Supernatural zombies, infected zombies, comedy zombies, zoombies. You guys mentioned gang rape zombies. Wonder how long before we see that, as every drop is milked from this (un)dead genre. The MPAA may not like it, because being eaten alive is fine, but rape is totally unacceptable.

Exactly - that'd be a very right-wing conservative position.... just kill 'em. All problems can be solved with a big gun.
If you can go back in time to change the future, then you already have the opportunity to rehabilitate. You're already changing the future by interacting with the kid and hopefully steering him in new directions. As the great liberal sage Sarah Conner said " There's no fate but what we make for ourselves."

Those deserted London scenes were great. The equivalent scenes in I am legend suffered from a bit too much obvious CG work. Invid's right - The Day of the Triffids (the 1980s BBC version) starts exactly the same way with a bloke waking up in hospital and wandering through London.
You guys didn't mention the score - quite an iconic theme.
For a gritty post-apocalyptic movie without the zombies/vampires/ghouls of Omega Man, Walking Dead, etc, I recommend The Road with Viggo Mortensen.  The bleakness is jaw-dropping.

omfg, high-brow humanities academic praises the prequels. Or is she just trolling? I felt a bit nauseous after reading the article. Could anyone be any more out of touch? I suddenly feel like a Republican, as in 'scrap the university liberal arts faculties' - what are they good for?

Agreed. But there isn't a legal system in the world that has as its calculus differing punishments based on how much life is left for the victim. Otherwise you'd have weird scenarios where killing a terminally ill child (who has one year to live) would receive less of a sentence than killing a 70 year old with 10 years left to live. It doesn't work like that.

Nor does it work like Eddie's suggestion - how capable the victim was in defending themselves, so that killing a frail old lady is worse than killing a boxer.

We're close to Philosophy of Law 101 territory - is it the crime itself that's punished, or the consequences of the crime? If a man rapes two women in equally brutal circumstances, and one woman goes on to kill herself due to the shame, and the other goes on to write a bestselling memoir of the encounter and becomes a rich talk-show darling, then should the sentences be equal?

Anyone got a solution to the (fat man) trolley-car problem?

I still don't see the difference. A trained man with a loaded .45 versus an unarmed man whose hands are cuffed. Same dynamic to me. The unarmed, handcuffed man is just as helpless as any kid.

It's the innocence that makes it an immoral act, not the respective strengths of the participants.

Here's a challenge. What's the most entertaining movie you've seen that actually conforms with your sense of liberal secular left-wing politics/skepticism? i.e. no vigilante violence portrayed in a necessary or heroic light, due legal process is observed by the protagonists, no superstitious supernaturalism, no jingoistic America Fuck Yeah, no fate/destiny or chosen one, no NRA weapons porn, etc?

I'd have to nominate The Insider, which is just men in suits sitting around, talking. Social Network? But they're both based on actual events. If the movie was purely fictional... Gattaca Contact Can you think of any? I guess it's a rational brain versus reptilian brain dichotomy.

Sure, but it doesn't make any sense to single out the killing of kids as unspeakable, whereas it's always open-season on adults. Is there some sort of Conservative Christianity going on? An adult has sex, therefore the sin of Adam corrupts his soul and death is just punishment? 1980s slasher morality.

Is there still a Hollywood production code in place preventing the depiction of shooting kids? Movies like Looper and Dredd have long sequences of shooting infinite goons in corridors as well as graphic execution-in-cold-blood scenes, but why single out kids as 'verboten'? Adults are people too.
If a film-maker wanted to be edgy and noticed, why not include an unflinching child execution scene (without cutting away)? Or would the MPAA come down on that with an instant NC-17? Does the same "rule" apply for dogs and kittens? Doesn't Batman take out some dogs in Dark Knight? There's not many taboos left with violence.

If the premise to any movie is too far-fetched (and time-travel movies definitely fall into this category), then it really needs to deliver on the character and story front. We get Old Joe's redemption in a montage and brief 'flashbacks' to his time in 2074. Perhaps it needed a longer scene here, and also one between Young Joe and the boy building up to his redemption. How confident can Young Joe be that the boy wouldn't grow up evil anyway?

All in all, it's an impressive $30M movie. It looked $70M+

Just saw this. Bold editing choices. You can tell it's a young man at the helm.

First point: it's a hell of lot of magic beans to swallow. (1) Time travel. (2) TK. (3) Mafia looper rules. No body can be disposed of in the future, but illegal time travel is fine?

Second point: Pitch meeting went something like this: Take Terminator and Chronicle and Sourcecode and We Need to Talk about Kevin and stir.

P.S. The stripper's son is one of the three candidates? C'mon.
P.P.S. Good to see a female VFX supervisor.