Film Primer

[daysonatrain]

great movie, i highly recommend

 

[vagueblur]

It's a good film but complicated. You might consider this a spoiler, though I've seen the movie and still don't understand it:

http://classicalconvert.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/primer_timeline.jpg

I would have attached it but it's too big

I wish there were more movies like this.

 

[AmorRoark]

Hey-yo, this thread already exists

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?t=205669&highlight=primer

 

[SackFromTheBack]

This movie is awesome. For anyone that is still confused by the film, here's my interpretation in a kind of time line format. This is one of those movies that really leaves a lot of assuming and guessing so obviously some of my explanation may be off.
I will refer to the original Abe and Aaron (before they had ever gone through the machine) as Abe 1 and Aaron 1. Once each go through a failsafe, they will become Abe 2 or Aaron 2 and so on for each time they use it. This helps with mixing up who's who.

Timeline 1(We don't see much of this timeline in the film)

• Abe 1 and Aaron 1 build the machine, then try and figure out exactly what it does

• Abe 1 discovers what the machine does. He builds a larger machine, puts it in a storage unit and turns it on. This is the failsafe machine.

• Abe 1 also builds a General Usage machine and uses it, we will still consider him Abe 1 since he didn't use the failsafe.

• Abe 1 back via General Usage machine finds Aaron 1 on the park bench and tells him about the machine. At some point around here a second general usage box is made

• That night, Robert has a birthday party where Rachel's ex-boyfriend pulls out a shotgun. Abe and Aaron were not at the party

• At some point in the original timeline, Aaron discovers the failsafe hidden by Abe. He's angry that Abe could reset the timeline and, in essence, control Aaron's reality

• Aaron takes one of the general usage boxes and folds it up into the failsafe (thus, becoming Aaron 2). Upon exiting the failsafe, he sets up his own presumably in a second locker. There are now two failsafes.

Timeline 2 (This is most of what we see in the film)

• Aaron2, back via failsafe, goes to Aaron 1's home and drugs him and stuffs him in the attic

• Abe1 meets Aaron2 at the park bench. Aaron2 has an earpiece and is recording all conversations.

• That night, Aaron2 goes to Robert's birthday party. He knows what happens since he was told though he doesn't know exactly how it goes down. He "rushes" the ex-boyfriend. Presumably it wasn't perfectly executed.

~~At this point we see how things progress as this is the bulk of the film.

• The night Abe 1 wants to take Aaron2 to punch Platz, a Granger double appears. Abe 1 panics as they have no idea how he learned about the boxes.

• Abe 1 decides to use the failsafe. Aaron2 uses his own failsafe.

Timeline 3

• Aaron3, back via failsafe, goes to original Aaron's home. Aaron2 was already there to drug the original Aaron and stuffs him in the attic. Aaron3 encounters Aaron2 (from timeline1) and gets beat up by him. But Aaron3 explains to Aaron2 that he's already done the recordings and already done the party, so he's better equipped. Aaron2 leaves.

• Abe2, back via failsafe, gases original Abe and stuffs him in a closet.

• Abe2 meets Aaron3 at the park bench. Aaron3 has the earpiece and the recorded conversations. Abe2 faints from exhaustion and Aaron3 is responding improperly based on the recordings.

• Aaron3 explains to Abe2 what's happened

• Aaron3 and Abe2 go to the party and Aaron3 does it "better".

• Aaron3 leaves, Abe2 sticks around to try and prevent Abe 1 and Aaron 1 from finishing the general usage boxes.

• Aaron2 calls Aaron to tell him everything that has happened so far, presumably so he can get one up on Abe and Abe2 and gain the power he desires (this is the narration throughout the film).

• Aaron2 or Aaron3 (never revealed) are shown perhaps constructing a bigger box to feed his power hunger.

 

[mariacallas]

Merged

 

[marsmellow]

I thought it was to movies what abstract paintings like those by Picasso and Dali are to visual art.

You have GOT to be kidding. This movie sucked.

It was boring, convoluted and not thought provoking at all.

It's hard to understand because the director/writer is bad at story telling. That's not a good thing. It's a flaw.

The characters were one dimensional and their conversations were either boring or confusing and sometimes both. And why did they keep talking over each other, and changing the subject every five seconds? That was very irritating.

A lot of the movie was wasted. Instead of including that meaningless techno-babble at the beginning, he could have used that time to explain the story better. It's a short movie. None of it should have been wasted like that.

The theme of the movie, the paradoxes and problems created by time travel, is nothing new, and it's been done a lot better in the past.

I have no idea why this won awards. It is not the masterpiece that so many people seem to think it is. Picasso? Dali? Please.

There are only two reasons I can think of why someone would like this movie.

1. They want to feel like an elite movie snob. This is a silly reason to like it. It's like bragging to people that you have great taste in wine... because you appreciate the kind that comes in boxes.

2. They like to solve puzzles. If someone likes to solve riddles and puzzles, then I can see how they might love this movie. You could watch it ten times in a row and still not fully understand it.

I gave it 2 stars. Maybe that is a little bit harsh, considering that it was made on a 7k budget. But still... I don't see the appeal of this movie. If you like puzzles, then watch it. If you don't, it's just a big waste of time.

 

[alasdairm]

There are only two reasons I can think of why someone would like this movie.

1. They want to feel like an elite movie snob. This is a silly reason to like it. It's like bragging to people that you have great taste in wine... because you appreciate the kind that comes in boxes.

2. They like to solve puzzles. If someone likes to solve riddles and puzzles, then I can see how they might love this movie. You could watch it ten times in a row and still not fully understand it.

3. different people like different things.



alasdair

 

[TheDeceased]

You should get that made into a stamp, alasdair. It'd save you a lot of time. Everyone knows that people like different things. You don't need to keep pointing it out to bluelight members that have contrary opinions. I'm not sure if you think it's some sort of revelation or if you're just consciously being patronizing.

Anyway, I completely agree with the two possible reasons for liking the film. You DO have to like puzzles to like the film. If you don't want to sit down for an hour after it finishes and struggle to make sense of it, then don't watch it. There's no arguing with that, really, is there?

Personally I thought the film was terrible. It is one of the most incompetently produced films that I've ever encountered and I've watched quite a lot of amateur unsolicited material. I struggle to understand how anyone could possibly like it unless they are particularly into conundrums.

alasdai, You might say of another film, as you have, this is a film for the horror fans or some such remark, implying a pre-requisite for enjoying it is a pre-disposition towards horror. Yet when you say such things I don't jump up and attempt to invalidate your opinion.

It seems to me that you just don't like people trashing films that you are fond of so you try to imply in a fairly non-direct and politically correct manner (the smiley face is a nice touch) that they are narrow-minded.

It isn't narrow-minded to say that you need to like puzzles to like this film.

It's obvious.

 

[DarthMom]

It's not an "easy" movie to watch. I don't think you gave it much of a chance.

saw it again, all the way through, understood...and it sucked. the hubby loved it though. not exciting, not mystifying, not original, not anything. the hubby is behind me as i comment this aloud and he loves it and is defending it and states it was just over my head and that is why i didn't like it.

fucker.

 

[TheDeceased]

Bah. It's not over your head. The entire film is plot, a series of events. There is little to no explanation of the science, little to no character development, no subtext. It's very confusing but that doesn't mean that it's difficult to comprehend because it's clever. I just couldn't be bothered doing what SackFromTheBack did above (Aaron 1, Aaron 2, Abe 1, Abe 3, etc). Like marsmellow said, some people like that sort of thing. I don't.

 

[PVMD]

You should get that made into a stamp, alasdair. It'd save you a lot of time. Everyone knows that people like different things. You don't need to keep pointing it out to bluelight members that have contrary opinions. I'm not sure if you think it's some sort of revelation or if you're just consciously being patronizing.

Anyway, I completely agree with the two possible reasons for liking the film. You DO have to like puzzles to like the film. If you don't want to sit down for an hour after it finishes and struggle to make sense of it, then don't watch it. There's no arguing with that, really, is there?

Personally I thought the film was terrible. It is one of the most incompetently produced films that I've ever encountered and I've watched quite a lot of amateur unsolicited material. I struggle to understand how anyone could possibly like it unless they are particularly into conundrums.

alasdai, You might say of another film, as you have, this is a film for the horror fans or some such remark, implying a pre-requisite for enjoying it is a pre-disposition towards horror. Yet when you say such things I don't jump up and attempt to invalidate your opinion.

It seems to me that you just don't like people trashing films that you are fond of so you try to imply in a fairly non-direct and politically correct manner (the smiley face is a nice touch) that they are narrow-minded.

It isn't narrow-minded to say that you need to like puzzles to like this film.

It's obvious.

I think it's ironic that you scold someone for reiterating common knowledge, and end your rant with "It's obvious".

 

[PVMD]

Not only is it sci-fi; it lacks internal consistency - full of paradoxes.

Nevertheless (mostly for those very reasons actually) it's thought provoking.

And as such has some entertainment value.

"Figuring it out" will only be identifying it's logical flaws.

Trying to "make sense of it" people end up with different incorrect explanations.

You can not answer a faulty question.

 

[adam west]

i dunno i was a bit tired when i watched it but it just didint grab me for me the most part. i might watch it again with a clear head and see how i perceive it then

 

[What 23]

This is a favorite.

 

[rickolasnice]

Good film Just finished watching it (thanks to this thread)..

 

[adam west]

i still dont understand it or maybe im not supposed to.

 

[His Name Is Frank]

i still dont understand it or maybe im not supposed to.

Watch these:

 

[What 23]

Another film was just released, by the same guy (Shanr Carruth) who did this one, called Upstream Color.

This is his second.

http://www.google.com/search?safe=off&site=&source=hp&ei=rE-MUfDTDOeEygH-gYG4BQ&q=upstream+color&oq=upstr&gs_l=mobile-gws-hp.1.0.41j0i10j0l3.6068.7559.0.9551.6.5.0.1.1.0.100.382.4j1.5.0.eplpr..0.0...1c.1j4.12.mobile-gws-hp.VScUI7zpSEE