Watched the movie "Primer" last night. It was written, directed, produced, edited and starred Shane Carruth. He also did all the music and sound design. If he is to be believed, the film, shot on Super 16, cost all of $7000 to shoot, edit and get accepted to Sundance. Of course, the blowup to 35mm for Sundance cost $35,000 but by then, someone had seen the value of the film and decided to help him out. It won the audience award (I believe) at Sundance and was picked up by ThinkFilm for distribution.
The story is "dense" with a lot of technical jargon. To me, it plays like an episode of ER in the sense that the jargon is incomprehensible at times but you always have a good sense of what's going on. For example, when the two guys stare incredulously at the "machine" after disconnecting the batteries supplying power and the thing still runs, you know something's up.
From last night's Q&A (it was an IFP screening and Shane was there along with the other lead actor), it seems that Shane addressed the challenge of making the film like an engineering problem (which he used to be - an engineer, I mean, not an engineering problem). So he would ask, let's see, how do you capture light on film stock? Read everything you can about cinematography and then experiment with a 35mm still camera. Can't afford alot of film? Shoot at a 2:1 ratio and try to get it right on the first take. Want to have a dolly shot but not sure how that would work? Go to a rental house, take a look at what you can afford, learn how the dolly works and then write the scene accordingly. It appears it took him a year to write the script (and do pre-production - he would only write scenes in locations he knew he would have available), five weeks to shoot and two years to edit.
All of the behind-the-scenes stuff aside, the film is very good, in my opinion. There were a couple of moments where the film dragged, or the sound wasn't perfect (very few) or where the cinematography was a bit self-conciously "oh, look at me." But those moments for me were few and far between and I really enjoyed the film. I definitely feel he got more out of his $7000 than Robert Rodriguez did on El Mariachi or Chris Kentis did on Open Water (two films I loved, by the way). Shane also seems pretty humble, talking about how he hopes to have a chance to do more films. Always nice to see someone make it and not get caught up in the hype created by those trying to make money from his film.
Wow, I just re-read this and realized I sound like a shill. I guess it's because I'm working on my own first feature that I get really excited whenever I see a no-name hit it big with an interesting story and visuals. It's either that or sit with my arms crossed and bitterness sweating out of my pores because someone else has made a great film and I'm still in the planning stages. Hmmm, positive thoughts, positive thoughts. . .
Anyway, I was pretty excited about his movie and his story. Hope you get a chance to see it.
Oh, I almost forgot. For me as a filmmaker, the best part of the film were the credits. The "crew" was all of, I think, five people long. Very cool!
The story is "dense" with a lot of technical jargon. To me, it plays like an episode of ER in the sense that the jargon is incomprehensible at times but you always have a good sense of what's going on. For example, when the two guys stare incredulously at the "machine" after disconnecting the batteries supplying power and the thing still runs, you know something's up.
From last night's Q&A (it was an IFP screening and Shane was there along with the other lead actor), it seems that Shane addressed the challenge of making the film like an engineering problem (which he used to be - an engineer, I mean, not an engineering problem). So he would ask, let's see, how do you capture light on film stock? Read everything you can about cinematography and then experiment with a 35mm still camera. Can't afford alot of film? Shoot at a 2:1 ratio and try to get it right on the first take. Want to have a dolly shot but not sure how that would work? Go to a rental house, take a look at what you can afford, learn how the dolly works and then write the scene accordingly. It appears it took him a year to write the script (and do pre-production - he would only write scenes in locations he knew he would have available), five weeks to shoot and two years to edit.
All of the behind-the-scenes stuff aside, the film is very good, in my opinion. There were a couple of moments where the film dragged, or the sound wasn't perfect (very few) or where the cinematography was a bit self-conciously "oh, look at me." But those moments for me were few and far between and I really enjoyed the film. I definitely feel he got more out of his $7000 than Robert Rodriguez did on El Mariachi or Chris Kentis did on Open Water (two films I loved, by the way). Shane also seems pretty humble, talking about how he hopes to have a chance to do more films. Always nice to see someone make it and not get caught up in the hype created by those trying to make money from his film.
Wow, I just re-read this and realized I sound like a shill. I guess it's because I'm working on my own first feature that I get really excited whenever I see a no-name hit it big with an interesting story and visuals. It's either that or sit with my arms crossed and bitterness sweating out of my pores because someone else has made a great film and I'm still in the planning stages. Hmmm, positive thoughts, positive thoughts. . .
Anyway, I was pretty excited about his movie and his story. Hope you get a chance to see it.
Oh, I almost forgot. For me as a filmmaker, the best part of the film were the credits. The "crew" was all of, I think, five people long. Very cool!
