Quattro amici/imprenditori alle prime armi, sapendo che c'è qualcosa di più grande e innovativo dei vari dispositivi di controllo degli errori che hanno costruito, si contendono la loro nuov... Leggi tuttoQuattro amici/imprenditori alle prime armi, sapendo che c'è qualcosa di più grande e innovativo dei vari dispositivi di controllo degli errori che hanno costruito, si contendono la loro nuova invenzione.Quattro amici/imprenditori alle prime armi, sapendo che c'è qualcosa di più grande e innovativo dei vari dispositivi di controllo degli errori che hanno costruito, si contendono la loro nuova invenzione.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 3 vittorie e 7 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
You're going to watch this movie for the first time... and you won't understand it. It's that simple. Honestly, I don't think it's possible to grasp Primer in a single viewing, especially if you're going in with just the basics. And that's not a flaw - it's part of the design.
Once it's over, you're left with two possible paths.
The first option is to watch it again. And again. As many times as it takes until you start piecing the puzzle together on your own. This is the purest - and most challenging - way to approach the film: no spoilers, no external explanations, just your intuition, memory, and attention to detail. Trust me, two viewings won't be enough.
The second option is to look for explanations. That's the one I chose. The video that helped me the most was "PRIMER (2004) - ILLUSTRATED EXPLANATION" by LondonCityGirl. Thanks to that, I was able to understand a big part of what was going on. Still, I kept digging, reading, and watching other analyses to catch more nuances. Primer is packed with visual clues, subtle gestures, and lines of dialogue that seem insignificant but carry a lot of weight.
My first viewing was total confusion. And if I ever felt like something made sense, I was probably wrong.
The second time was completely different. I started noticing connections, details I had completely missed before. But even then, I realized something crucial: even if you understand the fundamentals of the story, a lot still remains open to interpretation. And I'm pretty sure that if I hadn't looked up any explanations, I'd have been just as lost as I was the first time.
My favorite scene is a specific one - an unexpected chase down the street - where the shift in tone, the music, the tension, and the atmosphere all come together so perfectly that I felt completely immersed in the film.
Once it's over, you're left with two possible paths.
The first option is to watch it again. And again. As many times as it takes until you start piecing the puzzle together on your own. This is the purest - and most challenging - way to approach the film: no spoilers, no external explanations, just your intuition, memory, and attention to detail. Trust me, two viewings won't be enough.
The second option is to look for explanations. That's the one I chose. The video that helped me the most was "PRIMER (2004) - ILLUSTRATED EXPLANATION" by LondonCityGirl. Thanks to that, I was able to understand a big part of what was going on. Still, I kept digging, reading, and watching other analyses to catch more nuances. Primer is packed with visual clues, subtle gestures, and lines of dialogue that seem insignificant but carry a lot of weight.
My first viewing was total confusion. And if I ever felt like something made sense, I was probably wrong.
The second time was completely different. I started noticing connections, details I had completely missed before. But even then, I realized something crucial: even if you understand the fundamentals of the story, a lot still remains open to interpretation. And I'm pretty sure that if I hadn't looked up any explanations, I'd have been just as lost as I was the first time.
My favorite scene is a specific one - an unexpected chase down the street - where the shift in tone, the music, the tension, and the atmosphere all come together so perfectly that I felt completely immersed in the film.
If you've heard that "Primer" is a complicated, dense, and difficult film, you heard correctly. This is not simple entertainment, not even complex entertainment, this is a film that demands true focus and attention, and only then is truly rewarding. I can imagine countless bored people who watched and listened to the movie but didn't REALLY pay attention to it, didn't think with it. You simply cannot expect to like "Primer" if you aren't prepared to be an active participant IN the film.
The film is remarkably good visually, especially when budget is considered. Carruth clearly has a lot of talent. The cinematography is excellent, the shot composition is flawless, the strength of the visual storytelling astounding. Carruth's script is the best thing about the movie, and really isn't flawed at all. The dialogue flows naturally and the ideas are absolutely fascinating and captivating, and even the humor is effective. This movie does not use 'technobabble', it uses genuine scientific concepts as a basis for its events, and certainly some degree of knowledge of physics is needed for a proper understanding of the film.
I have seen "Primer" four times and I still don't completely understand it (or, at least I couldn't explain it too well to someone else), even after reading dozens of explanations. It's an incredibly rich and detailed film, and it's one that not only rewards but actually requires multiple viewings. This will and has already put many, many people off watching the film, but it only increases its greatness in my opinion. It is simply incredible how much these guys came up with using so little. Carruth's vision was unique and complete, and he made possibly the greatest debut film ever made, and with a 2:1 shooting ratio (the ratio between the total duration of its footage shot and that which results from its final cut) at that. If that doesn't prove that Carruth knew what he was doing what does? One of the most inventive, original, and unique movies ever made.
10/10
The film is remarkably good visually, especially when budget is considered. Carruth clearly has a lot of talent. The cinematography is excellent, the shot composition is flawless, the strength of the visual storytelling astounding. Carruth's script is the best thing about the movie, and really isn't flawed at all. The dialogue flows naturally and the ideas are absolutely fascinating and captivating, and even the humor is effective. This movie does not use 'technobabble', it uses genuine scientific concepts as a basis for its events, and certainly some degree of knowledge of physics is needed for a proper understanding of the film.
I have seen "Primer" four times and I still don't completely understand it (or, at least I couldn't explain it too well to someone else), even after reading dozens of explanations. It's an incredibly rich and detailed film, and it's one that not only rewards but actually requires multiple viewings. This will and has already put many, many people off watching the film, but it only increases its greatness in my opinion. It is simply incredible how much these guys came up with using so little. Carruth's vision was unique and complete, and he made possibly the greatest debut film ever made, and with a 2:1 shooting ratio (the ratio between the total duration of its footage shot and that which results from its final cut) at that. If that doesn't prove that Carruth knew what he was doing what does? One of the most inventive, original, and unique movies ever made.
10/10
I don't know how to feel about this movie. I do know it takes more than one viewing to catch it all. I enjoyed it, overall. There were twists even I didn't expect, and I'm one of those people who never gets caught by twists. The movie was well-acted. It seemed as if the things they did could actually happen. Watch it closely the first time, then watch it again to see how much you missed. If you get it all the first time, congratulations. If it takes more than one viewing, join the club. It's definitely a must-see, even though I only gave it a 6. It makes you think. It makes you REALLY think. I bought it sight-unseen for my husband for his birthday. I've watched it more than he has. So, "thumbs up", but be prepared for a bumpy ride.
"Primer" starts out innocently like a "Start-up.com" docu-drama and the first part covers some of those same financial, friendship and entrepreneurial issues as computer geek engineers work out of of one of the partner's garage to perfect an invention.
But gradually, in this antiseptic atmosphere of white shirts, electrical experiments and tweaking mechanics, every human emotion, virtually as every seven deadly sin, except sloth, and beyond, starting with greed, takes them over.
Without any explanation to the audience, we gradually figure out that we're seeing a cleverer, low budget "Paycheck" or what "Ground Hog Day" played for laughs and an original "Outer Limits" episode did for irony (I didn't see "The Butterfly Effect" to see how it also dealt with time changes).
Rather this is an attempt to seriously examine the philosophical issues of chaos theory and how inventions can't be divorced from human frailties, both mental and physical.
Shane Carruth, as the lead actor/writer/director/producer is a true auteur--and could therefore give his nerd a wife and kid-- but perhaps an outside editor could have helped make the permutations a bit clearer as I didn't quite follow the intersections with outside characters. I followed enough to get caught up in the anxiety and suspense of each iteration.
It was amusing that I was the only woman in the audience.
But gradually, in this antiseptic atmosphere of white shirts, electrical experiments and tweaking mechanics, every human emotion, virtually as every seven deadly sin, except sloth, and beyond, starting with greed, takes them over.
Without any explanation to the audience, we gradually figure out that we're seeing a cleverer, low budget "Paycheck" or what "Ground Hog Day" played for laughs and an original "Outer Limits" episode did for irony (I didn't see "The Butterfly Effect" to see how it also dealt with time changes).
Rather this is an attempt to seriously examine the philosophical issues of chaos theory and how inventions can't be divorced from human frailties, both mental and physical.
Shane Carruth, as the lead actor/writer/director/producer is a true auteur--and could therefore give his nerd a wife and kid-- but perhaps an outside editor could have helped make the permutations a bit clearer as I didn't quite follow the intersections with outside characters. I followed enough to get caught up in the anxiety and suspense of each iteration.
It was amusing that I was the only woman in the audience.
Four friends/fledgling entrepreneurs, knowing that there is something bigger and more innovative than the different error-checking devices they have built, wrestle over their new invention.
What can you do with $7000? Apparently, with a good script and a cast / crew that does not exceed their expectations or potential, quite a bit. This film is on par with very early Cronenberg (such as "Stereo"), and it seems to already be a modern science fiction classic.
We get some great quotes, too. "I'm hungry. I haven't eaten since later this afternoon." Where else could that line ever make sense? I also love the question of how do cell phones work? Most time travel films, even if they go to the future, neglect cell phones. This one asks a valid question: which one would ring if two existed in the same time? Hmmm..
What can you do with $7000? Apparently, with a good script and a cast / crew that does not exceed their expectations or potential, quite a bit. This film is on par with very early Cronenberg (such as "Stereo"), and it seems to already be a modern science fiction classic.
We get some great quotes, too. "I'm hungry. I haven't eaten since later this afternoon." Where else could that line ever make sense? I also love the question of how do cell phones work? Most time travel films, even if they go to the future, neglect cell phones. This one asks a valid question: which one would ring if two existed in the same time? Hmmm..
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe budget for the entire film was around $7000. Most of the money was spent on film stock.
- BlooperDuring numerous takes the director, Shane Carruth, mutters "cut" under his breath. According to the DVD commentary, this is due to their extremely low budget which did not allow them to "waste" film. Carruth notes that a total of 80 minutes of usable footage was shot; the final film is 78 minutes.
- Curiosità sui creditiThanks to Scott Douglass for having the faith to invest in the final stages of marketing and post production
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 7000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 424.760 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 28.162 USD
- 10 ott 2004
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 545.436 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 17 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti