User Reviews

I liked this film.

I thought the sound, and use of music, was very effective. That's not usually where I start reviewing a film, but it stands out to me. It set the mood. The one rough spot would be a time late in the film where there's black screen and silence for a few seconds, followed by punishing audio of a bus. Ouch. But aside from that one thing, the sound is excellent.

Also, the cinematography is great. I'm unsure what materials were used, but the cinematographic skills are greater than what the end product shows us, due to pixelation in the digital projection, and some post-processing. In one scene, it appeared to me that both characters were originally in focus, but a digital technique made one appear to be behind sort of wavy or frosted glass... that didn't go so well. And a shot of the sun also didn't go so well, due to a sort of white-on-grey pixelation. But most of the film is a visual treat, and that shines through. Many of the scenes would be frame-able as still images. I think that had film been used end-to-end, the results would have been exceptional. There's little dialogue, so the cinematography is really what is telling the story here, slowly and deliberately. Although much of the film is in tight shots, it doesn't feel oppressive, and is considerably better than most of English Canadian cinema. That's reason enough alone to see it.

The lead actress Stephanie Sobocan did a great job, as did most of the cast. I was less convinced by the aunt and the doctor, although some of that is due to the lines they were given. I think there could have been better ways to reveal Marjorie's background than to have her aunt read it out to us. It felt out of place, and out of pace, with the rest of the film.

The story itself keeps you guessing, as to what is really happening. Did we see the past, or was that imagined? Are we even seeing the present? Is Marjorie in fact nuts, or is she a conduit for her father's strange plan of reincarnation? Is she even human? When it's done right, as it is here, it makes for a great story, that keeps you involved for the whole film.

Still, I might have edited it by about 15 minutes, mostly toward the end. I wouldn't cut the story at all, but accelerate it. I felt that after the baby, the tension had gone, and we needed to reach the conclusion faster.

I expect this to win some awards. Overall, I think fans of David Lynch, Gus Van Sant, or Darren Aronofsky will like this film even more than I did.

I know Otto Buj. I have also seen many of the same films that he has seen. Given that, I have a different take on "Primordial Ties".

First I have to congratulate the entire cast and crew on the final product, which is as attractive an independent film as I have seen in some years. Given the point and shoot, "just add digital", ethos of today's independent filmmakers, to watch a film where every shot and sound is carefully measured and thought of is truly a pleasure. For that alone I give the film high marks.

Secondly while he is Canadian, comparisons to Guy Maddin do come up. It is a dreamy, often hypnotic film with unusual visuals, though not over loaded with them. That is the cinematic, artistic side of the film. On the narrative, story side it is lacking. Perhaps in his third film Otto could bring in some Bruce MacDonald to temper the Guy Maddin.

To clarify this point I believe that Buj makes fine "Cinema" but not so fine "Film", good art but weak story. This imbalance to me is to be expected. It is a tricky balance to be sure.

If I was to compare "Primordial Ties" to another film it would be to Terrance Malicks "Tree of Life", an equally perplexing and pretty film as divisive to some people as it is delightful to others. I could call "Primordial Ties" a "Twig of Life", shorter, smaller, and more concise in its philosophical ambitions than Malick's film. It is not a case where "Primordial Ties" would have been better with a bigger budget. It does quite well with the budget and scope it has.

For those who have seen Buj's first film, "The Eternal Present", his second is similar, a puzzling tale that seems to drift off to even more puzzlement, yet charmingly done to those who are susceptible to those charms.

The stated premise of of the film is that of a "coming of age" story of a girl. I however can see the film as a "coming of age" story of a young filmmaker coming to grips with his talent and ideas and working his way out of his influences.

As for the storyline I see less a plot made from the classical pillars of conflict and action, than a series of events and contrast. Events that either are or are not happening. Two portions of the film, the scenes involving the baby which adds some temporary suspense) and the astronaut theme which brings to mind "2001" I find visually interesting but undeveloped.

As for the idea of contrast I see the main character interact with other characters, many of which seem quite distant from each other as if they were speaking to each other from entirely different films.

Marjorie, the main character is a breezy butterfly from a 1960s or 70s French or Swedish film, with all the windblown hair and light flares from a perfume ad of the same time period. Her mysterious father figure seen in a striking photograph looks like a mad scientist out of an Italian thriller or silent serial. Her aunt, uncle and the other young people she interacts with are not as some posters have mentioned bad actors with bad lines but actors and line readings that seem taken from a 1970s American independent film, with the directness and roughness that those films have naturally.

I had the feeling as if say Marianne Faithful took a wrong turn in 1968s "Girl on a Motorcycle" and ended up in 1975s "Two Lane Blacktop". Or Cybill Shepherd found out that the movie playing at "The Last Picture Show in Texas" is "The Diabolical Dr. Z".

This is where I see an issue of nostalgia coming in. Nostalgia defined as a yearning, Not nostalgia for the trinkets of a decade but of the sight and sound cues of all the films in the memory of Otto Buj, and for those of us who share those same memories of past cinema styles. this is where the film to me becomes a dream. A dream of an art cinema before Miramax formalized a new notion of art film, a dream of an independent film before the Sundance festival popularized the notion of "Indies", a dream of film making before the takeover of digital.

Mr. Buj is quoted as saying that his film: "is more evocative than tidy, involving the experience of memory and emotions that are not easily processed by the viewer." This is fine but it is hard to fault an audience for not understanding when little information given in order for the viewer to understand and how to ultimately process those untidy memory and emotions, whatever they might be.

"Primordial Ties" ends on a similar note as did "The Eternal Present" with the main characters walking and in this film literally drifting off into further mystery. I wonder, as the last scene plays, is Marjorie mythical father, as stand in for Odysseus returning from the Trojan Wars or is Marjorie a stand in for Helen of Troy returning instead. And while Otto Buj specifically references the myth of Pygmalion, I find the this mythic reference as well.

I recommend this film to whoever might find in interesting and to programmers looking for a film that might wake up a sleepy audience with a film that is a walking dream itself. Or even start an argument in the lobby over weather this is film or film-flam.

One last thing Marjorie is seen reading Robert Heinlein's novel "Stranger in a Stranger Land". While the title is appropriate to the films theme, she could as well be reading Stanislaw Lem's "Solaris". Which could be to say that "Primordial Ties" is a strange planet indeed, one worth visiting and getting lost in its orbit.

This is a very unusual and well crafted film.

It is a story of a girl named Majorie who, coming of age in the 1970's - is trying to figure out who she is, and evidently loses herself in doing so. Marjorie's days weave in and out of everyday realities and dreams until we are not exactly sure ourselves who (or even what!!) Marjorie is. In fact - perhaps she may not even exist at all!!

The film explores it's ideas and themes in a non-linear way. The stark banalities of everyday teenage life are interspersed with some very strange events. Some shallow characters and personalities attempt to help Marjorie but actually push her further away. And Marjorie is a beautiful girl and we can't help but feel enticed into her own little world, however shrinkingly circular it might be.

Unusual props, rich colours, shades of light, and layers of music and sound done with some extremely rare 1970's era synthesizers (credited at the end) are a highlight in this film. In the theatre I actually felt the sound as much as heard it even though this film is not loud by any means.

The story itself unfolds gradually and the scope of Marjorie's life seems minimalist - reduced to a series of events for which both she and the audience together must make meaning of. This unusual narrative twist, along with unique shades of colour and light, and the hazy and otherworldly soundtrack, make this a film worth repeated viewings.