Primer

..i think the line is "she thinks there are rats in the attic"


..anyway , i thought the same thing ou did John. it wasnt an astounding peice of cinema. but it WAS entertaining. amazingly i followed everything the first time through.. im a pretty abstract thinker, and retain inormation well. but even in understanding what was going on, i found that it didnt do too much for me.. the charachters never really changed , and it seemed like nothing really ever happend except for shanes character going off and starting a new life at the end. but it was so open ended. it wa hard to really see any resolution in it . but good none the less. i liked it for what it was as an indie film , and im glad that shane made it with the film. and applaud him for the great work.
 
It is so dialogue driven, I think that that's why I enjoyed it so much. Sci-Fi isn't normally so much dialogue w/out CG. There is a limit, however, to the amount of dialogue and I do feel that the last 15 or so minutes could have been "cleaned" up. That being said, it's partly my fault for hyping this movie up. It's different--and that's what I found refreshing. I thought that the score was great (loops, baby) and sounded very Newman-ish at times. Considering how well the script was put together and the good lighting (aside from the natural fountains) I walked away thinking, what an inspiring movie!

The acting wasn't the best--but I doubt most *first* time actors could do a better job. The cinematography really stood out for me as being a good selling point for this indie.

Hudson, I read ya, bro. The one thing that stood out to me was that although the movie is very short (1 hr 17 min?), it felt like it could have been two hours long. I like that it was dialogue-driven, but there should have been a "bigger" finale. The twist was good, but the "action" scenes had no.....balls (the only word I can think of besides charisma and/or energy). An hour and twenty minutes of mostly dialogue is kind of dull--like a pretentious college professor. I liked the Matrix-style (obviously that's out of the question) format. Put down the cerebral stuff in the first 1/3-1/2 of the movie, then work on the principles established and rev up the speed. I really think that my main complaint of Primer boils down to: the film didn't give the audience proper time to digest the ideas put forth before moving on to another set of equally complicated theories. Call me lame, or slow, but on the first viewing most people are not likely to understand ALL of it (iamloser being an exception, it seems). But, you know, maybe that's why it's been getting all the hype.

The reason that I hyped this mutha up is because I view it as a film any one of us guys could have done....for cheaper. Just think that if he had done this via DVX. I'm not sure how the transfer to film would have worked financially, but I bet that he could have saved some serious dough (that's assuming that Sundance will only take FILM formats--I think).
 
It seems we all are on the same page for the most part.

I got most of it; and admittedly got a little lost at that 3/4 part whereas I was "Huh?" but no matter...

I enjoyed the dialogue driven aspect up and to a point; and then it just kept dragging on with the 'blah blah blah'. It's like "Film is a Visual Medium?" And it turned into a non-stop talking head film.

I felt there was no real CLIMAX/BALLS/ENERGY/CHARISMA either. Like waiting for something to build but it never comes nor reaches a boiling point.

I am truly fascinated with the concept of time travel and have done some minor research; I love it. I think it's possible and the concept itself is hard to wrap your head around; but you can see it and I guess I wanted more exploration and excitement on the premise.

Like when they were talking about 'Going back and punching that dude in the face". That would have been great to see. Or like the Stock Market stuff; they never really showed them enjoying those fruits nor did they really show the ramifications.

And what about the Bleeding Ear issue? Did I miss something? Did they ever resolve that?

As low-budget as it was; I think more could have been done with the concept; more fun more CINEMA.

As cerebral as any film can be; I still want to be entertained in the end and I just wasn't entertained with this film.

Again, hell yes it looked like something we would/could do and that's pretty damn inspiring.
 
**** This post contains spoilers. Be advised. ****

And what about the Bleeding Ear issue? Did I miss something? Did they ever resolve that?
Click to expand...

As far as to why the ear bled, there's never a concrete answer. It's kind of like the handwriting thing. The point is the machine is screwing them up.

As a plot device, the fact that Aaron's ear bleeds first is a clue that he's been doing the time travel thing since before Abe even told him about the discovery. Abe's ear bleeds towards the end of the movie. If Abe had been traveling back longer than Aaron (as the film would lead you to believe) then his ear should bleed before Aaron's.

Chris
 
Okay, I admit I'm too lazy to read the whole thread - there's like four f'ing pages there. But I loved PRIMER. It was like Kubrick doing Pi. There were definitely times the story left me behind, but it came together in the end. Fine production value (great, considering how it was done), passable realistic acting, very good writing. The way they explored their scenarios was fascinating, like when the guy gets out of the box too early and finds the other guy waiting. It twisted my noodle in a good way.
 
I thought the movie was a great mind f*ck and very inspirational. i rented through netflix and then had to buy it on dvd the next day.

but I think some of your comments here are major contradictions...

to say this proves an indie can make it with a smart sci-fi script but then say it was a bit of a let down because it wasnt exciting or ballsy enough? i don't get that. PRIMER proves you don't need stuff blowing up every five seconds or aliens to have a "winner". aside from the plot itself, that's a big part of what PRIMER stands for to me as a filmmaker.

it's funny to say but because it's a "thinking movie", its unique and it doesn't need any more to it. it doesn't need to be more like everything else thrown at us. i applaud the creative team behind PRIMER. what would have made it better and more thrilling? maybe aaron and abe should have been blazing guns at all their own doubles by the end of it or it could have had a great martial arts scene or something! maybe throw in a volcano about to erupt! oh the irony! he he

no budget cinema can be a success, as PRIMER proves, you need a great story first.
 
My take on the 'Ballsy' aspect is I just wanted more; I wanted a climax, a peak, an event, a chreshendo of sorts. I felt it just kind of stayed 'even keeled' thoughout and never gave me a 'high point'. I don't need CGI and Big budget effects; I just need to be entertained.

Something was missing for me and it wasn't guns and aliens and explosions.
 
Just saw it last night. Me Like. Did anyone else notice that this mofo' had some SERIOUS DOF in alot of the shots!! It looked really cool!! I guess that's typical Super16 though.

~reservoir~
 
I saw this over the weekend and although I agree with most of the points brought up about this film, I think Shane is a perfect example of "low budget" independent film making. He made "Primer" for around $7,000, and shot it on S16. On the DVD commentary, he says "we only shot one take on everything in the film" (except on short scene where he kept screwing up his lines) Can you imagine shooting anything with only one take!, much less a 78 min feature! I believe had he had a few extra feet of film, we may have seen more elaborate scenes, ie the "shotgun" scene. So kudos to Shane Caruth in everything he has accomplished with his little tiny budget film, that is now in every blockbuster video store across america.
 
I keep hearing the same thing; the fact that Shane did this and that....

It is great; it is inpiring and major major major props to him for accomplishing what he has. It doesn't change the fact that it is still lacking though does it? It's not as if we have to forgive or let go unoticed the flaws in the execution?
 
Hudson, you said it when you said that you don't need CGI or explosions for BALLS or CLIMAX. That "anticipation" of the end and resolution just wasn't felt in the film (for me, anyway). Carruth could've sped up the camera work (he did so, just not as effective as it could've been), up-tempo'd the music, ditched the monotone narrative voice that unveils the climax, etc., etc.

The story had the elements, just maybe not the execution of it. For me, I think of the ending of the movie with Abe (or Aaron--too lazy to look up mid-post) training the cosmonauts or whatever. For me, that part was the conventional winding down and end of the story, but I never felt that I needed to wind down from anything. It (the climax) just kind of slid by for me.

I love the film (mainly for what it stands for and the theory and story), but this film is definitely not without flaw. Could I have done better? I guess we'll have to wait and see....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top