Originally Posted by OG-
That baby only cost $7,000 to make, and on top of that only 4 minutes were cut from the total 80 minutes of shot film. Talk about a director knowing exactly what he wants...
Apparently most of those 4 minutes were lost thanks to the little numerical display they used near the start - it was taken from a set of scales, and it seems they mangled it when they ripped it out, so it never settled on the numbers they wanted. Kinda ironic, considering the DIY-tastic storyline
Originally Posted by Piddzilla
I admire his effort to put so much work into details, but maybe those details stole the show a bit from the bigger picture? i don't know... I should probably see it again. OG- made me feel bad for not digging it....
It was a totally introverted affair all told. I think he'll have to learn to come out of himself a bit if he's going to grow as a film-maker.
I think the biggest barrier to engaging with the film might be the central theme he's trying to explore:
WARNING: "Primer" spoilers below
IE 'trust becoming impossible when personal responsibility expands to massive extent'. That's how he describes it in the commentary. The prob is - when does anyone have to face that problem? Unless they're a president or something? It's not something that's easy to identify with. Add in the cheeky recursiveness of the time-travelling stuff, compounded by the storytelling emphasis on context over conversation [when the context is shifting wildly] - and it all becomes a bit of an effort, with not quite enough reward at the end .
Ultimately, i didn't buy the actions of the director's character by the end - sure he's slightly deranged by time-travel etc now - but why go against your friend's wishes to protect the life of the girl that fancies him? (At least that's how i read the gun-party business). That's 'personal responsibility' gone mad. That's probably the weakest aspect of the story for me. Altho i still don't understand everything that happened in those final sections
IE 'trust becoming impossible when personal responsibility expands to massive extent'. That's how he describes it in the commentary. The prob is - when does anyone have to face that problem? Unless they're a president or something? It's not something that's easy to identify with. Add in the cheeky recursiveness of the time-travelling stuff, compounded by the storytelling emphasis on context over conversation [when the context is shifting wildly] - and it all becomes a bit of an effort, with not quite enough reward at the end
.
Ultimately, i didn't buy the actions of the director's character by the end - sure he's slightly deranged by time-travel etc now - but why go against your friend's wishes to protect the life of the girl that fancies him? (At least that's how i read the gun-party business). That's 'personal responsibility' gone mad. That's probably the weakest aspect of the story for me. Altho i still don't understand everything that happened in those final sections
Basically, i think he may have tried to do too much. He may have warped the project around himself too much. I think he just took us on a journey inside his head. And it's a weird place
. Interesting to to visit tho
Originally Posted by Pyro Tramp
So does Primer rate? I'm waiting for it to get a bit cheaper before getting it, but can't tell if you (Pid and Tac) enjoyed that much.
Purely to see how a film pans out when a complex story is told almost entirely implicitely, with hardly any help given to the viewer at all, it's well worth watching. The budget and the pure auterishness involved mean the extras are worth a visit too.
It's ingenius, and it uses the time-travel aspect in an innovative way, but it certainly isn't entertainment on a plate. You've been warned
Like Tac says -
PI is far more enjoyable - and is probably the better film too
. Somehow
Primer makes a story about understanding the un-understandable seem streamlined and straight-forward
Reply to Topic
