4 ms·

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 ev

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!

almost 16y ago
Seconded, watch the movie! Don't read too much about it first. Primer is totally awesome, seriously confusing though it is :)
camperman 16y ago
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.
sandGorgon 16y ago
upvoted - especially the large image (one of the links on Wikipedia) that draws a graph of the "events".
dchs 16y ago
Damn! Too late!
acdha 16y ago
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.
micheljansen 16y ago
Exactly. I'm surprised this link got upvoted this much. Everyone should have already seen this movie ;)
ciaranbradley 16y ago
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.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- angstrom 16y ago
  True, but it's informational not editorial. I think the best they could really do is have a spoiler/non-spoiler view.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    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.
  - aplusbi 16y ago
    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.
  - ciaranbradley 16y ago
    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.
- 16y ago

almost 16y ago

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

camperman 16y ago

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.

sandGorgon 16y ago

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

dchs 16y ago

Damn! Too late!

acdha 16y ago

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.

micheljansen 16y ago

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

ciaranbradley 16y ago

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.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
angstrom 16y ago
True, but it's informational not editorial. I think the best they could really do is have a spoiler/non-spoiler view.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  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.
- aplusbi 16y ago
  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.
- ciaranbradley 16y ago
  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.
16y ago