I'm kind of with P-C about not seeing it entirely with Drive. Drive also had better music, so that's a 2nd stumbling block!
Thing is, I saw a lot more character growth of the main character in Looper than Drive. The director of Drive (and writer) made some choices in minimalism (on purpose) which makes the viewer fill in a lot of the character's motivation.
No such gaps really exist in Looper, so that's part of why I don't see it.
I still feel a really strong "this is a western"/noir vibe coming off Looper. I could see Bogart or Brando tearing this role up.
Does Drive have the logical consistency of a wet piece of toiler paper, which runs the risk of undermining any narrative arcs they're trying to convey?
I think this review generally encapsulates my feelings. Although more than half of it is just summarizing most of the movie.
This one is good too. His quibbles are my quibbles!
... I rather hope he doesn't. Some things shouldn't have sequels. (At least, not official ones.) You can't put the lightning back in the bottle.
Buttercup's Baby has been a running joke since the original novel was published. I think at one point you could actually write to the publisher and have it sent to you, but instead of a book you got a letter of apology explaining that it didn't exist.
The first chapter of
Buttercup's Baby
is in one of the later editions.
Yeah, no, apparently Goldman has been trying for a while to write a sequel, but it never works.
His quibbles are my quibbles!
That reviewer calls it thoughtful, which I just can't. Way too much handwavium, and no little bullying of the audience to just stop thinking so hard and just shut up and accept the ride.
Even though the ending risked going up in literal flames, hell, I'd call the ultimate failure of Sunshine more
thoughtful
than this seemed to be. They both collapse under their own weight, but Sunshine sure went out of its way to tip the whole thing over, whereas Looper just doesn't have a stable base.
I loved the moment (in Looper) when the door
opened (that could have a couple ways to finish the sentence, huh?) to reveal Garrett Dillahunt. Raising Hope aside,
the audience knew shit just got a whole lot realer, and reacted appropriately.
I saw a lot more character growth of the main character in Looper than Drive.
I don't know, I don't see all that much in Looper either. It's slight change on one axis.
Does Drive have the logical consistency of a wet piece of toiler paper, which runs the risk of undermining any narrative arcs they're trying to convey?
I would say no, but I wouldn't describe Looper that way either so I doubt my verdict is of much use.
