Loopy

[fbhjr]

My wife and I went to see Looper Saturday. Originally I didn’t want to see
it as the ads I had seen played up the “criminal gangs of the future”
aspect and that didn’t interest me much.
But, I saw an ad that emphasized the time travel paradox aspect of it, and
that intrigued me enough to want to see it.

The premise is that it is so hard to ditch a dead body in the future that
it is easier to throw them 30 years in the past to be killed decades before
they go missing.
That principal works if time travel is very, very cheap. But, the way they
do it is stupid.
They teleport them through time and space to a killing spot where their hit
man is waiting to shoot them. Then, the hitman disposes of the body and
takes their pay.

But, couldn’t you teleport them to some time and place when you know they
would die and not have to pay the hit man and worry about taking care of
them when they reach the future and know your dirty secrets?
Drop them at the bottom of the ocean pretty much any time and space. Drop
then in the center of the earth or a volcano. Drop them in the Chicago
fire, Pompeii, or a plane about to hit the trade center.
Why on earth teleport them to a corn field and pay a guy to shoot them?
But, I digress.
That isn’t the plot hole that bothered me.

The plot hole that bothered me is this:
The whole premise of the movie is that this is the best way to dump a body
in 2074 because there is no other way to get rid of it without getting
caught.
But, they kill the future looper’s wife in front of him and leave her body
in the burning house while they go and throw him back in time to be killed
by his earlier self.
So, based on the premise, why isn’t that an automatic get caught for murder?
Dumping a body in a burning building must be cheaper than time travel,
right?
Certainly cheaper than paying someone to dispose of the body in the past.
So, that can’t be how they get away with it.

Now the “new” crime boss 30 years in the future is shutting down the looper
program. So, maybe he has found another way to get away with it.
Probably, given the character, just by having enough power to not have to
worry about the law at all.
Or, as the future crime boss has a grudge against the main character in the
future, maybe it is “I don’t care, I’m killing the person you love no
matter what”. Which also fits the character.
But, the killing appeared to be accidental. So, it’s hard to think it is
that.

So, there are possible explanations. But, it would have been nice if they
had done something to address this contradiction in the movie.

Comments

[evrgreen.livejournal.com]

It does seem like a fairly weak movie as far as plot goes - we've waffled slightly on it but then decided it wasn't worth a trip out - we're saving out money for 007 next month, of course! And, in December....There and Back again..

[cissa.livejournal.com]

How DARE you apply logic to a movie plot! Shame!