| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Montgomery |
Posted - 03/26/2007 : 18:51:08
Has anyone seen this movie? I think I need to see it another 10 or 12 times to get it. (If only I had a time machine.)
I think I'm too dumb to get this movie. (Like I was for Pi.)
I enjoyed what I took in. But I lost track of who was traveling back when and why. I didn't even really understand how the time travel supposedly work.
But, once I understand it, I'm sure it's a very clever film.
EM :) |
| 5 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Shiv |
Posted - 04/07/2007 : 07:41:45
I think I'm going to have to watch it again because I also didn't get the science or time travel theory. I want to try and work it out a bit more, but I don't really like films shot like this - sort of hyper-realism, with supposedly naturalistic dialogue. I wasn't interested in any of the characters and I care about their relationships with each other even less. Interesting idea, though. And it certainly is an impressive feat in this day and age to shoot something that looks fairly professional for $7000.
|
| Montgomery |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 15:56:59
I didn't watch the movie all the way through either time I saw it. Just saw the last end of the movie the first time. Then caught somewhere before they actually got the machine going perfectly. So, that's part of the reason I don't "get" it, I think.
But, one question -- why do they need to stay in the box for so long?
As far as I understand it. They didn't want to change the world with their travel. Just one thing, like making money on the stock exchange. So, whomever is traveling, the first time around, goes and spends a day doing absolutely nothing, except making a phone call to get a stock tip. Then goes back in the time machine and lives the day the normal way, only then cashing in on the stock tip. Is that the gist? But, then they keep going back. And one has a "fail safe" machine that can go back in time before it all began. Although, if it's still the same timeline, then they would eventually make the time machines. It's confusing. Then add in the plot about the girl and the guy at the party with the guy with the gun. And the girl's Dad finding the machine and using it.
It's not as bad as Pi. I did not "GET" that movie at all. And I finally concluded that I was not smart enough for that film.
But, with time (no pun intended), I will probably get a better understanding of Primer. Brilliantly done, though. And I read it only cost $7,000 to make. Amazing.
EM :) |
| Ali |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 07:09:09
I love this film, and it took me many repeat vieweings to finally understand what's going on - or at least have a general idea.
What don't you get, Montgomery? Maybe I can help.
|
| rabid kazook |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 05:42:50
I personally liked this more than something like the obviousness of Prestige... I too was buggered with how it resolves  but more-or-less when it comes to movies for me it's more of how these contents are merged into the movie, than it's about the contents itself. And this here is one potent movie in those first terms. |
| silly |
Posted - 03/26/2007 : 19:18:29
I watched it with my son, who basically spent the entire movie repeating "WTF?"
Not in so many words, but that's what he meant.
Anyway, I gave up on ever achieving a higher understanding of the movie at this point. But I liked what I did "get." |
|
|
