Film Review | Looper (2012)

The best films about time travel are usually the films that aren't actually about time travel at all. Wait, let me try that again. What I mean is, if you're going to include time travel as a plot device in your film then make sure that the intricate workings of time travel aren't the main focus of the proceedings. Think about Back To The Future, Primer and, er, Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure. Time travel should be there to facilitate the story rather than actually be the story. A two-hour dissection of how time travel is possible, along with what you can and can't do, will almost certainly fail to create a compelling piece of cinema. As long as the audience can buy into the way time travel works in your film, that's enough. Unfortunately, Looper doesn't quite manage this.

Looper is set primarily in 2044, where the USA has suffered economic collapse and crime is rife. Joe Simmons (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) works as a "looper" - a contract killer who murders and disposes of people sent back from the year 2074 when time travel has been invented, but is illegal and only used by the mob for criminal means. When the target sent back for Joe to kill is the older version of himself (Bruce Willis) and Joe fails to eradicate him, things get complicated for both versions of Joe.

As outlined by TheTelf in his analysis of Looper, the film is not without fault. Whilst some of the problems Telf has with the film I would only agree with to an extent, some of them are undeniable. The time travel element is flawed, and whilst it doesn't go as far as destroying the film, the inconsistencies and niggles are enough to detract a little too much from the film's overall impact.

The film also disappointingly falls into the trap of padding things out at a few key points by ramping up the mindless action and violence. Taking into account the more considered, cerebral nature of most of what is presented throughout the rest of the film, these sequences stick out in a negative way. Whilst it's fun to watch Bruce Willis brandish two oversized hand cannons and take out a plethora of anonymous bad guys, it just feels unnecessarily heavy-handed in a film written and directed by the same man who gave us the superbly understated Brick.

The flaws are there, but don't get me wrong: there is also a huge amount in Looper to enjoy. Joseph Gordon-Levitt continues to prove why he is one of the most special young talents in cinema today. Even donning prominent prosthetic make-up throughout to make him a more believable young version of Willis, Gordon-Levitt's performance is superb, including just the right amount of Willis influence without ever slipping into mimicry or pastiche. Willis too is reliably excellent, with a performance reminiscent of that which he gave some seventeen years earlier in another time-travel-based story, Twelve Monkeys. The support is littered with strong performances from the likes of Emily Blunt, Paul Dano and Jeff Daniels, giving the cast a collective feel of quality and excellence.

The film also wears its sci-fi influences on its sleeve, with everything from The Terminator to X-Men being covertly referenced throughout. Never feeling like cheap fanboy fare or lazy copycatting, these only serve to add further credence and weight to Looper's plot and setting. The world which the characters inhabit has a pleasing gritty feel, and things such as the slightly advanced technology of the near-future are neatly handled.

Ultimately, I really enjoyed Looper, but still left the film feeling slightly disappointed. As I said, there's a lot to enjoy here, and enjoy it I certainly did. But there's very little here that will stay with you on a deeper level, which is, when all is said and done, Looper's biggest flaw. With the wealth of talent both in front of and behind the camera, and one of the most original sc-fi concepts seen in years, this undoubtedly had the potential to be a ten-out-of-ten instant classic. As it stands, Looper is a great piece of cinema that will entertain more than most, but falls short of the cinematic perfection it feels like it could quite easily have been.

8/10

Film Review | Cowboys & Aliens (2011)

Cowboys & Aliens stars Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford. It's directed by the guy who successfully brought the Iron Man franchise to the big screen. These facts alone mean that the film being no more than enjoyable is a serious problem.

As its title may suggest, Cowboys & Aliens is a Western-sci-fi mash-up where the Old West meets extra-terrestrial invasion. Jake Lonergan (Craig) awakes in the desert with no memory of who he is or how he got there. Heading into the nearest town, a gold rush settlement on its knees named Absolution, Lonergan quickly finds himself on the wrong side of local cattle magnate Colonel Woodrow Dolarhyde (Ford) as well as his son Percy (Dano), before the aliens make themselves known to all within the town and begin abduction without prejudice.

Cowboys & Aliens may as well be sponsored by Ronseal (with apologies to any non-UK readers) in that it does exactly what it says on the tin. It has cowboys - some of whom even herd cattle - and it has aliens. They do battle. It's fun. Does it push boundaries? Certainly not. Does it come across as some B-movie knock-up with a minuscule budge? No, it doesn't. The plot paces along without, for the most part, outstaying its welcome. The whole idea brings to mind that episode of The Big Bang Theory where Leonard, Sheldon and company are taken in by the "Mystic Warlords Of Ka'a" playing-card-based  role-playing-game expansion pack "Wild West And Witches". If you've ever wondered who would win in a battle between Billy The Kid and the aliens from Independence Day then Cowboys And Aliens will be right up your street. Otherwise it'll probably entertain you, but do very little else.

Unfortunately, that's Cowboys & Aliens's biggest failing. The last film that teamed up Indiana Jones and James Bond was Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade, and, taking into account popular and critical opinion, it delivered a resounding cinematic triumph. Cowboys & Aliens doesn't. It's not awful by any means, but  neither is it anything spectacular. It barely manages "good" at times. It brings together the most recent 007 - you know, the one that saved the franchise from self-parody - and Dr. Henry Jones Jr., one of the greatest action adventure heroes of all time, and makes something a notch above average at best.

Not only that, but the director is Jon Favreau, the man who realised that Robert Downey Jr. is pretty much the real-life version of Tony Stark. When you appreciate that the supporting cast features an underutilised Sam Rockwell and Paul Dano - watch Moon and There Will Be Blood respectively to see the talent we're dealing with here - it won't be long before you start asking the question: why isn't this film better?

If you're looking for something easy on the grey matter that mashes up two genres you may have thought would never collide in any meaningful way on screen, Cowboys & Aliens may be one of the few worthwhile options you're left with before plumbing the depths of the straight-to-DVD bargain bin. But, if you're a fan of modern cinema, it's likely that you'll find yourself shaking your head at the talent going to waste here as you watch that six-shooter aimed squarely at ET's over-sized skull.

6/10