“Looper” Film Review: Joseph looks like Bruce
by iconmatthew1
Rian Johnson has worked with Joseph Gordon-Levitt before; with the indie hit “Brick.” Now the duo are working together again in one of the most anticipated sci-fi movies in recent years “Looper.” The movie deals with time travel and any movie dealing with time travel can become complicated but in short: Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Joe and Bruce Willis plays Joe as well, except 30 year older. The movie takes place in 2047 and 30 years from that date time travel has been invented. Instantly outlawed, the mob now controls it and sends back people they want dead to 2047 so they can be killed off and the crime of murder technically doesn’t exist. A brilliant and equally horrific plan. Joe is one of these hired assassins called “Loopers” and he’s living the life with his job, but there is a catch. Eventually all loopers will end up killing the future versions of themselves it’s called “closing your loop.” So it’s a job with an extreme expiration date. “Looper” takes off when Bruce Willis (Joe older) is zapped back to the past but escapes and now it’s up to Joesph Gordon-Levitt to stop his older self from changing the future and getting the both of them killed.
“Looper” is an effective and well done film, and one that certainly deserves multiple viewings to take everything in. That being said this movie is good, not great. There has been a lot of hype and high praise for the film, so maybe my expectations were too high and I recognized that so I waited a few days to review the film. And while I find is satisfactory it’s missing something. I’m not sure what it is but it’s missing something that would take it to that level from “Entertaining” to “Classic.” Without spoiling anything the 1st and 2nd acts of this movie are outstanding, tense, inventive and the stuff of masterpieces. The third act though causes a lot of issues and the film almost collapses under it’s own weight. And I wouldn’t even say it packed on that many pounds.
If you like science fiction it’s surely a movie to see for the technology and fine acting performances. For me the single most impressive aspect of this film is the make up. Joseph Gordon-Levitt looks strikingly like a young Bruce Willis in many shots and even was able to nail some of Willis’ mannerisms like that cool cockeyed smile. The make up was done by Brent Baker, Jamie Kelman and Kazuhiro Tsuji among others. The prosthetic work on Joseph’s face alone in my opinion makes it worthy of an Academy award nomination. You may not notice how similar they look in the commercials but trust me once the subtlties sink in during the course of the film you’ll be convinced they are the same person. Joseph and Bruce do tremendous work acting as does Jeff Daniels in a very cold but never distant performance. Emily Blunt is solid in her role but I don’t think her character is written strongly enough. There is a serious lack of connection with her and her motivations. Alright so if you want to know more about my thoughts on this film you can click to read more, but there will be SPOILERSso I feel it’s fair to warn you as the only way I can articulate my major disappointment with this film is by revealing the ending. I recommend this movie to science fiction fans, but I feel those not familiar with the genre will be lost and won’t care for it very much. Though I could always be wrong.
Red Flag Movie Productions© 
January 30, 2013
Why Megan Fox is a Future Oscar Nominee in the Making
by iconmatthew1
Megan Fox (not to be confused with the woman on the Pantene box.)
Say what now again? I know that half of my subscribers right now are totally confused by this proclamation. The other two I already told in person that I’d be making this. But that’s right and let me say it again in bold letters for added emphasis: Megan Fox is an Oscar Nominee in the making! It seems Megan Fox gets a lot of flack from both men and women; particularly young filmmakers/actors about being some blight on Hollywood. That she is somehow this horrible, horrible, actress that ruins any movie that she is in. And yet somehow keeps getting work. Of course the lazy and most common reason people say this happens is because “She’s hot.” Ah! Of course she is an attractive woman, she must get all her jobs based on her looks alone. That might explain actors (or actresses I’m not sure what’s considered offensive anymore so I’ll just go back and forth) who get work on a SyFy channel original movie or maybe one movie just to be eye candy. But Fox gets consistent work, she’s in at least 1-3 major studio films a year and does a few more independent films as well. Is she just that insanely hot everyone has to hire her?
“I was thinking Jennifer Lawrence for this film, but I need someone who can’t act.”
It’s this flawed logic that movie fans have and even filmmakers that Hollywood is somehow this world where you have to choose beauty or acting. This is a mindset despite some of the most gorgeous model-type women in the world being nominated and winning acting awards: Charlize Theron, Halle Berry, Anne Hathaway, Angelina Jolie, Claire Danes, Jessica Chastain and Jennifer Lawrence just to name a few. Lawrence was voted Ask Men’s hottest female. Not one of the hottest, THE hottest. She beat Megan Fox in a beauty contest, so obviously good looks aren’t a marker of acting talent. So Fox must be getting all these roles because directors and producers only find her tolerable because of her looks. They could just as easily hire a good looking actress who probably has a lower paying contract, but they stick with Fox because….she’s pretty? I’ve produced many films in my life both short and feature length let me promise you something: pretty actresses are a dime a dozen. Actors who can act are harder to find. So what’s Megan Fox’s secret? Well I’m getting to that.
Read the rest of this entry »