks and some fishing line. It is by no means the best sci-fi thriller, but I think it gets the job done, particularly if that job is watching a satisfying movie of this genre when there are no other film priorities.

The Amazing Spider-Man and The Dark Knight Rises

In lieu of more formal reviews of these two summer blockbusters, Thrasher and Chicken Man got together for a little podcast to discuss the past and present movie versions of Batman and Spider-Man.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

The Dark Knight and Surveillance

Today for some quick entertainment, I decided to watch some portions of Christopher Nolan's instant classic, The Dark Knight. You may have seen in the past about how many of the themes and characters from Batman can have philosophical applications. But have you considered their relevance to surveillance? If you recall, Bruce Wayne uses the cell phone sonar technology developed by Lucius Fox to help him locate the Joker. However, Fox states that as long as this technology is used, he won't be a part of it; that it is "beautiful...unethical....dangerous. This is wrong." Does it change if it's not Batman, but your local police department doing the same thing? According to the Cato blog, various police departments have been using cell phones to track people for years, without warrants. Does this concern you?

Personally, my car has been searched twice by police with drug-sniffing dogs even though I have never used illegal drugs nor have any been in my vehicle. However, cops know that when they do this they will never face repercussions from their superiors because if they don't find anything (which of course they didn't in my case) they can just claim that the dog alerted on my car (something which I cannot prove to the contrary). This gives cops the ability to search any car they so please. How is this related to surveillance?

The more closely the government keeps track of you the more easily it can make life difficult for you. What if you have nothing to hide? Don't be so sure. Perhaps you own an unofficial copy of a copyrighted item. With civil asset forfeiture, your computer or other property might be confiscated without your even being charged with a crime. In a twisting of constitutional law, since your civil asset is not a person, the state requires you to prove its innocence (that it wasn't used in the commission of a crime) instead of the other way around. And even if you prove your stuff and yourself innocent, it will require a lot of money and time.

The question of whether art imitates life or vice versa has been asked many times. This is one of the times where they eerily and regrettably coincide. Stay safe out there.