It seems a bit of a cop out for the writer/director to say that he did everything based on that tiny outline and filled in gaps.
I'm not sure how it can be seen as a "cop out": that's how most scripts are written. The writer starts with a basic idea and then devlops it (creating characters, scenes, dialogue, sub-plots, etc) to make it work as a movie. In the case of "Triangle", what you refer to as "filling in gaps" took Christopher Smith around 4 years

It seems a bit of a cop out for the writer/director to say that he did everything based on that tiny outline and filled in gaps. There may not exactly be "plotholes" but there isn't any reason for discussion if the movie was flawlesswhich coming from the material we see could have been possible.
I don't buy that Jess would return to that horrible ship over and overlike you said Poetcertainly many things would change every time. Jess would get smarter and smarter and eventually figure out how to fix everything. I look at it like Back to the Future 2. Even in 1 trip they saw their former selfs but hid from them and knew what NOT to do. Maybe this has nothing to do with it I don't knowbut it's a time loop of sorts. Personally I think the movie was excellent. If we don't know what caused the loop, then we should have seen a finite end to the filmgood or bad. If it had ended with that car crashboom I think I'd have been happierthat waymaybe she had already gone on the ship 100 times to get off that boat.
I meanit seems something happens to her to reset the loop though. The first time WE see her board the ship she obviously seems clueless and that Jess keeps coming and coming and coming. The only Jess that gets smarter is the one that manages to stay alive ON the ship, not the one arriving.
I keep thinking about different outcomes likewhat if Jess just did nothing on the ship and kept everyone safe instead of killing them? What doesn't add up within the arc of more than 3 times is that there seems to always be 3 Jess's on board at all times so everything can't change even though it should.
The first time we see Jess doesn't mean the other Jess's aren't on boardwe just don't know that until later so how could things change? They can't or everything would unravelhowever we assume she should wise up eventuallybut it appears it's not possiblethis is why not having an end or at least a pre-loop lessens the quality of the film. My mom didn't even get it what-so-ever since it ended the way it dida casual movie goer. If it had either started different or ended different I think the movie may have been alot more popular.
I still don't get what Jess appeared after the car crash? Where did she come from? I think I someone say a different Jess crashed the car into them and she's the one that gets on the boatalthough I don't recall knowing this.
http://www.youtube.com/user/alphazoom
http://www.vimeo.com/1986276

Who says she necessarily always found her keys? That's a component of the pattern that could have developed over time. Or that they always heard Sally? Logically, the pattern started a bit differently and evolved into what we're shown, with the yin-yang type alternating pattern we see being the end result (although it could still be evolving for all we know, including the possibility of her escaping her self-inflicted looping fate).
Also bear in mind that each time they enter the what I'll call temporal "anomaly" they jump in time, they enter at a relative time that's different from the previous entry event (which is why a new group shows up each time instead of the same thing repeating, and is why things duplicate). It's a time fracture, if you will, that produces timelines that split off at the point of entry into the temporal anomaly, similar to the Hugh Everett Level III multiverse theory (although in this case it only occurs due to the "time fracture").
Because of how things are looping back in on itself, the first time Jess entered the "anomaly" she would have encountered future versions of herself. If she dropped the keys at some point during that first voyage, they might have floated around a while or sat somewhere unnoticed until a later loop, at which time she may have started dropping them like were shown.
The bottom line is that logically it's impossible for the pattern of every integrated loop to be identical from the starting point up to when we join in, and there's nothing in the film that requires every alternating loop within the overall cycle to be identical to the others. Therefore, what we see during the loop we follow or of the snippets of the other loops the loop we follow merges with, not only might be different but must be different, albeit if just slightly (the overall framework must be similar), from previous loops.
It's true the movie doesn't for the most part address the pre-loop trip that resulted in Jess getting thrown into the past that first time, but it doesn't need to, and is largely irrelevant to the story. The only evidence we have of that fateful first trip are the single set of keys and the events we see of the morning that would be similar (before she gets bashed in the head). We can't know the details, but we can deduce a general idea centered around her driving to the harbor instead of crashing.
As soon as Jess went back in time and killed her former self at the house she effectively erased that history and began rewriting a new history that involved trying to flee with Tommy and having the car crash. She also at that time created a close-time like curve that she will continue to perpetuate until at some point she chooses to not kill herself at the house (it's her only way out in a physical time travel interpretation), at which time the cycle starts all over (from our external perspective as an observer, while from her perspective she'd move on).
There's a little more about that particular subject here:
http://www.imdb.com/board/11187064/board/thread/193565705?d=193639324 &p=1#193639324

"I'm something new entirely. With my own set of rules. I'm Dexter. Boo."

The movie just doesn't go there at all and it's frustrating to see all that potential for answers. Perhaps the movie really needs a prequel to wrap everything up nicely. I'd welcome it. Why was the ocean liner there? Where'd the people go? Why is there food on it?
It's pretty clear from what Christopher Smith has said since that he intended a never-ending loop with no clear start or end: yes, there are clues as to why Jess is suck in this cycle, but he keeps them deliberately vague. And yes, he knew that some viewers who were looking for straightforward answers and everything tied-up neatly would be frustrated.
From memory, his original outline for the film was along the lines of: crew of capsized yacht sees strange liner, with indistinct person on bridge. Crew board liner and get bumped-off one-by-one. Sole-surviving woman finds herself on the bridge, sees another (identical) yacht approach and realizes that she's the person she saw at the beginning; and so on, and so on. That's it: everything-else was developed from that to make it work as a film, but it was always intended to be an infinite loop.
My comment about a sequel has always been "It would be exactly the same as the first one." Or as Smith puts it: if you're having problems or think you've found a plot hole, just watch the film twice back-to-back

Wellexactly.the movie's only fault within itself is that we are only watching the loop. Nothing within the movie is real. I think the movie could have chosen to be flawless (within it's own set of rules of course) if they had at least shown us what started the loop.
I loved the movie actually.. I just didn't love NOT knowing where the loop started. The OP states that she got on the boat and still heard the distress callnopenot possible. We simply do not know from watching the movie what REALLY happened to Jess and Tommywhich is a major flaw but it can be overlooked if you just ignore pre-loop time. The more I try to overlook it though, the more I think it's just a flawhard to say really.
If Jess always finds her keysthen they are looping. If she had not found them, but instead dropped them for the first time, and they didn't get a distress callETCwe'd at least have seen the very first loop but they chose not to go that route. They chose thealready happened route.
But.even in real-timesomething has to start off the loopin theory. The movie just doesn't go there at all and it's frustrating to see all that potential for answers. Perhaps the movie really needs a prequel to wrap everything up nicely. I'd welcome it. Why was the ocean liner there? Where'd the people go? Why is there food on it?
Certainly everything after the car crash could simply be a "coma" non stop dream for her to get Tommy back. This waythe boat and everything on it doesn't need a first loop in order to make sense. The rules are out the window if she just comatose or ina purgatory state.
http://www.youtube.com/user/alphazoom
http://www.vimeo.com/1986276

Wow, that's a very detailed plot summary. One of the things I love about this film is its ability to generate interesting conversation. I only have one question about the first part of your theory: How could they have heard the distress call that Sally made if they weren't already in the loop to begin with?

Mean Jess:
Mean Jess is simply the final Jess that we see, who has seen the whole loop.
There is actually just one Jess. The movie is just about her moving from a confused state of no understanding to understanding and thus becoming focused (and mean).
I choose to believe what I was programmed to believe

For me the seagull is the clearest sign of a mythological archetype basis.
The seagull is - at least partly - an intentional reference to "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" (see FAQ). It was an important influence on the script, but one that gets a lot less recognition than, say, Sisyphus or "The Shining". At one point, Smith was considering making it a lot more obvious, such as having Jess come back to attend Tommy's wedding

You're right about "mean" Jess, although she alternates personalities every other loop. The Jess iteration we follow is "nice", or I'd agree with your take as "less-resolute", and she'll become the "resolute" personality in the loop we see her about to enter due to the pattern that'll occur this time for her. She'll then fall overboard, and go back "nice". It should be noted that the "mean" designation as comes from Chris Smith. It isn't quite accurate, because she's not really mean. She's really just colder and more determined.
Nice work on developing your theory but I'm sticking with my belief that its punishment by the gods and not time loops.
There's absolutely no reason it can't be both. In fact, it works better if it is. Although, I don't see evidence of literal "punishment" by active gods. I see it as a "Jacob's Ladder" type of event, with her experiencing a dying nightmare, or in a more physical interpretation, with her dying in the car crash and the Ferryman (a.k.a. the cab driver) bringing her back to the land of the living, where she'll end up again because of her failure to keep her promise to pay him. My vote is that it's a combination of both interpretations, with the taxi driver being a modern day manifestation of the Ferryman archetype, with a very real Bermuda Triangle event, and very real time travel to the past. In the end, however, it's really just a matter of preference, and that's how Chris Smith intended it.

"I'm something new entirely. With my own set of rules. I'm Dexter. Boo."

I think the incarnation you call 'Mean Jess' is the one we see at the end of the movie, who has been through a whole loop, and wants to go through the loop again in order to have the chance to save Tommy and avoid the car accident. She is not so much 'mean' as resolute. She goes about the killing very clinically, even apologising to them as she stabs them saying (paraphrased) "i just love my son".
Nice work on developing your theory but I'm sticking with my belief that its punishment by the gods and not time loops.
For me the seagull is the clearest sign of a mythological archetype basis.

Trying ,in some way, to share your enthuse. (told ya that I really enjoyed the movie) Triangle definitely has big entertainment factor. It has something that other movies don't. Could be the atmosphere, the tension, the suspenseCan't put my finger on it.
It happens only what is suppose to happen. That's the whimsical fatality!

Agreed Arsdeviu, and I have not done this with any other movies.
But, this movie really motivates me like no other.
I think it is one of the more tighter scripts, with a puzzle that
simply draws you in and in and in, the deeper you unlock it.
Bottom line, the analysis is fun. To each his own!
Camcody

Geez guys! I really enjoyed the movie, but it's a movie. Why such a microscopic analyze? You are putting too much effort in trying to prove fiction. Most of the times even the movie script writers ignore the holes just to get it over and start shooting the movie. Just saying.
It happens only what is suppose to happen. That's the whimsical fatality!

Where do you come up with this stuff???

[My Prior Post concludes here, it was too long for one posting]
The saving Tommy lines (or Im sorry but I love my son) has always bothered me. They were there for a reason toward the end of each and every loop, and they were said by both Masked Confused Jess and Mean Determined Jess. I had been trying to possibly associate it with a memory of Tommy drowning, or a memory of the car accident (certainly not with him being at school). Neither really made much sense though. Saving Tommy from herself makes perfect sense, and fits in with the logic presented to us by Smith in the movie. It is also a hell of a twist.
Well, there you have it. Go ahead, and tear it apart!
Camcody
P.S. Regarding the Taxi driver, (and I hate to say this), but I am coming around to the belief that the Taxi driver was more than merely a taxi driver. Surviving that car accident was always problematic, solved in a scientific theory by the paradox solving proposal. Of course, I highly doubt that Smith had that science theory or possibility in mind. And the dialogue at the end of the ride is just to in line with what was said on the Aeolus, about a promise being broken, etc.
Why would a taxi driver drive someone to a harbor and then say, Ill leave the meter running, you will come back now, wont you? He wasnt asked to by his passenger, who had fallen asleep. And Jess says, yes. And he asks if she promises? My problem is in having to mix in a supernatural element into what is a preferred cleaner scientific theory, but Im afraid there really is no good way around it. I think it is what Smith intended as part of the movie logic.

Sorry, this is a long one, but necessarily so.
This latest discussion regarding Jesss perplexing memory lapses caused me to
review the film yet again and focus on that angle. In so doing, I have come to
some new conclusions about her memory, and I have also come to yet a new
revelation about a new angle that had never occurred to me in the past. To me,
a startling revelation, maybe to others not as much.
I am amazed that even now years later, I can still find revelations within the riddle of this movie.
There always seems to be something not quite right that needs to be figured out. The grand unifying theory of Triangle seems to be the Holly Grail.
I will start out by saying that while focusing on trying to understand what
exactly Jess is remembering or forgetting, and looking for some tells that
Smith may have had Melissa (Jess) give the audience, I am simply amazed at the
direction and performance. If they ever give Oscars for ambiguity in writing,
directing, and acting, then Smith and Melissa should win hands down. You can
take so many of Jesss gestures (and dialogue) while at the harbor and sailing into the storm
so many ways to support almost whatever your theory may be. Thus, they must
cancel each other out as a determining factor for me in my analysis.
Having said that, and upon another close examination of this film, I have come
to some additional insights, and what may be perceived as surprising conclusions
to the veterans that may know me on this Board. Again, as I have always tried
to do, I make only conclusions based on facts from the movie, including dialogue
and acting gestures, and reasonable logical assumptions derived therefrom. I
strive to stay away from mere speculation not supported by a sound factual basis
or information given to us in the movie.
Here we go: First of all- What I can say we do or should know (or I soundly believe) from
the movie:

1. Jess was clearly going to wear her dress on her date until the Tommy
   spilled paint incident. We can reasonably assume that in the Original Time
   line, no paint spilled, and she wore it on her date as planned. She was wearing
   the dress when she told Tommy to hurry up or theyd be late. In addition to
   what clearly occurred that morning, there is so much supporting dialogue in the
   movie to support this, I do not think it is a point of real contention (two
   references on the ship regarding what the women were wearing, one regarding that
   women plan on what they are wearing for a long time, and the other between Sally
   & Heather when Heather asks Sally if the shorts bothered Sally, the other 2
   women being all decked out). Remember, also, how ballistic Original Jess went
   when Tommy ruined her selected dress. Now, this is not really such an important
   point except to point out that things were quite different on the maiden voyage.
   Jess had a dress. Jess had her car keys because she drove to the harbor (the
   only time any Jess did). Jess may have also had Tommy with her.
2. Now we come to Tommy. There really is no question in my mind that Tommy
   was meant to go with Jess on her date. It was clearly the plan. Jess told
   Gregg. Gregg told Victor. First question to each looping Jess after the
   Original Time Line was from Victor, where is your son? Then the lie
   (apparently a reasonable lie because Gregg was aware that a special needs school
   is open every day, he told that to Victor later). So, assuming Tommy came
   along, and they got caught up in that time vortex, Original Tommy must have
   drowned at sea. In other words, Tommy died in the Original Time Line, and he
   died in the car accident in each of the altered time lines. To me, this has a certain
   uniformity I like. Tommy always dies.
   The only way he doesnt die, is if Transporting Jess does something different, doesnt kill Original Jess. As an aside, this may lead into Smiths remark that he thought about Jess (both
   Jesss) appearing at his wedding in the future or something to that affect; though being somewhat of a writer myself, I simply do not assign much credence to what may or may not have been part of an every changing story line when written. We have the final story in the movie. Lets stick to that.
   However, I do have a question: In both the beginning of the film, and at the
   end, Jess says to Tommy something along the lines of what sounds like the
   following: Hurry up Tommy, were going to be late. I cannot make out if she
   is saying, were going to be late (implying both going sailing), or youre
   going to be late (which would imply her taking him to the school instead). At
   the end, Transporting Jess hears her say the same line while at the window, but
   I still cant make it out. Ambiguity again on purpose? Spielburger?
   Spielburger? Spielburger?
   Now, again, having said all that, although I assign a very strong probability that
   Tommy went on her date and died at sea, I am open to the lessor possibility that
   she did possibly drop him off at school that morning. That li

Tommy drowning is completely wrong, because he never went on the yacht.

Jess didn't murder Tommy because we never saw it happen.

Tommy must die
Warrior Poet in his explanation regarding the highly unlikely possibility that Original Jess murdered Tommy (of which I would more strongly agree and state even further that there is really no possibility if you use evidence from the movie, but if you want to get into pure speculation, then you could just as strongly say Original Jess was a serial killer too)
Warrior Poet: Tommy was dropped off at school (it's mentioned numerous times directly within the film), or a concept one of the posters (the names Camcody!) has mentioned is that he died when the yacht overturned (there isn't direct supporting evidence of this in the film, but it's plausible and sticks with the theme or "feel" of the movie) . . . . . .
Well, I am not sure what is meant by direct supporting evidence, but there is really an abundance of evidence from the movie (circumstantial, logical, or otherwise) that supports that poor Tommy must die, one way or the other. I believe that Tommy died at sea, and there is really little room for doubt on this point. Why? Because Tommy simply has to die one way or the other for the movie logic to make sense. I have touched on this before in more detail, but I will briefly explain the points below:

1. It was CLEARLY the Original plan, and nothing is shown in the movie to divert from that plan (nothing);
2. We see only by the end of the movie how the genesis of the hes at school (on Saturday) story came about, looping Jess made it up to explain (to Victor, after a long delay) why Tommy wasnt with her as Originally planned (she couldnt say to him my son just died in a car crash, but the audience knows he did). Thus it was a lie (in my mind), or at least a made up story, and we know it was not true;
3. Jess comes to believe her lie after her long sleep when she loses her memory of the car crash and everything else that happened in prior loops (including the Original loop when she brought Tommy on board); When Warrior Poet says, it's mentioned numerous times directly within the film- it is mentioned solely in Jesss mind (numerous times) and we know the genesis of why its in her head, even though Jess forgets; -and finally,
4. for those (like me) who believe in a science time travel theory, it also has to be. Tommys death in the car does not create a paradox for only one reason, because he had already died in the Original timeline at sea. No harm, no foul. When our Movie Jess goes back in time and kills herself (Original Jess), she creates a paradox in which the remaining alive Jess must get back to the harbor to resolve. However, Tommys death does not create a paradox because he died anyway. If, on the other hand, Tommy was left at school in the Original timeline, then his death in the car would have created a time paradox. How could he have been left at school if he died in the car crash? If he was killed in the car in the altered reality, then he could never have been left at school alive in the Original time line! If that were true, then this time paradox is never resolved- never. Jess reentering the loop could not solve it. The only logical conclusion, Tommy died either way, at sea and in the car crash. I would add, the only way for any Jess to end the loop would be for her not to kill Original Jess, and let Orignal Jess go to the harbor anyway without interference. In theory, I suppose, she could also take Tommy away from Original Jess, explain to Original Jess why she had to save her son, and save him from his death at sea (which would not create a paradox), and explain that Original Jess still had to go to the harbor. But, we know from the movie, this really is not a possibility given the dynamics of her state of mind in the movie. Thus, no matter how you cut it, Jess is destined to loop forever.
   As Warrior Poet aptly explained regarding this time paradox with respect to Jess:
   But then I'd say, "she's not predestined to repeat everything, only to return to the loop, and only after she kills her former self." This occurs because she's created a temporal paradox when she kills her other self at the house. Some version of Jess MUST go to the harbor and cycle back to the past because that's what's already happened.
   For this same reason, Tommy who died in the car accident in the altered time line does not create a time paradox, it is of no consequence, only because he had to have died at sea in the Original time line. The logic of the movie reveals the answer to this part of the puzzle.
   This is the reason what happened to Tommy is an important element in understanding the movie.
   Camcody

It really is. I've mirrored your exact post here several times, and others have as well, marveling at how civil and intelligent the discussions are. The discourse on this board is indeed rare compared to most others. Sure we each have minor disagreements with each others' interpretation, but that's what sparks the debate. How those arguments are carried out here is quite pleasant. For whatever reason the trolls tend to avoid "Triangle".

"I'm something new entirely. With my own set of rules. I'm Dexter. Boo."

Will do, but I'm going to go to bed first, kinda late. It's nice to have a discussion on IMDb with real intelligent people, as opposed to the other boards & topics here on IMDb with trolls and name calling if you have a different opinion. I'm sure they're probably a few posts like that on this board but thankfully, i haven't found them.
_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.

Excellent thoughts! You may want to read through my Triangle: Mythology and Science thread, given your interest in the matter. I should note that some time back (some of us have been posting on here for two years) Camcody and I, and I think HazardousHenry as well, prescribed to the multiverse theory to explain a physical interpretation, but then one contradiction occurred to me: the seagulls wouldn't be piling up on the "outside" original world if events there were occurring in branching universes.
This lead me to a combination of the two. Inside the anomaly there are multiple timelines (which cannot be refuted), resulting from the temporal refraction being caused by the anomaly itself, but they converge outside the area of the storm (the so-called temporal anomaly), meaning when Jess is thrown to the past she's not entering a new branching dimension or temporal brane (short for membrane). She must literally be returning to the original timeline she'd left from previously. If she weren't, there wouldn't be dead seagulls lying beside the road.
The paradox component is also necessary to explain her miraculous survival of the crash, without a single injury, scratch, smudged or torn clothes, not even a hint of pavement burn. In this aspect of a physical time travel interpretation, she survives because she must survive. If she were to die, if she were to be prevented from boarding the Triangle, and in turn the Aeolus, and in turn be thrown into the past, a paradox would occur. She must go through the loop and return to the past to reset the original timeline again. It's inevitable.
Now if the seagulls weren't piling up alongside the road, I'd be advocating the Hugh Everett interpretation of a Level III Multiverse all the way (rendering the need to invoke the grandfather paradox component moot, although her survival of the car crash would be much more difficult to explain). But we have to contend with those pesky seagulls piled up along the side of the road. The only way they could be there is if objects from disparate timelines were being dumped back into a single original timeline.
As a side note, I'll reference my Triangle: Mythology and Science thread, where I cite a recent experiment using post-selection quantum teleportation (i.e. in effect transmitting information into the past) that all but proves that quantum processes prevent grandfather paradoxes from occurring, meaning the grandfather paradox prevention mechanism, although not understood, has seemingly been experimentally verified (although not subsequently substantiated with further experiments that I'm aware of).

"I'm something new entirely. With my own set of rules. I'm Dexter. Boo."

I never liked the grandfather paradox theory. It never made sense to me. However, this movie can be explained using the multi-verse theory, or parallel universes, which IMHO debunks the grandfather paradox. You can't go back in time in your own timeline, but you can go back in time in an alternate universe - you basically enter that universe's time stream at any point prior to your own time line's. All those little glimpses of deja vu, or even certain day dreaming events are you experiencing one of those universes. Some people explain these events as being in tune or tapping in the "energy". IMHO, it's all the same. I know it sounds all sci-fi, but I believe it. How do we astral project to those other parallel universes where the "time" is so different from our current time? I don't know at this point, but I'm willing to find out.
If I may digress for moment This happens to me all the time and I personally believe it's me slipping into a parallel universe that is running adjacent to my own time line. For example, say I'm running late to work. My intention was to take my same route that I always do, but for whatever reason (Quick decision to turn right and proceed on another route, or perhaps traffic was too thick and annoying) I chose another path. It never fails when I've done this, I now notice things on the this route, which I've taken several times before, stuff looks "different" or perhaps there's an object (building, house, telephone phone, light fixture, something) that I never noticed before. Now that I've said that, it doesn't really explain parallel universes, it just means I never noticed something before; However, I can not explain the "feeling" I get when I notice one of these objects, how it looks so foreign and the vibe I get like it's not the same as it's been day after day, like it's changed or doesn't belong here.
Back to the movie
The rift we see was the key to the multiverses and the space time loop continuum. Now prior to seeing this movie, I was doing some light reading on parallel universes. It was by slight coincidence (as I don't believe in those, either. Everything happens for a reason) that I found this movie for my wife and I to watch yesterday. I seen the title, read the synopsis and took a look at the trailer on youtube (watched the movie off of Amazon). Nothing of which said this was one of those weird time looping movies. I was simply blown away by this movie. Definitely up there with my favorites like Donnie Darko and Memento.
Anyhow, a passage in the book I was reading prior to this stated:
The whole idea of choice and decision is based on a scientific phenomenon, and one of the foundations of quantum mechanics - the observer effect. According to quantum physics, every time you observe something, it changes the event.
This book is called Beyond Reality, Evidence of Parallel Universes, by Shelley Kaehr, PhD. I thought this passage was significant as it pretty much sums up what was happening in the movie, from 1st Jess' point of view and the more she saw the looping events, the more she was able to change the event (or so she thought).
I just skimmed through the beginning of the movie. What makes it difficult to follow previously, I can now see that at first the movie starts from the Dressy Jesse perspective, and after she goes outside to talk to the neighbor, the credits go by, and the next shot is "first" Jess, or the nice Jess. At this point in the movie, you do not know there was a body being stuffed into the trunk and Jess later picks up Tommy and off they go, but they never show where they go (or if Tommy was in the car), but we do see Jess moments earlier looking at the sticky note about the harbor at 8:30. All we see is her car driving down the road, the seagull and her going around the bend where there is a big sign that state: Goodbye Please Return, which is very ironic indeed.
_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.

Sounds like everyone's pretty much answered your questions on this, but if you look at my past posts I'm with you (which Ill expound upon below). In an interpretation where Jess is dead, however, or in a coma or in a state of dying and the proceedings are all in her head or in a purgatory environment, Tommy died along with her in a car crash (there's very little doubt in this case). The Alpha and Omega symbol conjoined with the 8:17 time, the song being played by the band and on the record player , etc. strongly suggest that her loops beginning and end, the time of her death and rebirth or her time of crossing over, is the car crash.
In a physical time travel interpretation, which Chris Smith states is viable, this of course cant be the case because until shes transported into the past that first time theres no mechanism to allow her miraculous survival of a crash (e.g. no reason for divine intervention, no temporal paradox invoked, etc.), no explanation for the single set of keys on the ship, and no reason for her to have continued on to the yacht, which leads to her motivation for saving Tommy. The car crash in a purely physical scenario is still pivotal to her experience, and all the links and shared imagery between the outside world and the world on board the Aeolus can just as easily be explained (e.g. its figurative, sci-fi quantum processes, the hand of the gods, etc.)
My preference for a physical time travel interpretation (or one where at least the initial trip and loop back into the past is a physical experience) is that Jess dropped Tommy off at school. However, just like you state, we can't know this for sure, which is why I don't completely dismiss the possibility of Tommy drowning on the yacht (which is possible - we don't see it because we don't witness that first pre-loop trip). Even the in my opinion absurd out of character act of Jess murdering Tommy (which has been proposed in the past) is remotely possible because nearly everything pre-loop must be relegated to speculation only.
The content of my post above relates to why Ive always maintained that the details of that first trip, specifically the portion prior to her entering the temporal anomaly for the first time, are largely irrelevant to the film, even though speculation on them is fun. The pre-loop events have been completely rewritten by new events (ones that we see in the film). The fact Chris Smith designed the film as a closed loop without caring what happened during that first trip also plays into this.
The only deductions we can make with any certainty whatsoever about the first trip is that Jess drove to the harbor (as evidenced by the keys) and that Tommy probably didnt board the Aeolus, although we can reasonably conclude that Jess wore her dress while driving to meet Greg and his friends at the Triangle. Everything else is up in the air, including my personal preference of Tommy being dropped off at school. Ultimately, it doesnt matter. Making up stories about what might have happened is pointless, and has little bearing on any events in the film. Due to Jess action of killing herself, it never happened. Literally. There is no first trip. Its been erased. The screenwriter didnt care about it, so why should we?
As Ive suggested, in a purely non-physical (e.g. purgatory, coma, state-of-dying, etc.) interpretation we have a few clues that may provide a general idea as to what may have happened, with the Alpha and Omega symbol, i.e. the beginning and the end of her situation, tied to the time of 8:17, which is the time of the car crash, so we could say, for example, that she crashed and is dying and the movie takes place in her head, or that she died in a crash and what were witnessing is her self-inflicted purgatory, etc. We could also speculate that if the entire movie is the result of a crash event, that perhaps shed recently watched a movie about the Bermuda Triangle and read a book on Greek mythology, fueling some of the bizarre details of her dying nightmare.
But we dont have a solid reason to connect any of this to that first trip, only to subsequent trips contained within the loop cycle, especially given that there is quite literally no first trip. In fact, the keys being on board the Aeolus, and the fact that she only recklessly speeds away with Tommy (instead of driving to the harbor) as a direct consequence of the events contained within the loop (i.e. shed have had no reason to be doing so pre-loop), seems counter to her dying during that first trip. All signs point to her making it to the harbor with her keys on her, then boarding the Aeolus without Tommy, without having a crash, without dying.
I actually find a combination of interpretations more plausible than a purely non-physical one, in which case she experienced something similar to what we see on the Aeolus after driving there, during which she lost her keys (which get introduced as part of the pattern), got thrown into the past through a Bermuda Triangle t