Rian Johnson Explains The End Of LOOPER

Rian Johnson Explains The End Of LOOPER

If you've seen Looper or have read reviews of the film, you know that the mechanics of the film's time-travel raise a lot of questions, specifically about the ending. Here's Rian Johnson's explanation. [Spoiler Warning]

By MarkJulian - Oct 01, 2012 07:10 AM EST
Filed Under: Sci-Fi
Source: Huffington Post


Speaking to the Huffington Post, here's director Rian Johnson explaining the ending to his film, Looper.



At the end of the film, we discover that the horrible future created by the Rainmaker was in fact brought about by Old Joe [Bruce Willis] going back in time. But that future is prevented thanks to the sacrifice Young Joe [Joseph Gordon-Levitt]makes to save Sarah [Emily Blunt] and her son, who would've grown up to be the Rainmaker. 'But if old Joe never existed, why does Sara still remember him? Why does Sara's son, the future kingpin known as the Rainmaker, still have a gunshot wound that was inflicted by Old Joe?'

Rian Johnson: The approach that we take with it is a linear approach. That was an early decision that I made. Instead of stepping back to a mathematical, graph-like timeline of everything that's happening, we're going to experience this the way that the characters experience it. Which is dealing with it moment-to-moment. And so, the things that have happened have happened. Everything is kind of being created and fused in terms of the timeline in the present moment. So, the notion is, on this timeline, the way that old Joe is experiencing it, nothing has happened until it happens. Now, you could step back and say are there multiple timelines for each moment, and every decision you make creates a new timeline. That's fine. You can step back and draw the charts and do all that. But in terms of what this character is actually seeing and experiencing, he's living his life moment to moment-to-moment in the linear fashion and time is moving forward. And, as something happens, the effect then happens.

Why does Old Joe vanish instead of falling down?

Rian: No, it made sense to me that he would vanish. The second that young Joe kills himself, then he's not going to live to be old Joe in the same way. The same logic by which, if you cut off a finger, then suddenly he has no finger. You take that to the ultimate end, where if you kill yourself and you're not around, then the universe would realize that, catch up with it and he would no longer be there.

If Young Joe shoots himself, thus preventing Old Joe from ever traveling back in time, how does Sarah remember Old Joe?

Rian: And I think you can dive into it and ‑‑ I don't know, it's interesting. Or she would remember him because she had experienced him to up to the point where he turned the gun and shot himself. And whether you think of it as in that moment, where he shot himself, an alternate timeline was created that we now switch to -- that, to me, is largely just semantics. That, to me, is really just how you would go back and graph the whole thing out. What's important is what the experience of these people are in the events that happened in the movie. And that, you have to experience in a linear fashion.



I had a few qualms with the film but not with the ending. I understood pretty readily how time-travel worked in the film and what the ending of the film was trying to accomplish. Overall, it's a film that deserves to be seen and probably at least twice but I don't think it quite lives up to the hype that followed from the film's screening at the Toronto International Film Festival. Stay tuned for my full review that I'll post sometime in the coming days.

RELATED CONTENT:
Captivating LOOPER Trailer Sheds New Light On The Plot
LOOPER Story Elements Restored For Chinese Audiences



In the year 2042, a mob hitman assassinates targets that arrive from the future of 2072. For him it's just a job... till he receives a new target: himself from the future.


Running Time: 1 hr 58 min
Release Date: September 28, 2012 (USA)
MPAA Rating: Unknown
Starring: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Bruce Willis, Emily Blunt, Piper Perabo, Han Soto, Jeff Daniels
Directed by: Rian Johnson
Written by: Rian Johnson

HIT MAN Star Glen Powell Spotted On Set Of Edgar Wright's THE RUNNING MAN; Movie's Logo Revealed
Related:

HIT MAN Star Glen Powell Spotted On Set Of Edgar Wright's THE RUNNING MAN; Movie's Logo Revealed

SQUID GAME Season 2 Trailer Sees Lee Jung-jae Embark On A Bloody New Mission As Player 456
Recommended For You:

SQUID GAME Season 2 Trailer Sees Lee Jung-jae Embark On A Bloody New Mission As Player 456

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

MarkCassidy
MarkCassidy - 10/1/2012, 7:31 AM
Like Jeff Daniels says in the movie.."this time travel shit really fries your brain like an egg". If you think about it too much it becomes ridiculous, that's why I'm glad Looper kept things pretty simple.
angus666
angus666 - 10/1/2012, 7:39 AM
^That's true. Me and my dad still have discussions about Back to The Future for hours and hours.
PsyGuy
PsyGuy - 10/1/2012, 7:42 AM
Stop complaining about the logistics and ENJOY THE MOVIE
GetsugaTensho22
GetsugaTensho22 - 10/1/2012, 7:51 AM
That sounds like a stupid ending. Glad i haven't watched it then.
Greengo
Greengo - 10/1/2012, 8:06 AM
Those questions are bullshit make my head explode type questions.
Greengo
Greengo - 10/1/2012, 8:07 AM
The movie was great but the very end was flat and abrupt I would have enjoyed seeing a flash-forward of the good guy/super hero Rainmaker.
SuperSomething616
SuperSomething616 - 10/1/2012, 8:21 AM
Looper did very well to keep time travel (which is a pain the ass to think about let alone try and make a story out) simple...

They avoided the grandfather paradox for the most part...however if this is how he approached it in this linear sense...doesnt make the ending realistic...

Because seeing young Joe knowing now what he knows would just make the choice to not return to the past...eliminating the future Joe in the present...

Still really enjoyed Looper though...top film!!!
Marveluffugus
Marveluffugus - 10/1/2012, 8:33 AM
I now I have three favorite movies of the year.
1. The Dark Knight Rises
2. Moonrise Kingdom
3. Looper

I think the first two movies speak for themselves. Looper is such a great movie, violent, complex but not murky, what's the best is the most rational and logical outcome is the least expected and yet still so powerful. Great movie....
KingLobo
KingLobo - 10/1/2012, 8:43 AM
If you really pay attention...some may have caught it.
That there were at least 4 resets.

First...when YJoe didn't kill OJoe the first time. YJoe died falling on the car.----Reset
Second...YJoe Killed OJoe.-----Reset
Third...YJoe didn't kill OJoe and most of the events played out.
Fourth...OJoe Kills The mom, Future plays out...final Reset...YJoe previously saw the other ending and prevented it after seeing the unending loop.

Because OJoe wanted his wife so bad he had to die, it was futile.
DukeAcureds
DukeAcureds - 10/1/2012, 8:53 AM
Did this really need explaining? The rules were set throughout the movie and it made sense by the end. Don't logicide it. None of us actually know shit about actual time-travel. It's all just philosophical at this point. He defined the rules that this particualr flm adhered to and within the context of those rules at work withinb this film it made sense.
It's the beginning that needs explaining.
"So the mob are the only one's that use time-travel, because it's illegal and they can't kill people either because of some ID thing, so they send people back in time to be killed"
Sure.
"And there cutting all ties with the Looper organisation by having them kill themselves"
Well, um, if the Looper organisation was known to exist at all, wouldn't this coupled with access to time travel help the authorities shut down the Looper organisation down, let alone the mob?
DrRockso
DrRockso - 10/1/2012, 8:55 AM
This is probably the first movie that I didn't spoil for myself. So awesome. I think they shoulda wrote in a scene where old Joe and young Joe have a three way with old Paul Dano as his shit was falling off. The Rainmaker must've cut off future Piper Perabo's tits. Aaand scene.
DukeAcureds
DukeAcureds - 10/1/2012, 8:56 AM
nhalden@ huh?! brain. fried.
DukeAcureds
DukeAcureds - 10/1/2012, 8:59 AM
greengo@ That would've been good. Or even better, it could've flash-forwarded to him becoming the evil Rainmaker, regardless of the sacrifice. Destined to be bad, like.
DukeAcureds
DukeAcureds - 10/1/2012, 9:00 AM
SuperSummin616@ I don't think he really had a choice.
spidey23435
spidey23435 - 10/1/2012, 9:36 AM
I'm fine with his explanation because really you can argue semantics all day on how it should have happened but in the end it was a good movie and that is all that matters. The one small beef I had though was why did young joe just not shoot his hands off? when this scene started and young joe got out of the truck and started walking I flashed back to the scene earlier where they cut joes friends hands legs and what not off to get him back. I know it would have been a less powerful scene but a much smarter choice by young joe. lol
Greengo
Greengo - 10/1/2012, 10:25 AM
blowing off just his hand wouldn't have stopped Old Joe. The kid may have gotten away but Old Joe wouldn't stop trying to kill him.
Mysterion
Mysterion - 10/1/2012, 10:26 AM
that kid actor was awesome, he creeped me out but in an adorable way...if that makes sense.
gaikinger
gaikinger - 10/1/2012, 1:14 PM
It seems like the writer here wants to make a timetravel movie, set some rules, and then break them. His explanation seems a little lazy and he seems to be talking out of both sides of his face. I actually prefer the respect given to time travel element given to Butterfly Effect and Timecop. An excellent book to read would be Stephen Kings 11/22/63.
BruceWayneNewton
BruceWayneNewton - 10/1/2012, 1:49 PM
I just don't understand why the mobsters couldn't kill these people before they sent them back in time. Seems like that would have saved them a bunch of headaches...
lokibane2012
lokibane2012 - 10/1/2012, 1:56 PM
I thought the ending was too generic.

Maybe I've just had bad luck in this specific case, but I've seen the "I'll kill myself, to erase my evil future self" ending a bunch of times on TV, in novels, and heck even on an Indian film once.

In fact, I thought the whole third act was complete shit.

The way The Looper group is dealt with was a cheap quick fix. I am surprised JGL bothered running away from these weak ass pussies. I am surprised nobody else has wiped them out yet. The kid is the least of their problems if all it takes is an old fart to get rid of them. Way to kill a major source of the film's tension and intrigue just like that.

The kid's plotline seemed to be heading for something big. Like some big twist ending, that would bring all the threads and themes of the film together. Well... just... nope.

And I believe I have already expressed why the resolution to the "Two Joes" plot felt underwhelming to me.

So yeah, the film was great before the shit third act came along and ruined it all.
laughterman26
laughterman26 - 10/1/2012, 3:08 PM
interseting
Luminus
Luminus - 10/1/2012, 3:46 PM
The time travel makes no sense and is inconsistent within the movie. Examples:
1) It’s shown that there’s a single timeline, where events in the past affect the future. YJoe’s best friend is tortured in the past and his future-self experiences the results.

Problem A: Why not just kill the guy in the past, so his future self will cease to exist? The theatrics were totally pointless.
Problem B: The movie establishes that the old version of you remembers new information as it happens. Why didn’t the future version of YJoe’s best friend know that his younger self had been captured or that he didn’t carve the message into his skin?

2) In the original timeline, old Joe is killed by young Joe and the Rainmaker still exists. Young Joe grows up to be Old Joe, but makes a different set of decisions for whatever reason (I’ll get to that) and returns to the past to kill the Rainmaker.
Problem: Old Joe has clearly changed the future, because of the mob boss who told young Joe to move to China after his loop is closed. This wouldn’t have happened in the original timeline. The Rainmaker caused this set of events by trying to close all the loops.

3) Old Joe disappears after young Joe kills himself and nothing else changes.

Problem A: This is a paradox and, by definition, can’t happen. Everything that happened up until that point is directly a result of Old Joe’s existence; therefore, he must exist. Conclusion, Old Joe is from an alternate future.
Problem B: Old Joe can’t share any new memories that young Joe experiences, when they aren’t together, because they aren’t from the same universe.

There are 3 timelines here:
1) Young Joe kills Old Joe instantly, then moves to France. Rainmaker takes over and starts closing loops
2) Young Joe Kills Old Joe instantly, then moves to China, because of the warning he received. Rainmaker takes over and starts closing loops
3) Young Joe Kills himself right before Old Joe kills the Rainmaker’s mother. Time storm happens, then, as Doc Brown puts it, “the encounter could create a time paradox, the result of which could cause a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space-time continuum and destroy the entire universe! Granted, that's worst-case scenario. The destruction might in fact be very localized, limited to merely our own galaxy.

Then Marty McFly says “Well, that's a relief.”
ScarSpeedster
ScarSpeedster - 10/1/2012, 4:07 PM
I don't see how this needed explaining. What i wanna know is why he didn't just shoot his left hand off
WadeWilson33
WadeWilson33 - 2/19/2013, 9:08 AM
This is not a film for thinkers.
I'm sorry I'm not one of those who can 'not over think it and just enjoy it' because the flaws in this film were like sore thumbs poking me in the eyes. Clearly this was penned by, and for, a less 'sharp' audience. Johnson's explainations are idiodic, and make me dislike the film more than I did before.
I'll try to keep my reasoning as simple as possible.
If you went back in time, and shot yourself in the face, your elder self would not, die nor would you disappear, like Joe did in Looper. Mr.Johnson clearly skipped basic science in school, because the most fundamental law of nature explains why this would never, ever, ever happen- You can NOT create nor destroy matter. Period. IF you killed your younger self, it would merely create a tangential timeline in which you died then at that moment, but since these events never transpisred in your experienced past- they would not effect you. So the loss of fingers, and limbs in the one scene was so unbeleivably dumb, I suggest Mr.Johnson do a little research for any future projects, as most skilled writers prefer to know a little bit about what they write before doing so, as to not look like an unintelligent moron. There is more than enough on the subject; Einstein for instance wrote a lot on the subject back in the early teens/twenties, shortly after he and Herman Minkowski discerned the fourth dimension.
Oh, and not to mention, if you could teleport people into the past to get rid of them- why not a volcano? Or the north pole? Involving other people was completely needless, and one of many reasons this film was an absurd, ham-fisted and sloppy pile of garbage, in conparision to really, well-writen time travel.
One final thing- WORSE USE OF TELEKENESIS EVER.
WadeWilson33
WadeWilson33 - 2/19/2013, 9:12 AM
Oh, and also- the invention of time travel (30 years) and the Looper life span (30 years)...anyone see something wrong here?
If not, go watch an episode of Jersey Shore.
Much more your speed.
WadeWilson33
WadeWilson33 - 2/19/2013, 9:14 AM
This is not a film for thinkers.
I'm sorry I'm not one of those who can 'not over think it and just enjoy it' because the flaws in this film were like sore thumbs poking me in the eyes. Clearly this was penned by, and for, a less 'sharp' audience.
Mr.Johnson's explainations are idiodic, and make me dislike the film more than I did before (His first comment says it all- you cannot think of time travel in a linear sense. That's just f*cking stupid).
I'll try to keep my reasoning as simple as possible.
If you went back in time, and shot yourself in the face, your elder self would not, die nor would you disappear, like Joe did in Looper. Mr.Johnson clearly skipped basic science in school, because the most fundamental law of nature explains why this would never, ever, ever happen- You can NOT create nor destroy matter. Period. IF you killed your younger self, it would merely create a tangential timeline in which you died then at that moment, but since these events never transpisred in your experienced past- they would not effect you. So the loss of fingers, and limbs in the one scene was so unbeleivably dumb, I suggest Mr.Johnson do a little research for any future projects, as most skilled writers prefer to know a little bit about what they write before doing so, as to not look like an unintelligent moron. There is more than enough on the subject; Einstein for instance wrote a lot on the subject back in the early teens/twenties, shortly after he and Herman Minkowski discerned the fourth dimension.
Oh, and not to mention, if you could teleport people into the past to get rid of them- why not a volcano? Or the north pole? Involving other people was completely needless, and one of many reasons this film was an absurd, ham-fisted and sloppy pile of garbage, in conparision to really, well-writen time travel.
Oh, and also- the invention of time travel (30 years) and the Looper life span (30 years)...anyone see something wrong here?
If not, go watch an episode of Jersey Shore.
Much more your speed.
View Recorder