|
|
Post by Bartwald on Sept 13, 2005 13:27:12 GMT -5
So I saw Primer. You know: the supposedly genius time-travel tale made with next to no money and with no star names in it. And let's admit this: it IS a hell of a confusing flick, this Primer! I mean: I did feel ouright dumb when the two main characters were doing their scientific mumbo-jumbo throughout the film's opening 20 minutes or so, and then I did feel a complete idiot when the plot came to a close and I got sweet 2% out of it. The question, though: is it so damn intelligent that I just can't grasp it or is it simply bad cinema? Well?
Kill me if *I* know the answer to it. Perhaps it's a strange mix of both: some intelligent and original ideas with, oh yes, bad cinema. A film CAN be confusing and still good - just think of Memento; but Primer too often gets boring or just SO confusing that you stop caring - and this should not happen in a well-made film, should it?
Am I wrong or right? Please someone tell me, as my very intelligence is being questioned here!
|
|
|
|
Post by Quorthon on Sept 14, 2005 11:38:04 GMT -5
When was this film released? I haven't heard of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bartwald on Sept 14, 2005 12:09:29 GMT -5
It's a 2004 movie, I'm not sure when exactly it was widely released in theatres; it premiered during last year's Sundance, I think. Now it's already out on DVD in some countries (I guess in the US as well).
|
|
|
|
Post by spacer on Sept 29, 2005 3:22:29 GMT -5
I mean: I did feel ouright dumb when the two main characters were doing their scientific mumbo-jumbo throughout the film's opening 20 minutes or so, and then I did feel a complete idiot when the plot came to a close and I got sweet 2% out of it. The question, though: is it so damn intelligent that I just can't grasp it or is it simply bad cinema? Well? Am I wrong or right? Please someone tell me, as my very intelligence is being questioned here! Wanna have an independent judge? I'll help you to solve your dilemma. No shit, no dick licking just pure, open and candid research. If you dare to be a subject of my scrutiny just let me see that flick. To make you feel more secure I guess Quorthon will find that flick too and he'll agree with my diagnosis or not. So the classic scientific double blind (blind in a way ;D) test. |
|
|
|
Post by Quorthon on Sept 29, 2005 10:13:00 GMT -5
We've got my little boy this weekend, but that doesn't mean I couldn't go out and see if Blockbuster has this film. I'm not saying I'm smart enough to follow it or anything, but I could give it a shot.
I mean, I didn't even understand 2001 a Space Odyssey until Spacer explained it. And 2010 left me with some lingering questions, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by spacer on Sept 29, 2005 12:16:30 GMT -5
Oh shit, I promised to give you my opinions about the 2010 and I forgot about. My memory like a sieve. OK. I'll kick myself hard to punish my person for that misdeed and then I'll deliver my views on that film. I'll do it as soon as possible. I mean watching the flick.  |
|
|
|
Post by Quorthon on Sept 29, 2005 12:47:12 GMT -5
Cooooool. I look forward to your interpretation!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bartwald on Oct 2, 2005 13:30:13 GMT -5
It would be a delight to read your opinions on Primer, guys!
|
|
|
|
Post by spacer on Oct 3, 2005 1:28:58 GMT -5
Waiting for your parcel, Bart ;D
Hope you won't regret it ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Bartwald on Oct 3, 2005 14:56:38 GMT -5
Waiting for your parcel, Bart ;D Hope you won't regret it ;D Ha! I'm worrying my arse off and you know it! |
|
|
|
Post by spacer on Oct 11, 2005 3:27:56 GMT -5
You must be worrying helluva a lot cause the parcel still hasn't appeared ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by spacer on Jan 11, 2006 3:07:27 GMT -5
So I saw Primer. You know: the supposedly genius time-travel tale made with next to no money and with no star names in it. And let's admit this: it IS a hell of a confusing flick, this Primer! I mean: I did feel outright dumb when the two main characters were doing their scientific mumbo-jumbo throughout the film's opening 20 minutes or so, and then I did feel a complete idiot when the plot came to a close and I got sweet 2% out of it. The question, though: is it so damn intelligent that I just can't grasp it or is it simply bad cinema? Well? Kill me if *I* know the answer to it. Perhaps it's a strange mix of both: some intelligent and original ideas with, oh yes, bad cinema. A film CAN be confusing and still good - just think of Memento; but Primer too often gets boring or just SO confusing that you stop caring - and this should not happen in a well-made film, should it? Am I wrong or right? Please someone tell me, as my very intelligence is being questioned here! I finally saw that movie and I'll tell you your intelligence is intact. Are you happy? I took one more big trouble off your chest Bart ;D I saw that flick partially twice. When I started it, I've decided to use subs after some time as the talk indeed seemed to me more that a bit obscure due to the plot and... my weak audio  . When I did that the audio level became much more understandable. The same beginning I would judge as brilliant indeed, you are to understand it fully only after seeing the whole thing. The other good part is an inspiring music well-tuned to the theme making the atmosphere more mysterious. It is the same melody throughout the movie like in a computer game but it is not played all the time in the background but is given as the kind of bridge joining the parts of the movie. The shooting technique and the quality of the tape on which the flick was made was very good knowing that the whole budget was only 7000 pound sterling. The atmosphere and tension was built and growing through the first half of the film then it was lost due to the rocketing incomprehensibility of the plot in the second part. More to the end the more obscure it became. And here after the praises I turn to the prime reason why I'm writing it: to check the Bart's cognitive faculties. ;D I would divide the flick into 2 main parts let's call them halves. The beginning as I said was brilliant and creepy. The first half was quite comprehensible but it didn't include anything solid, anything that would create any idea, any coherent description of what they are really doing in this garage. There's a lot of loose words and vague phrases to make you intrigued but we still have no theory what the hell are they doing there. But the tension is created by that and the fact that thanks to avoiding anything concrete they don't say any nonsense. The viewer (I) waits than for some explanation. You wait and you’re made to think to create the theory yourself, to use your imagination to make from the loose things and words some theory. The tension and suspense is growing we do feel that the explanation is imminent. I liked that part. You are plead not guilty here Bart as you couldn’t understand something which was to be understood we had hoped later. So you comprehended the notions/phrases/words they uttered (superconductors, heptagonal box, superconductors of the first kind, 'it was meant to lessen the gravity’, platinum, palladium, room temperature, cooling, and etc... You must have been brooding to understand the things which were not presented. Funny,isn't it? The results of the experiment carried out in the first half were quite obvious and I think it is that 50% you understood. The way they were presented was fine. (Growing fungus, the babushka getting lighter looking on the display, the superconduction after the current was cut off.) It is the strong and best part. OK let's go to the second part. Here we are given the first and the only bit of a theory. Unfortunately, we are given something which does not suit the experiment and in the light what the heroes do is insufficient, simplistic. Let's say it outright it is bullshit. What I am talking about is a simple loop drew on the piece of paper with the point A and B. You are expected to believe that between these point you can ,thanks to that machine which is now big enough to hold a human inside, make a time travel into the future. No, it was really disappointing. The only good part in the second half are descriptions how the heroes felt inside the machine and how they became entangled into the time mess and causality and how they are growing tired and frustrated because of it. The plot is so entangled here that the full comprehension is in the realm of the screenwriter only I guess and only at the time when he was writing it as I believe when he was reading it after some time he had to have some troubles in understanding it too ;D I understood much more that the 2% as you said but I think you comprehend more and just out of frustration lowered the number too much. Concluding it isn't a bad cinema, but it is not a masterpiece as well and it will be probably too obscure to most of viewers even as brainy as you Bart. I would give it 6/10. |
|
|
|
Post by Bartwald on Jan 17, 2006 12:31:42 GMT -5
Thanks for the opinion, spacer - much appreciated, I really wasn't sure what exactly is wrong with me... Yeah, it does feel at some point as if the scriptwriter lost control over what he was writing there.
A mad film. 6/10 is generous but I'm glad you didn't hate it.
|
|
|
|
Post by spacer on Jan 23, 2006 2:53:36 GMT -5
I wasn't generous giving it 6/10.
The flick has an immense potential.
What a pity it wasn't explored.
If the script had been more comprehensible the flick might have been a huge success.
|
|
. When I did that the audio level became much more understandable.