saw the movie this weekend, and after reading the tread and my own opinions, I was beyond satisfied...
then I read this a blurb in British GQ about the most mindfukking time-travel movies and it mentioned something no one has brought up and I was
a few questions to think about...(time-travel movies are so awesome but such a clusterfukk)
A.) so in original timeline, Bruce Willis' Joe closes his loop, and lives his life, meeting his Chinese wife, and he gets caught and sent back by what he tells JGL's Joe is the Rainmaker's men...if Bruce Willis' Joe is the creation of the Rainmaker, how is the Rainmaker character in the original timeline?
B.) Its assumed this cycle has repeated itself an infinite amount of times...What happens to Bruce Willis' Joe in the timeline where he creates the Rainmaker? Like after Bruce Willis' Joe kills Rainmakers mom...what happens to him?...He just stays in the same timeline with JGL's Joe ....?
C.) Why doesn't Bruce Willis' Joe just go into hiding since he knows he is going to get caught in 30 yrs and be sent back?
I know these problems are most likely just a result of time-travel paradoxes...time travel movies sometimes turn into "the chicken or the Egg" type scenarios, but interested to see what you guys think
A) The Rainmaker was always going to come to fruition. The means in which it happens doesn't matter. Maybe in Bruce Willis Joe's timeline, the boy killed his mom by accident & he grew up angry because of that. Its like the movie Butterfly Effect. No matter how many times Ashton Kutcher went back to save his girl, his girlfriend just ended up more fukked up afterwards until he realized it was just destined for him & his girl not to end up together & even if he stopped one problem from happening, their fate manifested itself in another way. That's how I look at the Rainmaker. If it wasn't Joe that was the cause, then something else would've been. It does create a flaw in the film though because eventhough Joe killed himself to save Sara & Sid, assuming this theory that the Rainmaker always finds a way to become the Rainmaker, who's to say the kid won't still somehow lose his mom & go batshyt crazy.
B) Now for that I have no idea. If he killed the boy, he would've zapped back to his timeline because without the Rainmaker alive in the future, he'd never been ambushed at his house. I guess you right, if he just killed the mom & not the boy, he would be stuck in Young Joe's timeline.
C) They explained it in the movie. He started living life. Killing nikkas, fukking hoes, you gotta remember, Joe was sitting on millions of dollars from all that silver he saved. He wasn't paying that shyt no mind until like year 29.
B) Now for that I have no idea. If he killed the boy, he would've zapped back to his timeline because without the Rainmaker alive in the future, he'd never been ambushed at his house. I guess you right, if he just killed the mom & not the boy, he would be stuck in Young Joe's timeline.
C) They explained it in the movie. He started living life. Killing nikkas, fukking hoes, you gotta remember, Joe was sitting on millions of dollars from all that silver he saved. He wasn't paying that shyt no mind until like year 29.
