Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
Primer (film) (wikipedia.org)
225 points by iamwil on May 28, 2010 | hide | past | favorite | 91 comments


Please, don't read the Wikipedia article before you go out and rent or buy this movie. The movie is absolutely fantastic.

I have seen it 17 to 18 times, and even-though people have attempted to explain everything that is going on to me I still have a hard time wrapping my mind around it. Awesome for the hacker in you!


I'm ashamed to say I haven't seen this movie yet, I must order the DVD this weekend, (now that I've been reminded for the umpteenth time).

On a side note, my biggest annoyance with Wikipedia is manifest in articles about movies. For some reason, they allow an editorial policy of essentially writing out a scene by scene account of a movie.


It's on Netlfix Streaming if you have an account...Was recommended to me last week by the system - which I'm definitely glad for.


I'm in the UK, I'm not sure whether Netflix is over here yet. Not to worry, it's on a retail website for reasonable money, and I wouldn't mind owning a copy :)


... and it's expiring from Netflix Streaming Sunday midnnight (5/30) so catch it today!


... and it's expiring from Netflix Streaming Sunday midnight (5/30) so catch it today!


True, but it's informational not editorial. I think the best they could really do is have a spoiler/non-spoiler view.


They used to have a spoiler warning in movie articles but they got rid of it. I kind of liked it, but I suppose it made it seem less like an encyclopedia article and more like a forum post.


I agree that it's an informational site, but the nicest to read information adheres to editorial principle. To me, information for information's sake is a poor substitute to well crafted, and concise "simply what you need to know".

I would stress that not all of Wikipedia falls into that trap. Obscure information (histories of places, etc) read quite well, and tend to get the information balance right. However, pop culture and movies in particular, seem to attract a kitchen sink style, as though someone just sat through the film with a laptop, and typed up everything as it was happening on the screen in front of them.


It's indeed informative. Now I have to watch it five more times to understand what the wikipedia article says.

From about two or three viewings, I got about a third of it right.


I'm on my tenth time and I'm just starting to figure out a few of the nuances in only some of the scenes. The timeline has helped but one day I will do an animation that shows it more intuitively it that's possible.


Just got around to watching it on Netflix a few weeks ago - the first movie in awhile which has kept us up talking about for nearly as long as it takes to watch. Highly recommended.


Seconded, watch the movie! Don't read too much about it first. Primer is totally awesome, seriously confusing though it is :)


Exactly. I'm surprised this link got upvoted this much. Everyone should have already seen this movie ;)


upvoted - especially the large image (one of the links on Wikipedia) that draws a graph of the "events".


Damn! Too late!


Primer is one of my all time favorite movies. I had goose bumps watching it the first time.

The linked timeline from the article is actually pretty "easy" to read and really helped me understand what I've just seen. Just watch the movie beforehand :)

http://neuwanstein.fw.hu/primer_timeline.html

Edit: The entire movie is officially(?) available on Google Video, though the quality is not that good. You should find yourself a better copy...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3909854615539675694#


Bad news guys. Carroll, Farhi, and Guth along with 't Hooft already looked into this in the 1990s. The only way time travel is possible is if there is already a time machine in the universe. If there isn't one already, it's impossible to create one in an open universe, and in a closed universe, it's not possible to create one and then use it before the universe ends.

The proofs are in 2+1 dimensions, but they're generally believed to hold in 3+1.

http://preposterousuniverse.com/research/#ctcs for a brief summary with references by Carroll.


As I understood it, this pertains to a specific implementation of a time machine i.e., the Gott time machine.

The jury is still out on other implementations, though of course everything seems to point towards them being impossible.


You're right, but what other implementations have proven they can actually produce a closed time-like curve?


Well, you have wormholes (but they require exotic matter) and anything with singularities in it; there is the Gödel solution of a "rotating Universe" (which could be true for a "parallel" universe), the van Stockum's solution and so on. I guess until closed time-like curves are proven to be unphysical (which seems likely), physicists will keep coming up with possible solutions to Einstein's equations which allow for CTCs (and refuting them). And who knows, maybe one of them can be implemented by humans.

On the other hand, it would be very interesting to know what is the mechanism by which the Universe protects itself against CTCs.


I discovered this through a fantastic list of 'mindfuck movies':

http://www.themorningnews.org/archives/reviews/mindfuck_movi...

It's definitely the most complex of the bunch, but most of them were great finds. Cube was another low-budget gem, and on the other end of the spectrum there's The Game with Michael Douglas.


Thanks for this awesome list, unfortunately it seems I've watched most of them. I especially recommend La Jetee (the Hollywood remake, Twelve Monkeys is also good) and Solaris.

I started watching Primer but gave up after 10 minutes or so, maybe the effects of watching it late after you put your child to sleep.


Give it another shot. It's not an action flick, you need to give it more than 10 minutes.


Thanks for sharing that movie list, we just had a wonderful time watching Mulholland Dr. and it has been the topic of conversation whole day.


On a tangential note, Timecrimes (Spanish) is another good movie I enjoyed watching - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Cronocr%C3%ADmenes


Agree, Timecrimes is very similar and good value.


If you liked Primer, check also Timecrimes:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0480669/


I prefer Timecrimes to Primer... it doesn't try to confuse the viewer.

SPOILER ALERT.

Also, single timeline based time travel is just plain better than multiple timeline based time travel. There are just way too many problems that having multiple timelines introduces. I don't think you can ever tie up all lose ends with multiple timelines... someone can always just build a time machine later and fork the past. Maybe Primer addresses this with the limitations of their devices.


I tried watching Timecrimes, but just couldn't make it through. Found it to be horrible.

Maybe there were some interesting ideas, but it just felt so clunky and amateurish.


Required link to related xkcd strip: http://xkcd.com/657/


Shameless self-promotion: my timeline app, Preceden, which lets you make multi-layered timelines, would be perfect for representing timelines like this (and the one in Primer!).

Check it out: http://www.preceden.com


Wow, cool I am going to do a timeline app for london start weekend. Planning to start prototype this weekend.

Just some feedback lower the barrier to entry. From the initial look of it, it seems like it would have a steep learning curve.

Your stats look great though. Spend $60 and get $145 back, you are on to something.


Thanks for the feedback.

The $5/day the led to that $60 didn't result in any paying customers, so I stopped. Blog reviews and word of mouth are much more effective.

As far as usability goes, it should be pretty easy to use. There are advanced features, but for a simple timeline, you should be off and running in minutes.

Hope you like it.


lol, I was trying to find that, hilarious!


The best thing about Primer is that it felt completely real. I felt like I could go out to my garage and build something amazing.


speaking of (relatively) low budget films, "The Man from Earth" is awesome (it's low budget relative to Hollywood, not relative to Primer; $200,000)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_from_Earth


I loved Primer.

But The man from Earth was just boring, I don't get why so many people liked it.

Bad actors, the hero claims are either dull or ridiculous (I laughed a lot when he pretended to be J.), and most important of all, not surprising. I knew what the movie was about before I saw it, and if it can't show me more than I can imagine myself, it just sucks.

I'll be happy to get some downvotes so that some of you could save 2 hours by not viewing this movie.


If you liked Star Trek: TOS, or perhaps any Star Trek, you should not listen to this man. Watch the movie at least once. Although heavily flawed and not particularly novel (just like Star Trek) it will strike a chord with some people. It did with me.


The actors themselves have done good work, but they did the best they could with the writing. I was annoyed by the historical inaccuracies, but mainly it came off as though it was written by a college freshman.


A word of warning: this movie is entirely dialogue. That being said, it's a great movie.


Two more movies for the instance queue. Thanks


I watched it earlier this year. Awesome.


It's available for instant playback on Netflix if anyone was wondering.


But only through the end of the month (Monday)


Wasn't Primer available free to view on Google Video?



Set time aside to watch it twice. It's only 77 minutes long, and I believe that's a plus. I saw this for the first time with a few friends and when it was over, nobody protested when I started it over immediately.

I've watched this movie several times and I pick up on new things almost every time.


Do NOT read this if you haven't seen the movie. Don't learn anything about it. Just watch it.

I guarantee you'll have a better time.


And then watch it again. And again.


Yeah a great flick. Only cost $7k dollars to make or something. Needs to be watched MANY times to figure it out, but the great thing is it seems to all hold together.


The DVD commentary is incredibly interesting because of this - mostly explaining how they kept the cost so low


It's rather simple. They traveled back in time with the complete movie. $7K was what the cost to build the time machine they used.


Another movie similar to this (I think, having not seen the movie, but from reading the discussions) is Momento: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memento_%28film%29

IMO it stays with you a long time after you've watched it..


I have to say I felt that Memento was only good for a single watching. This may be an oversimplification, but if you reorganized the movie with all the scenes in reverse it would just be a mediocre movie about a guy who can't remember anything and the people he interacts with. I guess I just felt it was gimmicky.

Primer, on the other hand doesn't use a single editing gimmick or plot twist, but rather does a deep drive in the mind bending situations that can occur when time travel becomes possible.


Thanks for the comparison :)

I can't say I've watched Momento more than once. I guess that says something in itself.

I'll definitely be getting a copy of Primer now!


I can't say it's my favorite, but I like it and respect it. I think I like it more knowing how it was done. It's hard to characterize it without sounding negative, but these guys were practically neophytes. The budget was tiny, and the actors are not conservatory trained or anything. It's shot very nicely, and it mostly feels quite natural. It was bootstrapped to success. In that way, it's a good spiritual match for the HN community.

Criticisms: it's twisted beyond comprehension, and it's jargony almost to a fault. I find it tough to get some people to sit through it.


I like how this movie has cost $7000 and brought in nearly $500,000.


I just wanted to clarify that it's very misleading to say that this film cost $7000. It cost $7000 and several years of Shane's life, as well as a torrent of favours from his friends, family and others.

Why is this an important distinction? Because you can't calculate or quote business investment and return while discarding the cost of people working for several years on a project for free.

Saying that Primer cost Shane Carruth $7000 to make is like saying that The Harry Potter Book Series cost J K Rowling 19 ink cartridges.

It's important to appreciate what Shane achieved with such few resources though, and it's interesting to note also that he was a software engineer before making his way into filmmaking.


this will help make it easier to understand the movie -> http://www.nobleworld.biz/images/Gendler.pdf


>After principal photography, Carruth took two years to fully post-produce Primer. He has since said that this experience was so arduous that he almost abandoned the film on several occasions.

Wow. This particular fact really stood out to me. I'm glad he chose to be resilient and finish the project. Theres a lot of parallels founders can draw upon from the making of this film (budget, style, technique, etc.).


If you like films like Primer you will like Triangle. I clearly want to watch it again to understand every time loop. Plus there's Melissa George in the lead role, which doesn't hurt.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1187064/

If you're broke, it's available on Bittorrent (I am broke). Otherwise you won't regret your purchase.


Triangle was ok, but it has another feel to the movie. It's a bit of a horror with some mystical explanation to it.

But Primer is pure mind-bending sci-fi. You could feel the atmosphere of the guys inventing something like few other movies.

Actually - this is how I think a startup should feel and look like: the way the movie portrays it at the beginning, while the guys are still figuring things out.


Agreed. TRIANGLE was a pleasant surprise --far better than the average for that genre-- but not 'hard' sci-fi.

Another surprisingly good lower-budget/-attention sci-fi film is PANDORUM.


You can also watch it on voddler for free.


I was completely taken off-guard by the time travel humor:

"Are you hungry? I haven't eaten since later this afternoon."


I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Pi in this thread yet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi_(film)

It's a low-budget philosophical/mathematical/surrealistic geek film.


The funniest thing is that people have actually tried to graph all the different timelines. Some examples:

  * http://i.imgur.com/kqja1.jpg
  * http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/PrimerTimeline.gif


Why is that funny?


Just watched the movie for the first time and understood pretty much nothing. Went through the Wikipedia summary and still I don't understand a lot of things. Will take another crack at it tommorow morning.


I watched this movie several years ago, and thinking about it still messes with my brain. Even though I wouldn't watch it again, I still recommend you go and see it if you haven't already!


Its a tough watch the first time, I was left scratching my head!


It's a great film and the way it was made is very inspiring. Makes me think about picking up that dusty hd cam sometimes. Either way, a must see.


FYI - you can stream this movie from netflix on demand.

(though the movie has only 1.5/5 stars, interestingly enough.


The Machinist is worth watching too.


Primer was a fantastic movie. Total mindf*, but then that is what made the rewatch worth it.


A friend was telling me about this last night too, strange coincidence!


Not really, he read about it today and told you about it last night.


"What's that?"

"It's a time machine."

"Does it work?"

"Heck, yeah, it does. You don't even know."


Alas, most of people saw Avatar, and believe that it was the best movie in the history of genre..


I haven't seen Avatar yet. I'm likely one of the 7 who hasn't.


It was totally worth seeing in 3D and on big screen just for the effects. Story's lame though.


Exactly. I don't get all the Avatar hate. The story was bad, but the cinematic experience was excellent. It was a summer blockbuster style movie. I didn't go into it expecting a plot, I went into it expecting action, explosions, and shiny things. It delivered superbly on those things. Don't judge Avatar against hard sci-fi, judge it against something like Star Wars or the new Star Trek movie. Its purpose was to entertain, not to leave you thinking about it for days. Personally, I find nothing wrong with that. I generally prefer movies like Primer, but sometimes it's nice to kick back with a bucket of popcorn and marvel at the pretty lights.


I found it impossible to relate to or care about any of the characters.

If you haven't seen it, find the incredible review of the Phantom Menace on YouTube by Red Letter Media. The most insightful part is where he asks people to describe the nature of the characters in both trilogies. For the original movies, people instantly recall, for example the "dashing...arrogant..scoundrel" Han Solo. For the newer films, nothing. What was princess Amidala like? Nobody cares.

Avatar suffered from this, and no amount of shiny graphics could ever bring me to care. With great characters you can forgive all kinds of things (eg Battlestar Galactica.)


I think people could do a pretty good job of that for Avatar. The characters were nothing if not archetypical.


I wouldn't call it lame. It's predictable, precisely because it's a fairly standard hero story, the kind we keep telling each other since we have learned to tell stories.

Stories like these are part of what makes us human.


I guess I'm two of 7.


I like to maintain my take on time travel as described by Sheldon in Big Bang theory

"Sheldon: It occurs to me that if I ever did invent a time machine, I will just go into the past and give it to myself. Thus eliminating the need to invent it in first place. That really takes the pressure off".

I would like to hear what you guys think of time travel, after all it has be one of the favourite subject of speculative science fiction.


Some spoilers, beware.

Honestly, I'm rarely a fan of time travel stories. They tend to be full of plot holes and half-baked logic. Since everything is theoretical, it seems like many writers just pull whatever rules they feel like out of a hat, and use it as a sort of deus ex machina. Very rarely is it used well in my opinion. Primer is one of the rare exceptions because it's well structured and thought out (maddeningly so), but overall I tend to skip such things.

Also, it could be noted that Primer being about time travel could be considered a spoiler. I didn't know what it was about until it was actually revealed in the movie, and I was kind of happy having it that way.


Just not possible... That's not fun.

Let me just clarify a little bit. Traveling to the past is not possible. "Traveling" to the future is already known how to.

At least some fiction make a coherent history for how time travel works, like Primer or Asimov's book 'The End of Eternity'... Unlike for example Donnie Darko, a movie that i love, but the ending....


The whole universe only needs one well maintained time machine.

I like the clause in their roommate agreement - if any of them ever invents a time machine, the first stop will be their meeting on the roommate agreement when they are discussing it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: