Primer (2004) User Reviews

A film for the days when science fiction was about wrestling with ideas . . .

[Chris_Docker · 8/10 · 24 August 2004]

A group of young scientists work at a frantic pace to invent they are not quite sure what, but their efforts start demonstrating interesting side effects. From their work in a small cottage industry of error checking devices they are forced to confront the fact that they have discovered something too valuable to market. As they explore the potential of their machine, they are caught in a frantic loop to second guess themselves.

Science fiction in the cinema has largely been dominated by the visual impact, and so this is a welcome (for some) return to the world of ideas. This is not an easy-rise entertainment film but one where you have to concentrate to keep up, working out the logical implications of what's happening. If made on the scale of Men in Black or the Matrix it would descend to the level of spoof – as it is we follow the two main characters knowing that their actions are having momentous effects on the world around them and on themselves. Instead of flashy graphics, we are left to keep the ramifications of the story in mind as the characters themselves grapple with what they know is happening but can't even let themselves look at directly.

The $7000 Science Fiction Film

[gavin6942 · 8/10 · 21 July 2015]

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..

The Pandora's Box That is Time Travel

[DD-931 · 7/10 · 3 March 2006]

I have to say this is an astounding movie to me. Not simply because it looks far better than a $7000 movie has any right to look (even if a distributor spent a hundred times that to "clean it up").

This movie takes the ultimate advantage of it's budget to present a time travel story that is, in a way that I find rather unnerving, the most "realistic" portrayal of time travel I have ever seen. The "non-acting" of the actors, the shaky (yet sometimes quite sophisticated) use of the camera, the odd way the story plays out as semi-coherent...this film plays out as if it were actually made by it's protagonist (which, of course, it was). But what we discover by learning the story through "Aaron" is that the final result of time travel is, quite simply, madness.

I had such a feeling of dread as this film unfolded. From the moment we see Aaron and Abe first watch the "other" Abe at the U-Haul facility, the full ramifications of what time travel really could lead to started to crystallize. It's not just the idea that God-like powers have been placed in the hands of flawed human beings...it's the concept that flawed human beings are continually pulled like magnets toward the temptation to trap themselves inside a nightmarish existence, for the most "logical" of reasons. Not only that, but the insidious way the ripple effect of tampering with reality through time travel spread and spread meant that, ultimately, no one would be safe from such a disastrous invention. To me, somehow the most terrifying moment of this film is when the wife talks about getting an exterminator to take care of the "sound in the attic." As soon as I realized what that sound was, it shook me.

I will be thinking about this "imperfect" film for some time to come.

Incredible

[ChrisC_ATL · 13 June 2004]

You remember the first time you saw The Matrix (please, not the awful sequels) and you could barely keep up with what was going on, trying to piece together the pieces of what you were being told into a coherent story?

This movie was exactly like that. The first half or so is fairly linear (despite the frenzied Altman-esque style of everyone talking on top of each other), but then it gets WEIRD and it just absolutely blew me away. This film won a major Sundance award, and normally that means I won't like it (especially the normally pandering audience award winners) but this movie, and first-time filmmaker Shane Carruth, deserves absolutely everything it gets. I am just blown away.

Did you like Pi? If so, go see this one.

By the way, the attention to detail in the beginning is great. Often in thrillers with technical content, if you have a technical education you have consciously ignore all the stupid movie crud that they pull to make it into a good story. But this movie pulls off an incredibly believable technical story, with only a few distracting gaffs. That is, the tech jargon is good enough that you don't get distracted and can focus on the story line.

Final comment: Yes, it is very hard to follow the story line in this movie.

Obviously I'm not going to spoil it, but I think the following fact will help when the movie gets kind of hairy towards the end: Aaron is the dark-haired guy, Abe is the blond-haired guy.

This movie now has distribution and you should keep an eye out for it in the fall.

what a unique experience

[kittiwake-1 · 6/10 · 21 August 2006]

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.

Fresh look at the sci-fi sub-genre of time travel

[asabfatin · 7/10 · 21 December 2022]

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.

Confusing but it makes perfect sense

[jncressman · 10/10 · 9 June 2005]

Partial explanation Only for those who have seen the movie.

The movie is shown completely linearly from Abe's perspective. (Abe's the blond one.) I'm sure most people can follow the move up until the scene in the garage where Philip and Robert explain to Abe that Rachell's ex boy friend showed up at the Robert's party with a shot gun.

Things get strange at this point because Aaron and Abe are now planning to stop the ex boy friend, an event that from regular time has already happened but we are viewing the movie from Abe's perspective and he hasn't gone to the party yet. Also at the time of the garage scene Abe doesn't yet know that Aaron used the failsafe machine to change the events at the party.

When Abe shows up at the fail safe machine it isn't the one he left running but the one that Arron had taken back in time inside the first fail safe machine. When Abe goes back in time he meets Arron who already knows what Abe was going to say because he's also gone back in time.

Abe knocks his past self out with the NO2 while Arron drugs his own breakfast milk.

At this point they are changing their own past. They don't play the stock market so they aren't rich at the end of the movie.

Aaron's been recording all the conversations that he hears through the ear piece so he's ready the second time that Abe comes to explain that they have built a time machine, only the second time Abe has also come back in time.

We will never know what would have happened at the party if Aaron and Abe hadn't used the time machine to change the events at the party because those events never happen. We do know that Abe tells Rachel's father the venture capitalist about the time machine and he uses it. That's why he has a couple days worth of beard growth.

Aaron goes though the days several times and even meets himself and gets in a fight with himself.

Now all you have to do is watch it another 3 times to confirm what I just wrote.

good blueprint for a remake

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 29 October 2015]

Aaron, Abe, Robert and Phillip are engineering friends working in the garage during their spare time. The guys argue over the project. Aaron and Abe work on their own device which is suppose to reduce weight but it also seems to be a time travel machine.

This is a micro-budget indie. I don't even know if they ordered pizzas. This is an interesting concept. The tech talk is a bit confusing. The acting is all amateurish and so is the production. That's not unexpected considering the couch cushion change. This is a good blueprint for a remake once they gather more financing and some bigger acting names.

No Maps for These Territories

[Quicksand · 9/10 · 9 October 2004]

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.....

"I think my body's getting used to these 36-hour days."

[ackstasis · 7/10 · 17 January 2008]

Travelling through time is a tricky business, especially when the time-travel machine was invented purely by accident, and you don't really know much about how it works, or how its misuse might affect your own future. Just days after I enjoyed Richard Schenkman's excellent 'The Man from Earth (2007),' low-budget cinema has presented me with another fascinating foray into science-fiction, a film that uses ten times the brain-power expended on your latest blockbuster… and with one millionth of the budget! 'Primer (2004)' was the brainchild of first-time director/writer/actor/producer/editor/composer Shane Carruth, who makes little effort to dumb-down the film's scientific jargon to cater for the less knowledgeable viewer, without ever treating its audience with condescension or pretension. Because the film's main characters understand just as little as we do, we feel as though we are all in the same boat, just waiting for their naive, deceptively-straightforward schemes to go awry.

Filmed on a meagre budget of US$7,000, 'Primer' defies its ultra low-budget roots, and reeks with slick professionalism. Indeed, the film certainly looks as though it was shot cheaply, occasionally making use of a shaky hand-held camera, but this, oddly enough, only contributes to the effectiveness of the story. As 'Primer' takes a purely scientific approach to time-travel {resisting the common temptation of inventing a fantastical, unexplained device – a "flux capacitor," for example – for the sake of simplicity}, it is imperative that the film feels factual, and the pedestrian, documentary-like realism of the cinematography keeps us firmly grounded in the real world. Fluorescent lighting, non-neutral color temperatures, high-speed film stock and camera filters, when required, do nicely to set the mood, and are about the most sophisticated special effects employed at any point during the film. The two main actors, Shane Carruth and David Sullivan, both do a very good job in their debut performances, with their acting never feeling forced or tentative, despite occupying the screen for nearly one hundred percent of the total running time.

'Primer' is a film relatively well-known for its unfathomability, the fractured narrative structure only contributing to the complexity of Carruth's story. Being an time-travel enthusiast myself {prior to watching this film, I had spent the last two days boring my co-workers with my opinions on the Grandfather Paradox}, I felt pretty confident that I would be perfectly capable of following the narrative from beginning to end. The story remained completely coherent in the opening two acts – in which Aaron and Abe invent the time machine, and then use it to play the stock market – as long as the timeline (apparently) remained self-consistent. However, as soon as a third party was found to be using the machine, I completely lost it. The final act, though convoluted and perhaps deliberately-incomprehensible, nonetheless remains a fascinating puzzle, and one that I'm sure will fall into place once I find the time to rewatch the film. As for now, all I can do is offer an enthusiastic thumbs-up recommendation, and smugly pretend that I understood more than I actually did.

Confusing

[view_and_review · 5/10 · 22 January 2016]

Yesterday I watched "Project Almanac" which was also about time travel. The discussion board was full of threads about the temporal paradoxes created in the movie. One thread mentioned movies that did a good job with the time travel theory and "Primer" was mentioned, so here I am.

I don't consider myself a dumb or inattentive person; I typically don't need plots spelled out for me and I understood the premise, however, somewhere mid-movie they lost me. Characters were mentioned whom I hadn't heard before and nor did I know their relationship to the main characters. Then it got to the point where I didn't know what time frame they were in or who I was looking at because every time the two main characters went back there would be a double of them. It all just got too confusing; to the point I actually watched it twice to see if I missed something. Even with watching it twice I couldn't quite figure it all out. Their dialog was too ambiguous and the jump cuts from scene to scene left me behind.

What's amazing is that the movie had a narrator--and it was needed--but he added very little to helping comprehend this movie. Time travel movies are naturally confusing because of the paradoxes and conundrums in them, the last thing I need is ambiguity on top of confusion.

Beautifully Flawed

[flat6 · 9/10 · 8 December 2004]

Here's the gist of it: as another review has said, 'the script is riddled with problems, about 60% of the movie is out of focus, the audio is muffled and garbled, and continuity problems abound'. All these things are true. Yet despite all appearances, this does not amount to a bad movie. It just makes Primer a exquisitely different movie, and furthermore, a movie that works.

The reason to love it is that it's utterly defiant of the expectations of the traditional movie experience. It can't resort to a beautiful cast, shiny special effects, gorgeous scenery. Indeed, the cast is wooden in its acting, which turns out to work because that's how normal scientists and engineers (and people in general) are, flawed communicators. The settings are drab, out of focus, rushed and cheap, which turns out to work because that's what being efficient with your resources means for an inventor. It doesn't matter if the makers of Primer were forced into this style by their budget (as opposed to consciously 'pulling off' this look and feel). All that matters is that in the end, it turns out to work beautifully with the plot and the story.

What this means is that it has nothing to go on except its wits. And wits it does have. This is not to say that it's coherent… you will be confused by the fact that the plot doesn't nicely clean up after itself. There is no nice take-home message, no all-knowing schemework. But it is an intellectually respectable, honest attempt at dealing with the paradoxes of time travel. I've never seen any major flick that throws up its hands in the complexity of it all and just admits there's only so far you can look into things – most movies you'll see gloss over the issues with some bad science, or worse, simply don't ask the questions.

It's entertainment that's intellectually honest and respectable, and that's a tremendously rare thing.

9/10

'They took of their surrounding what was needed, and made something more'

[twistedhooch · 7/10 · 6 August 2006]

On the cover of the UK Tartan DVD release of Primer it name drops, in quote, that most heavily referenced recent film dealing with the concerns of time travel, Donnie Darko. It is a lazy comparison point as, other than time travel, the main similarity between the two films is the bafflement after the initial viewing. Like Donnie Darko, Primer would benefit more than one viewing to grasp concepts and ideas contained within. Unlike Donnie Darko, it focuses on a scientific time travel concept, using quite technical language and theory; Primer shows a physics concept of time travel, whilst Donnie Darko is based in a metaphysical concept.

Primer is very impressive for what it is, a lo-fi science fiction film: 'they took of their surrounding what was needed, made something more', could refer to the action in the film and be a knowing reference to the low budget nature of this film. Clinically shot and edited, with an impressive piano driven soundtrack, this film looks so much more impressive than a film should for $7000. It is only in the sound department that it occasionally illustrates its low budget; a few lines of dialogue are a bit hard to distinguish, but this isn't too much of a problem.

The film concerns the plight of friends and inventors, Abe (David Sullivan) and Aaron (Shane Caruth), who unwittingly invent a time machine in Aaron's garage. Initially things seem to go well for them as they use their machine to cheat on the stock market. But tensions grow between the two friends, as both get paranoid over their discovery and use the application for their own ends, such as intercepting a shooting at a party and Aaron drugging his past self . The film is quite serious and adult in tone, but there is some fine use of future-tense humour; in a scene where Aaron and Abe are commentating on a live basketball game they've seen, Aaron states 'Are you hungry? I haven't eaten since later this afternoon.' The causality of their actions is shown as they both lose their ability to write properly and Aaron bleeding from the ear which he sometimes uses an earpiece in.

Abe and Aaron's friendship is well handled and believable, and their acting is of a high quality. It is outside their friendship that there are flaws. Both Abe and Aaron's family life is only referred to briefly and confusingly, leading this element to seem quite inconsequential. This also happens in their relationship with their colleagues / co-inventors Robert and Phillip, who appear early on but disappear as the film goes on.

The main challenge in watching Primer is both a point of praise, and paradoxically, a flaw for some; Primer requires more than one viewing to fully enjoy the film. The first time I watched it I was baffled; some of the technical language is quite baffling on the initial viewing and Primer features a very non linear narrative structure. I can imagine this being an alienating film to some, as it requires constant attention to detail. That said, those who like to study and dissect films will enjoy the amount of study required.

Primer is a well made low budget film with good production values. Shane Caruth should be commended for the amount of work he has done, in the roles of writer, director, producer, lead actor, casting, production design, editing, sound design, and writing the original music. If you are willing to make the effort with this lo-fi sci-fi gem, it is a rewarding experience.

Insulting drudgery

[oecobius · 1/10 · 3 September 2013]

"Primer" is often praised for its clever, convoluted plot that you'll have to watch several times to truly figure out. This is a myth, though, since if you pay close attention and ignore the film's many irrelevant details and scenes, the plot is a pretty simple tale of a guy going back in time, making a mistake, then going back in time again and fixing that mistake.

The film is hard to follow NOT because of any clever or deep writing, but instead because the editing is utterly terrible. The characters spout technical jargon for too long without serving the plot or theme, and a couple scenes are incomprehensible because of bad lighting, awkward cutting, poor staging, and lousy sound quality.

All the dialogue is dry and dull, NEVER giving us the slightest reason to care about any of the characters. Primer won't stir any emotions in you, it won't inspire your imagination, it won't make you reflect on life, & it won't even make you uncomfortable. Its storytelling style is woefully incompetent and would be better suited to instructional pamphlets.

For all its long-winded, muffled dialogue, I can't even find a statement or a message in this film. You might enjoy this film if you are a college kid trying too hard to have "different" tastes from others, but if you want an actually compelling or rewarding film experience, ignore all the hype and give Primer a miss.

Revisits

[tedg · 13 October 2006]

One great river of narrative is something that started with the detective story.

It is a rich engagement, one in which the reader and writer engage in a battle of wits. Its power comes from the way it involves the reader in the story. The engagement is tight. The more the reader invests, the more they are *in* the narrative, with the traditional form being that the reader discovers things at the same time a detective does.

There are very clearly understood rules of this game. The book or movie must "play fair." Clues need not be obvious, but they need to be there. Also, at the end there needs to be a solution, and everything needs to add up.

It can be hard, very hard. "Irreversible" was very hard. "Memento" was moderately hard. "Eyes, Wide Shut" was hard. All these had their mysteries in discovering what the story was, instead of the simpler case of solving a mystery within the story.

Now here, we have something similar. Simpler in a way — all the difficulties come from time travel overlaps. In mathematics, it is common to denote a second instance of something as that thing primed, then double primed and so on. (The notation is an apostrophe.) So we know that the problem will be one of multiple instances of characters.

But this doesn't play fair.

+

Okay. I went back to the beginning and did the thing again. The second time in viewing it all makes more sense because you know what to look for. Some of the things that don't seem like clues can be turned into clues given what you know from the future. It works. I am happy.

+

No wait! If you go back a third time, it is all ruined because all the things you could discover have been ruined by the second rerun. Now you just encounter the amateurish production values and weak storytelling. I hate the second viewer for ruining this for me. I should have just skipped the second viewing and gone to the third.

+

Ignore the paragraph above. What matters is the second viewing. All subsequent viewings (and there could be dozens already that are unknown) don't count because the second one goes all the way back to the first detective story and changed the rules. Now we don't have to play fair.

+

Okay. Final judgment. After 21 viewings I can say for sure that there is no mystery at all. This is what the original script for "Cube 2," was intended to be, but it got swapped in an argon- filled cube, by a guy named Granger.

... In true revisiting fashion, this comment was deleted after nine months because of some complaint. So it itself now makes a reappearance, changed by the experience of returning to the outside before re-entering.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

One of the most complex films out there

[SoumikBanerjee1996 · 6/10 · 20 September 2022]

This is one of, if not the most complicated film I have ever laid my eyes on. Right now, I am having severe difficulties figuring out what I have just been a witness of! Perhaps, it is my lack of adequate knowledge in the field that got me overwhelmed with its intrinsic complexness, or that my puny brain got overstuffed with a ton of information, that I wasn't able to process! Irrespective of what the exact reason might have been, at this very moment, I am quite speechless, I don't even know what to say or what to discuss with you.

Despite my heartiest efforts, I do not think I have comprehended it completely. While I'm pretty much aware of the fact that this movie is quite notorious for its complicatedness and that, many others before had identical issues in grasping the core notion of the writing, still, I feel being a fan of such high-level concepts (Time Travel, Time Paradoxes), I should have had done better as a viewer, I should have had made a better understanding, but it seems I couldn't.

Interesting but confusing

[Farzad-Doosti · 6/10 · 28 November 2021]

It has an interesting story, but they have added so much complexity that even the viewer forgets what time it is now!

The speed of events is high, so it may take some time to understand what is happening.

It was interesting but I will not watch it again even to better understand the story, because it was not well made in general.

Intoxicating science-fiction

[kobe05 · 10/10 · 1 May 2005]

Never before have I felt so compelled to re-watch a movie within 48 hours of initial viewing. This mindf$%# of a movie demands exactly that. If you are up for a challenge, I recommend you view this film... research it a little (not too much)... watch it again, and then go read the forums at primermovie.com - but importantly, do not go there before watching it at least twice in my opinion. It's amazing what can be done with only $7,000 - in comparison to what others do with $200,000,000. This is science-fiction at its purest and I really hope it gets a wider release and receives the attention it deserves. Contagiously brilliant, and as close to perfect as a film of it's ilk can get. 10/10

Good; surprised Carruth hasn't gotten any other jobs yet

[zetes · 7/10 · 19 October 2008]

Famous for being made for $7000, this is a sci-fi flick about a couple of engineers/inventors who stumble upon a way to travel back in time. While it's pretty clear how this could be made for so little money (location, location, location – it was probably made in the director's garage and stuff like that), it never really looks cheap. Actually, the photography is quite good. Also, the actors, among whom are the director, Shane Carruth, are not at all bad. The problems that the film does have all come from the script, although it has its positive aspects. I'm not really sure if the script is above my head or if it's just pitched in such a way that it feels above my head. The science described in the film sometimes sounds so technical that you want to believe it, but it also sounds so vague that I was wondering if all the dialogue was pretty much meaningless. I suppose I should credit Carruth for making me think his script might actually be really smart, instead of just dismissing it out of hand. That takes talent in itself. But then the vagueness of it is also distancing, and eventually I grew a little bored of the film. Still worth seeing. I have to wonder why Carruth hasn't been tapped by Hollywood yet. He clearly has talent in both the writing and directing departments, and maybe as an actor, too.

Really Good

[michaeltrivedi · 8/10 · 16 November 2019]

Two friends invent time travel. And then some weird things start to occur.

This is one great movie. It is very well made. You get lost in all of the mathematics and science involved. That's really the majority of the communication. But the end result is magnificent. I've watched this movie twice and both times could not take my eyes off the screen.

Great movie. See it!

8 stars

It's time to think outside the box! Go see Primer! This smart movie is really out of the norm!

[ironhorse_iv · 7/10 · 3 October 2018]

Made on a minuscule budget of $7,000, this low budget American independent science fiction movie about two engineers, Aaron (Shane Carruth) & Abe (David Sullivan) accidentally creating a device that allows time travel, that soon become troublesome to them is quite possibly one of the most complex time travel film ever made. Between the multiple paradoxes time travels with many clone individuals, the nonlinear plot, philosophical implications, and the ocean of techno babble that the main characters spout at each other constantly, while also dishonestly lying; this movie indeed, is one very puzzling motion picture. While, some people might not films like this, that tests a person's ingenuity or knowledge, others find "Primer' as a wonderful stimulate to the ravenous mind. It's only, near the climax, where the movie starts to fall apart & get really frustrating. For the most part, the film concept is clearly thought provoking enough for people to invest time in it. After all, it inspire people to sit down and create a diagram flowchart after watching this movie! I'm not kidding, diehard fans, honestly, made graphs & charts on the internet in order to explain to the casual viewer, what was happening on screen. This movie has that deep of a fandom. Thank goodness for them, because even I, with some knowledge of the Feynman & Meissner effect, couldn't figure, what everything was going on, during this film, during first viewing. Trust me, when I say this, you wouldn't get much information from the filmmakers. Even the commentary track from director, producer, editor & writer, Steve Carruth that come with the movie, couldn't help you get more information about the story elements. Why, because Carruth does not believe, in dumbing down the piece, the piece, in order to make it easier to decipher. Instead, he trust the audience into finding the answers; for themselves; through multiply viewings. I don't blame him, that's a brilliant strategy, to get viewers to keep renting or buying into his movie, even after many years since the theatrical release date. He probably made mad money off, the cult-following trying to understand the film. This movie took a huge risk of not pleasuring the general movie goer audience at all. While other movies that have time travel try to keep it simpleton layman terms to entertain casual viewers, 'Primer' goes the other direction, showing that time shouldn't be mess with. The way, Carruth chose to deliberately obfuscate the film's plot to mirror the complexity and confusion created by time travel was somewhat brilliant. While, I can understand, his stands of not exposing too much. I still believe the movie should had given a little more subtle clues to explain, what's happening at a given moment like the degeneration & personality swaps scenes. Because, as of right now, the film does seem a bit uncoherent. Despite that, I have to give the movie, some credit for its showing, not telling approach to the time travel parts of the film. However, I didn't believe the same approach to the central theme of the breakdown of Abe and Aaron's relationship, as a result of their inability to cope with the power afforded them by this technological advancement, work as well. I don't think, the main performers have the acting skills to portray the need human emotions that a piece like this, really needed. It didn't help, the movie didn't give the performers, much a persona for them to work with. Instead, both men seem like boring lackluster robots. While, it's true that juicy sub stories involving their friends, Robert (Casey Gooden) & Phillip (Anand Upadhyaya) involving an unseen antagonist, Platz, might add some spice to the story, as their characters might want to steal the invention in the beginning, the supporting characters were quickly abandoned and sweep under the rug for the rest of the film. They really don't play much of a factor, in the second half; much of the same, can be said, with the Aaron's family, wife, Kara (Carrie Crawford) & daughter, Laney (Delaney Price) who rarely shown, any worries about Aaron's negative aggressive change in behavior, due to the time travel. Its sucks that this movie has no great emotional core, because there were so many layers where it could had added more to the main story. Instead, we got a very loose-unexplored love interest with Rachel Granger (Samantha Thomson); whom Abe is seeing, that subplot involving her father, Thomas (Chip Carruth) seem to come, out of nowhere. It was very faulty. Even the music, also score by Carruth barely add anything to the film. None of the tracks, were engaging or compelling. Another thing that hurts the movie from reaching masterpiece standards, is the horrible editing. Carruth frequently deploys vicious jump-cuts, when it doesn't need it. It's really disorienting. Even the cinematography isn't much to look at. Every frame in this film is dull looking with ugly color scheme. However, the biggest complain, I have, against the movie is that it's a little too low budget. I was a bit disappointed by the lack of special effects & the absence of key action scenes like the gunman at the party scene. The "incident" could probably be the dramatic high point of the film. But here, it happens off-camera. Very disappointing. The movie feel cheap, when it shouldn't. Despite that, Carruth's goal of portraying time travel in a down-to-earth realism was a success. His years as a mathematic and former engineer pay off. It's quite possibly the most single nerdiest film ever made, and one that brings sci fi realism up to bar. While, not for everybody, it's a film, you don't need to pass a MENSA exam to enjoy. Overall: Despite no prior filmmaking experience, Carruth's movie blew everyone's minds at the 2004 Sundance Film Festival & has since then, continue that thread. It's cerebral stimulating. Check it out.

Confusing

[julie-40 · 1/10 · 12 June 2006]

I would normally love this kind of movie 'time travel' but I just found it confusing. The tone of the speech is the same all the way through which makes you even more bored as you get sick of listening to it. Its just so quiet and uninspiring. It just goes on and on and I hadn't a clue what was happening. The first half an hour is all about physics, with long words and references to things you haven't a clue about unless you are a physicist. The actors kept all talking at the same time so I couldn't catch what was being said anyway from the 'normal' everyday words.

As it had such a good review I thought I would give it a go despite the fact that I hadn't heard of any of the actors before. I wish I hadn't. Waste of time. I have never commented on any movie on this site before but this was just so so disappointing I felt I had to let others know.

Worth watching, worth seeing, it doesn't please all

[siderite · 8/10 · 14 July 2005]

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!

I Guess I'll Watch It Again

[Hitchcoc · 7/10 · 30 August 2009]

There are so many reasons to watch a film. One is to see how characters interact in hostile settings. The thing that we normally know is what the external or internal forces are. In this case it is a device that a couple guys create which has elements of a time machine. How it is made and the scientific concept that is employed is a mystery to us. This film is more about what happens to the inventors when they get to the verge of success. The machine becomes an overwhelming element of the status quo that begins to cause a rift in the relationship. We are never sure what is going on exactly, but we know that it is deadly serious. There is a disintegration that is put in motion that changes the joy of discovery to an unwillingness to take the wraps off. What are the practical applications? I don't know.

The film is obviously low budget and has a bit of that Blair Witch feel to it with a narration over it. This may be a bit of a weakness. Nevertheless, if this film was really done for $7,000, it is a masterwork. It is highly provocative and unsettling. I need to give it another chance. Did I not get it or is that the whole point.

Confused, pointless & boring

[shes_dead · 1/10 · 27 August 2005]

Before you read on, be warned this review contains many spoilers!

When a film is promoted by the fact it only cost $7000 (or whatever) to make, it does set alarm bells ringing. Like it must be bad if they're trying to impress you with how little it cost to make. Anyone can make a film for $7000, doesn't mean it's any good though, and this sure ain't any good.

I went to see it only because of some of the positive comments on IMDb made it out to be something special.

The first 45 minutes or so are incredibly boring. The conversations between the 4 friends about science & engineering is, well, here's a sore point, I didn't have a clue what they were talking about. It went way over my head and left me bored. On top of that the sound quality was bad, the 4 characters kept talking over each other and there was a lot of mumbling so I missed a lot.

The look of the film is awful, mostly filled with either a yellow or blue tint so that everything looks either yellow, or blue.

The group of 4 splits to 2 as Aaron & Abe start to make discoveries with a machine they have invented, and stop talking to the other guys. I was lost a bit here too, but I think the machine does something like hold an object in time where it is while the rest of time continues. Anyway, I didn't really care, and by this time more than 1 person had walked out of the cinema.

The last half hour gets slightly more interesting but it's so confusing that it isn't completely enjoyable. From what I gathered, they worked out they had a time machine and they started to go back in time. Three hours at first, then up to three days. They start to play the stock market for a bit (of all the things they could do) and apparently make some money, though this never becomes evident and they never do anything with it.

Then it gets confusing. Aaron speaks about punching some guy in the nose if he could go back in time. And Abe makes a big deal out of it, and his wife is like "wow I'm really proud of you for saying that" and the audience is like 'What?' Who is this guy and why is it a big deal? Then they are told about a party where, I think, a girl named Rachel is shot (I'm presuming a lot because so much is unclear). So then they decide to go back in time by three days to stop this happening.

Why? Why oh why? Who is this Rachel? We never even met her and now the film for the next 10 minutes revolves around saving her life. Only this isn't even made exciting it's just they do it and that's it. We don't even see the rescue.

Now, there's also a scene where there is a guy (head of department or something) sitting outside Aaron's home in the middle of the night and they believe he looks like he has 3 days worth of stubble whereas he was clean shaven earlier that day. They think he is following them and found out about the time machine. So they chase after him. The next thing, Aaron and this guy are lying on the floor and this guy is either dead or asleep, but we never hear of him again. This is just an entirely pointless scene involving a possible subplot that was never developed.

This film is madness and as I write it down it sounds even more ridiculous than when I was watching it.

Then Aaron elopes (leaving his double to carry on everyday life - and who takes the place of where the double left?) Then it ends. What a stinker. Avoid this messed up confused, poor excuse for a film!