IT'S ALIVE...IT'S ALIVE...ARF, ARF, ARF.

"MOVIE REVIEWS" FIELD CORRESPONDENT BECKY PULLING DOUBLE DUTY SO I DON'T HAVE TO

I am a child of the 80's. Late 80's but 80's all the same. The one thing that I always looked forward to even more than Christmas was Halloween. Why Halloween? Well for one; you got candy, for two; you got to dress up ALL DAY, and three; Disney Channel played Frankenweenie.

The original Frankenweenie (1984) was only a half hour featurette done by the then not-so-illustrious Tim Burton (it ended up costing him his job at Disney Corp.). Basic story was a boy loses his pet (like we all do) and unable to cope with the loss he is inspired by science to bring him back to life akin to Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein'.

Get the correlation? Frankenstein... Frankenweenie?

More often than not a childhood remake leaves you screaming at the sky for why they would make such STUPID casting/screen/editing/whatever choices, ultimately ruining your precious memory (I'm looking at you Transformers, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Indiana Jones and Spiderman). Thankfully with Frankenweenie (2012) this did not happen. It has been changed in a few respects but mostly lengthening the story from a half hour to almost an hour and a half, adding some more characters, and the most obvious, it's stop-action animation.

This review will be one without spoilers, so I won't go into HOW they lengthened the movie, what they added, etc. All I will say is that Frankenweenie was a beloved (at least to me) cult featurette and I'm ecstatic that today's generation will get to enjoy it as much as I did.

LOOPER REVIEWED LOOPER REVIEWED LOOPER REVIEWED LOOPER REVIEWED LOOPER REVIEWED LOOPER REVIEWED...

THIS REVIEW WAS DONE BY MRFNH CORRESPONDENT BECKY.

Okay so I went to go see Looper with my husband, I'm really looking forward to it, the husband not so much. Overall I enjoyed it but there are a few things to annoy me.

SPOILER'S LAW:
There will be spoilers in this review, I'll allow you to leave... ok are we done? Onward!
Okay so I love the premise, future hit men? time travel? BLUNDERBUSS?! The downside: random telekinesis, fantastic opportunities at character development, and weird lip color on Joseph Gordon-Levitz.

The Premise:
Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a specialized type of hit man called a looper. When his employers, who hail from 30 years in the future, want someone killed, they send them back in time—where their body won’t be identifiable—for a looper to shoot. This cut-and-tried business arrangement is complicated when a future version of Joe (Bruce Willis) shows up.

Are we Set?
First off, this may just be me but the likelyhood that both telekinesis and time travel will happen within 30 years of each other seems unlikely to me. It is my opinion but then again so is this article, i know it's setting something up but they lead you to think that this telekinesis has a much larger role but doesn't really deliver.
There's this unseen antagonist called "The Rainmaker", which as we all know anyone with a title is going to be kickass. He supposedly took over the future mob and is closing all the Loops which is what happens when the future mob sends back the looper 30 years later to be killed. When this happens then they get a big golden payout and their contract is officially closed and they are free.

Does this mean that "The Rainmaker" is closing off hitmen? To me that sounds sort of decent; clean up the city he took over, pay the past off and set them free.... They never tell and or show what he actually did that was so awful.

Either way, future Joe gets sent back in time to be killed and he's able to outwit his earlier self and set out to stop the Rainmaker. How does he plan to do this? .... by killing a kid. Ok so the Rainmaker ends up being a child with crazy telekinetic powers strong enough to explode a full grown man.

The child is raised by Sara (Emily Blunt) who knows of the child's talents but thinks that by raising him he will learn to control his telekinesis. Oh yeah.. and she hides in a gun safe. Apparently, when he has tantrums in order to keep herself safe she hides in a very large... safe. So we see the capacity that he has. Older Joe is alluded to be the one who kills Sara and is the catalyst that turns that grumpy little child into the Rainmaker.
Younger Joe is able to figure this out and at the last minute gives up on being selfish and looks to save the future. He takes his blunderbuss (the Looper's gun that's impossible to miss within 15 paces) and shoots himself. Older Joe never exists, Sara survives and we assume the Rainmaker never takes over. Once again, fantastic opportunity for character development but that's sort of where it ends.

They introduce several characters that have a great potential to grow and improve the story: Abe, mob boss that was sent from the future to run the loopers aaand that's about all you know. Boy Blue: he is a Gat Man which is higher on the hit man totem pole than a Looper. He is seen as a screw up but kept around as a "son" for Abe. When Boy Blue sees that Old Joe has murdered Abe you see a flicker of purpose... of revenge... and then it's gone. Missed opportunity yet again.

Now for the good news: the visuals where amazing!! The acting was spot on. Joseph Gordon-Levitt must've studied every single movie Bruce Willis had ever been in. Aside from the nose prosthetic and odd lip color in some scenes (which is not the actor's doing) there was nothing I could fault actor-wise. All the actor's were very in tune with their characters.
 
So overall did I have a bit to pick at? Yes; but it took me time to think about all those points. The movie kept me grossly engaged and by the time I left the theatre I was quite satisfied. I wasn't gushing but I didn't feel like I had been jipped of my eleven dollars. I believe this is a good movie worth seeing but you may want to wait until it hits the dollar theatre.