|
God. The highlighted frame is "Old Joe ordered his steak and eggs 30 seconds ago. Meat that has only been cooked for 30 seconds is not safe to eat." I need a huge  spitting out smaller s.
|
| # ? Jan 19, 2013 19:08 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 19:12 |
|
|
What is that emoticon based on anyways
|
| # ? Jan 19, 2013 19:29 |
|
|
Steve Yun posted:What is that emoticon based on anyways 
|
| # ? Jan 19, 2013 19:41 |
|
|
The fact that he knows JGL is Robin but doesn't recognize the dude who played the preacher & twin in There Will Be Blood says a lot about him. Also the fact that one of the points is basically that he doesn't believe poor white children exist in America even during what is obviously an extremely economically depressed future ("...almost runs over the whitest Ethiopian kid ever" or something).
|
| # ? Jan 19, 2013 22:56 |
|
|
I liked this movie. Now I'm going to sperg about time travel for a second. I don't care about how it works, or how realistic it is. I am perfectly happy to focus on the themes of the story and not worry about the time travel. That's why I'm so loving pissed that the movie shoves two concrete yet contradictory examples of how time travel "works" in the movie. The the doc is chopping limbs off of young Seth, old Seth is "updating" and from the perspective of the present, with no "retroactive" changes. This is time-travel concept that is unique to movies and television, and it is a neat way of showing the audience cause and effect type things and a great excuse for special effects and twists (see Frequency for another example of this). It's use in this movie is visually striking, thematically relevant, and horrifying. Due to it's prominance and memorability, it's very hard to not accept that the movie is telling you this is how time travel works. You see old Seth running, and then his leg vanishes and he falls. It doesn't take take "thinking about it too much" to see that the movie doesn't care that he never would have been running in the first place if his leg got cut off in the past. The movie is straight up telling us that only physical/mental changes propagate through the loop, not "causal changes" i.e. because things will have been different they are not suddenly different. Then, at the climax of the film, young Joe kills himself, and old Joe VANISHES. Why? Is it because he's dead and never could have come to the farm? The earlier scene suggests that if, instead young Joe had jumped feet first into a wood chipper, old Joe would fall to the ground with no legs. If young Joe had chopped his arms off, old Joe would suddenly have no arms. Old Joe suddenly vanishing somewhat implies that he vanished because he never could have come there. This is troublesome. Now, really the only way this could be avoided would be to have old Joe just fall down. It's not like you could show a "healed" hole through his chest because that also wouldn't make any sense. I'm not saying that would be better. I'm mostly just annoyed that a movie that's not supposed to be about time travel so unavoidably threw the Seth scene in my face. It's such a good scene, but it's a time travel gimmick, which is exactly the kind of thing you need to avoid if you don't want people to think about the mechanics of time travel. It's almost like the had a really thematically solid film that happened to have time travel in it and then they gave into the temptation of "Oh man wouldn't it be cool if..." because that's exactly what it feels like. Again, I'm not trying to harp on the scene, or even say that it shouldn't have been in the movie (it was amazing), but it's like there's a rule that any movie involving timetravel has to have one ridiculously over the top "Look at our time-travel special effects gimmick!". Off the top of my head, Terminator is the only movie (franchise) that has successfully avoided this. Even Kate & Leopold did it, albeit subtly... It just bugs me.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 01:14 |
|
|
Snak posted:I liked this movie. Now I'm going to sperg about time travel for a second. The Seth scene serves a narrative purpose: it sets up the concept of "writing" your future self a message by cutting it into your skin, and it shows just how ruthless Joe's bosses are. You're right that Old Joe shouldn't have vanished, but I'd chalk it up to quick visual shorthand for "everything worked out all right, movie's over now."
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 15:09 |
|
|
Has anyone checked out the commentary track Rian Johnson created for nerds who wanted to hear the commentary when the film was still in theaters? I never bothered, but I kind of wish I did because I'm going through the commentary on the BR now and while it's good, the sound from the film is pretty much gone entirely and it kind of bugs me.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 15:24 |
|
|
I enjoyed this movie quite a lot and wish I had seen it in a theatre. I guess it is kind of a stupid question but wouldn't the Rainmaker have figured that closing all of the loops might change the future? Or would that have been his intention? Does anyone think that perhaps Joe was a TK and that the sepia toned sequence of Old Joe shooting Sara is his premonition of what is to come?
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 15:25 |
|
|
Okay, I have to ask, because several people in this thread are talking about it: [In reference to TK]Why do some people seem to think that TKs have preconative abilities? jet sanchEz just mentioned it, and Young Freud was talking about it a few pages ago... Is there something in the movie that I missed that implies this AT ALL? In response to jet sanchEz, no I don't think it's a premonition, but it might be literally the first time Joe has ever imagined what might happen in someone else's life.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 15:30 |
|
|
jet sanchEz posted:I enjoyed this movie quite a lot and wish I had seen it in a theatre. For the first: No one seems to know the first thing about how time travel works, and the Rainmaker has just grown up getting what he wants with his massive TK powers so he's probably not the sharpest dude anyway For the second: It's never once implied that TK gives premonitions, is it? I thought it was just a garden variety epiphany on Joe's part.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 15:32 |
|
|
Yeah, it's just an epiphany.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 20:55 |
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Was it? What other scifi was there? As it's been said, there was Looper, Dredd and Prometheus. twistedmentat posted:It's probably better to say it was a really good year for Genre films. This is more accurate. Snak posted:Okay, I have to ask, because several people in this thread are talking about it: Psychic premonitions seem to be a lot more common in fiction than telekinesis is. Plus, the ability to see the future sounds like something a super powerful TK like the Rainmaker could do.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 21:32 |
|
|
Just my two cents on why Old Joe disappeared rather than fall down; whenever Old Seth's body parts were removed, the 'dead' parts disappeared rather than fall off. From this distinction, we know that dead human matter just stops existing in the loop while any would-be wounds are shown to have healed over (see: Old Seth's hand after the finger is chopped off). Therefore since Young Joe died, with no if-ands-or-buts the entirety of Old Joe himself entered the state of dead matter in the loop. Just like Seth's extremities, the previously existing dead matter just plain stopped existing from there on, it did not stop retroactively existing, from the moment Young Joe died Old Joe stopped existing the moment it couldn't. Barring the logic of "how could the plot of the movie happen if Old Joe couldn't exist" We have to assume that the effects of time travel and loops just plain occur only when it could actually theoretically happen/not-happen; rather than happen retroactively and effect the future But chances are what I'm saying is bullshit, and I am going to be proven wrong in a post or two.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 23:00 |
|
|
SomeJazzyRat posted:But chances are what I'm saying is bullshit, and I am going to be proven wrong in a post or two. I like this. Ties into the changing memories. He only sees the new memories after the actions actually took place. Points toward changes not being retroactive, i.e. Young Joe gets shot but Old Joe had been there up until that very moment and then disappeared. Making sense of it is tough as hell but I think it's internally consistent which is cool.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 23:19 |
|
|
SomeJazzyRat posted:Just my two cents on why Old Joe disappeared rather than fall down; whenever Old Seth's body parts were removed, the 'dead' parts disappeared rather than fall off. From this distinction, we know that dead human matter just stops existing in the loop while any would-be wounds are shown to have healed over (see: Old Seth's hand after the finger is chopped off). Therefore since Young Joe died, with no if-ands-or-buts the entirety of Old Joe himself entered the state of dead matter in the loop. Just like Seth's extremities, the previously existing dead matter just plain stopped existing from there on, it did not stop retroactively existing, from the moment Young Joe died Old Joe stopped existing the moment it couldn't. Barring the logic of "how could the plot of the movie happen if Old Joe couldn't exist" We have to assume that the effects of time travel and loops just plain occur only when it could actually theoretically happen/not-happen; rather than happen retroactively and effect the future Seth's fingers wouldn't fall off, because once they were cut off in the present they were never sent back in the future. It's not like the mob is going to bag everything, freeze dry it, and send it back thirty years later. Old joe disappearing could be taken to mean that young joe's sacrifice was enough to stop the rainmaker from closing loops, or it could mean that the mob didn't bother t send back an old body, or it could just be a nice cinematic shortcut.
|
| # ? Jan 22, 2013 00:30 |
|
|
SomeJazzyRat posted:Just my two cents on why Old Joe disappeared rather than fall down; whenever Old Seth's body parts were removed, the 'dead' parts disappeared rather than fall off. From this distinction, we know that dead human matter just stops existing in the loop while any would-be wounds are shown to have healed over (see: Old Seth's hand after the finger is chopped off). Therefore since Young Joe died, with no if-ands-or-buts the entirety of Old Joe himself entered the state of dead matter in the loop. Just like Seth's extremities, the previously existing dead matter just plain stopped existing from there on, it did not stop retroactively existing, from the moment Young Joe died Old Joe stopped existing the moment it couldn't. Barring the logic of "how could the plot of the movie happen if Old Joe couldn't exist" We have to assume that the effects of time travel and loops just plain occur only when it could actually theoretically happen/not-happen; rather than happen retroactively and effect the future Chef Bromden posted:[spoiler] Seth's fingers wouldn't fall off, because once they were cut off in the present they were never sent back in the future. It's not like the mob is going to bag everything, freeze dry it, and send it back thirty years later. Both of these things make amazing sense.
|
| # ? Jan 22, 2013 00:57 |
|
|
Parachute posted:Has anyone checked out the commentary track Rian Johnson created for nerds who wanted to hear the commentary when the film was still in theaters? I never bothered, but I kind of wish I did because I'm going through the commentary on the BR now and while it's good, the sound from the film is pretty much gone entirely and it kind of bugs me. I thought its was pretty interesting, if a bit technical. I haven't listened to the DVD commentary, but he spent a lot of time on talking about how he did certain shots, like how the DP unseated the lens for the time travel effect, or what was cgi and what was practical. I thought it was pretty educational for me as someone who likes movies but hasn't been exposed to the film school mechanics of what the second camera operator does or how much time it takes to get a particular location ready for shooting.
|
| # ? Jan 22, 2013 01:14 |
|
|
Chef Bromden posted:Seth's fingers wouldn't fall off, because once they were cut off in the present they were never sent back in the future. It's not like the mob is going to bag everything, freeze dry it, and send it back thirty years later. Old joe disappearing could be taken to mean that young joe's sacrifice was enough to stop the rainmaker from closing loops, or it could mean that the mob didn't bother t send back an old body, or it could just be a nice cinematic shortcut. Conceivably, time travel may not have been discovered at all because Young Joe killed himself. Who knows how his not being alive changed the future.
|
| # ? Jan 22, 2013 02:47 |
|
|
Time travel never having been invented doesn't change what's happened so far into the new timeline. The whole timeline we're in doesn't change based on what happens or will have happened in the future. Only those who are there from the future are changed by being in the present. Their memories die, they lose limbs, and they can cease to exist. It doesn't rewrite the timeline in which we spend most of the movie to some alternate reality where they never came back in time. It's only them who changes; the strangers to the timeline.
LividLiquid fucked around with this message at Jan 22, 2013 around 07:43 |
| # ? Jan 22, 2013 07:41 |
|
|
LividLiquid posted:It's only them who changes; the strangers to the timeline. That sounds... poetic
|
| # ? Jan 22, 2013 07:51 |
|
|
Did they ever explain why getting away with murder is so difficult in the future that you have to send people back in time to do it, yet they just shot Old Joe's girlfriend like it weren't no big deal?
|
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 17:47 |
|
|
Roman posted:Did they ever explain why getting away with murder is so difficult in the future that you have to send people back in time to do it, yet they just shot Old Joe's girlfriend like it weren't no big deal? No but after that event, they clearly had to try to destroy all evidence - hence the burning of the house when they took Joe away. Despite the shooting being an accident, their rash response to it indicates that the slip-up would not go unnoticed.
|
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 17:51 |
|
|
I figure it's relative to the notoriety of the target.
|
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 18:01 |
|
|
Roman posted:Did they ever explain why getting away with murder is so difficult in the future that you have to send people back in time to do it, yet they just shot Old Joe's girlfriend like it weren't no big deal? We have no reason to believe it wasn't a big deal. e: Also these are thugs using time travel to cover up their crimes. They're dumb-dumbs
|
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 18:08 |
|
|
Yea I'm surprised by how many people focus on Joe's wife being killed as some kind of plot hole. I mean all together we get maybe 2 minutes of screen time to make a judgment, and you never see any potential fallout that may have happened as a result of it. Not to mention the panicked look on the guys face that fires the shot, he clearly knows he just hosed up. I just assumed these guys burned the house down to cover it up, but I never assumed that it would work. They may have been arrested, or sent back by the Rainmaker to be killed for their mistake, who knows. Doesn't matter. I guess the only thing I wouldn't be able to explain is why even allow(if your the boss) your thugs to carry weapons? No good can come of it.
|
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 18:45 |
|
|
Roman posted:Did they ever explain why getting away with murder is so difficult in the future that you have to send people back in time to do it, yet they just shot Old Joe's girlfriend like it weren't no big deal? Rian Johnson said that in the future everyone is injected with nanobots which broadcast to the authorities if their heart stops.
|
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 20:25 |
|
|
twoot posted:Rian Johnson said that in the future everyone is injected with nanobots which broadcast to the authorities if their heart stops. It also tags their remains for up to 2 years, so if you buried the body, chopped it up, or burned it to ash, the police would still be able to find enough as evidence. At the same time, the original short story Johnson wrote said that penalties of illegal time travel were so harsh that anyone dealing with time travel ended up getting the Keyser Soze treatment with anyone they knew, so a Looper's loved ones would end up getting killed as well. Young Freud fucked around with this message at Jan 24, 2013 around 21:01 |
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 20:57 |
|
|
Young Freud posted:It also tags their remains for up to 2 years, so if you buried the body, chopped it up, or burned it to ash, the police would still be able to find enough as evidence. Actually it makes sense that they would still carry guns and maybe shoot someone every now and then because it seems like time travel is supposed to be the most illegal thing you can possibly do. So they'd rather risk being caught murdering someone than let that person go and possibly get caught loving with time travel.
|
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 21:16 |
|
|
I think the important thing to note (as others have said) is that they weren't thinking in that situation, just reacting. Even if they were thinking, it's made clear in the movie that this line of work does not attract particularly intelligent, forward-thinking, long-term planning people.
|
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 21:43 |
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Yea I'm surprised by how many people focus on Joe's wife being killed as some kind of plot hole. They state in the movie that the Rainmaker is changing all the rules because he doesn't give a gently caress. Killing Joe's wife indiscriminately should emphasize this point, but instead people are are all "wah, it makes no sense!".
|
| # ? Jan 24, 2013 22:10 |
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I think the important thing to note (as others have said) is that they weren't thinking in that situation, just reacting. Even if they were thinking, it's made clear in the movie that this line of work does not attract particularly intelligent, forward-thinking, long-term planning people. Yeah, Joe's wife getting killed because thugs with guns were bad at planning is less of a plot hole and more of an example of one of the film's major themes: People use violence because they aren't thinking about the consequences of it, and one of the consequences of violence is more violence.
|
| # ? Jan 25, 2013 01:31 |
|
|
All those guys were killed when old joe shot up the hideout except then they weren't because young joe killed himself so there was no old joe but then young joe didn't kill himself because there was no old joe to spur the events and then Oh dear, I've gone cross-eyed
|
| # ? Jan 25, 2013 02:07 |
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:All those guys were killed when old joe shot up the hideout except then they weren't because young joe killed himself so there was no old joe but then young joe didn't kill himself because there was no old joe to spur the events and then Old Joe didn't vanish until new Joe shot himself, just like old Seth's fingers didn't vanish until young Seth's were cut off.
|
| # ? Jan 25, 2013 17:21 |
|
|
I knew nothing about this movie other than it was about time travel and Bruce Willis was in it. I just finished watching it and I have to say, it was loving great.fleshweasel posted:Old Joe murdering a million henchmen just breaks my sense of him being a real character. I personally saw Old Joe as a calamity from the future cast into the past and the Rainmaker as the reverse of that. Two cataclysmic events that would go on and on unless someone put a stop to the origin of it all. That being Young Joe. I think him taking on the entire organization by himself fit the character pretty well.
|
| # ? Jan 26, 2013 20:59 |
|
|
I figured with the whole Seth amputation thing was done by a "doc" because that way the amputations were able to be cauterized - thereby allowing Old Seth to still be alive but without limbs. If they just hacked Young Seths limbs off all willy nilly then he would've bled out and Old Seth would disappear the same way Old Joe did later in the film. It was both physical torture to Young Seth and mental torture to Old Seth (realizing what was happening to his younger self and probably having memory flashbacks as it was happening)
Fiendish Dr. Wu fucked around with this message at Jan 26, 2013 around 22:19 |
| # ? Jan 26, 2013 22:17 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 19:12 |
|
|
Sorry to necro the thread, I just saw this today and it was the best movie I've seen since Drive and I wanted to give my two cents.Chef Bromden posted:Seth's fingers wouldn't fall off, because once they were cut off in the present they were never sent back in the future. It's not like the mob is going to bag everything, freeze dry it, and send it back thirty years later. Old joe disappearing could be taken to mean that young joe's sacrifice was enough to stop the rainmaker from closing loops, or it could mean that the mob didn't bother t send back an old body, or it could just be a nice cinematic shortcut. Hell, they even mention with Seth that they won't kill him, because they have no idea what killing someone in the past would do to the future but they're pretty sure it would be Bad with the capital letters. That kind of premptive death is an unknown variable, unlike what they did to Seth. I do like the idea from a narrative standpoint about Joe's wife and the reflexive and perpetuating nature of violence. Hell, look at Old Joe saying he "fixed" it for Young Joe when he killed the mob in the past- it only led to more killing.[ Ugly In The Morning fucked around with this message at Apr 28, 2013 around 06:04 |
| # ? Apr 28, 2013 06:00 |
|
