Quatro amigos empreendedores lutam para atribuir a autoria de sua mais recente invenção.Quatro amigos empreendedores lutam para atribuir a autoria de sua mais recente invenção.Quatro amigos empreendedores lutam para atribuir a autoria de sua mais recente invenção.
- Prêmios
- 3 vitórias e 7 indicações no total
Avaliações em destaque
It's not easy to follow. The production values aren't perfect. There's not an obvious 'good guy' or 'bad guy.' But was this movie any good? Oh hell yes.
This movie has been compared to "2001" because of the sci-fi angle. But while the movie has one sci-fi element in it (the device), the movie isn't even about that. It's about these two guys, and how it affects them individually, and their relationship with one another.
I found this movie to be fairly challenging, but worth the ride. I was up for hours discussing this movie with friends, and if that's not what you like to do with your movies, then this one probably isn't for you. But if you like something that tweaks your brain, that you can watch repeated times, that you can really chew on... then here comes "Primer," like a ghost in the night.
It's too early to tell where this movie will reside in cinematic history-- revered, forgotten, or somewhere in between-- but it's already won the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance (where it beat out 'Garden State'), and just won't go away. It moves along, it's clever, it held my attention. Even "Pi" didn't do that, and if you're a film nerd, that's saying something.
If you're not a film nerd, approach this one with more caution. Remember, Shane Carruth had no idea even how to make a movie when he started making this one, but the end result is something far more fascinating than your typical film-school snob could ever put together. This is wholly original, and took me someplace I have never been. And that alone makes the "2001" comparison start to look more and more accurate.....
This movie has been compared to "2001" because of the sci-fi angle. But while the movie has one sci-fi element in it (the device), the movie isn't even about that. It's about these two guys, and how it affects them individually, and their relationship with one another.
I found this movie to be fairly challenging, but worth the ride. I was up for hours discussing this movie with friends, and if that's not what you like to do with your movies, then this one probably isn't for you. But if you like something that tweaks your brain, that you can watch repeated times, that you can really chew on... then here comes "Primer," like a ghost in the night.
It's too early to tell where this movie will reside in cinematic history-- revered, forgotten, or somewhere in between-- but it's already won the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance (where it beat out 'Garden State'), and just won't go away. It moves along, it's clever, it held my attention. Even "Pi" didn't do that, and if you're a film nerd, that's saying something.
If you're not a film nerd, approach this one with more caution. Remember, Shane Carruth had no idea even how to make a movie when he started making this one, but the end result is something far more fascinating than your typical film-school snob could ever put together. This is wholly original, and took me someplace I have never been. And that alone makes the "2001" comparison start to look more and more accurate.....
"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.
Yes, there is a chance that you will NOT like this movie. That's because it is not a movie made for the majority of paying cinema goers, but it is a movie made for the sake of movie making. It is an ORIGINAL movie, so if you want something that you are used to see and expect beginning and ending in a specific way don't go watching this one.
Now, about the movie: it is low budget, but the money was well spent. The plot is confusing, but good, and it does need you to watch the last 30 minutes again in order to be understood. The acting is good, even if the roles are nothing demanding. The idea is very interesting and makes you think "outside the box" :) You will see what I mean after you watch the movie.
I won't waste your time telling you what it is about, just watch it and if you don't like it, at least you will have gained another perspective on movie making. For me this is a keeper: burn, CD, burn!
Now, about the movie: it is low budget, but the money was well spent. The plot is confusing, but good, and it does need you to watch the last 30 minutes again in order to be understood. The acting is good, even if the roles are nothing demanding. The idea is very interesting and makes you think "outside the box" :) You will see what I mean after you watch the movie.
I won't waste your time telling you what it is about, just watch it and if you don't like it, at least you will have gained another perspective on movie making. For me this is a keeper: burn, CD, burn!
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
Pros-
1. Charged with heavy scientific theories(half of which i don't understand) not dumbed down for the audience. Serves it's homegrown realism.
2. High production value for a microbudget project. Shots feel calculated and cinematically composed. Once it kicks the sense of paranoia is always there. The dialogues are pretty naturalistic and creates the atmosphere of being accompanied by scientists(not seen that often). It feels homemade rather than cheap and that helps maintaining its low-key presentation.
3. For a genre known for silly pseudo-science and not giving much thought about paradoxes it faces, this film started the trend of 'science based' time travel movies.
Cons-
1. Too much theoretical talks for exposition in the first act. Nearly lost me there.
2. Convoluted plot, partially saved by the narration.
1. Charged with heavy scientific theories(half of which i don't understand) not dumbed down for the audience. Serves it's homegrown realism.
2. High production value for a microbudget project. Shots feel calculated and cinematically composed. Once it kicks the sense of paranoia is always there. The dialogues are pretty naturalistic and creates the atmosphere of being accompanied by scientists(not seen that often). It feels homemade rather than cheap and that helps maintaining its low-key presentation.
3. For a genre known for silly pseudo-science and not giving much thought about paradoxes it faces, this film started the trend of 'science based' time travel movies.
Cons-
1. Too much theoretical talks for exposition in the first act. Nearly lost me there.
2. Convoluted plot, partially saved by the narration.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe budget for the entire film was around $7000. Most of the money was spent on film stock.
- Erros de gravaçãoDuring numerous takes the director, Shane Carruth, mutters "cut" under his breath. According to the DVD commentary, this is due to their extremely low budget which did not allow them to "waste" film. Carruth notes that a total of 80 minutes of usable footage was shot; the final film is 78 minutes.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosThanks to Scott Douglass for having the faith to invest in the final stages of marketing and post production
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 7.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 424.760
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 28.162
- 10 de out. de 2004
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 545.436
- Tempo de duração1 hora 17 minutos
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente