<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Your feedback on The Woman in the Fifth	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.chelmsford-filmclub.co.uk/2013/05/22/your-feedback-on-the-woman-in-the-fifth/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.chelmsford-filmclub.co.uk/2013/05/22/your-feedback-on-the-woman-in-the-fifth/</link>
	<description>An independent film society based in Chelmsford, Essex.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 11:43:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Bob		</title>
		<link>https://www.chelmsford-filmclub.co.uk/2013/05/22/your-feedback-on-the-woman-in-the-fifth/#comment-984</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 11:33:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.chelmsford-filmclub.co.uk/?p=605#comment-984</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[‘Excellent’ 3 votes
 =&gt; A bit alarming
 =&gt; Intriguing &amp; thought-provoking
 =&gt; Not sure I understood it! But still enjoyed it.

‘Very Good: 6 votes
 =&gt; The Shining meets 10 Commandments!
 =&gt; If this was a crossword, I would not have solved it. Not everyone goes to Paris and has two women during the length of a film.
 =&gt; Enigmatic and other-worldly; an unravellment!
 =&gt; I can tell you what ‘happened’! but to say what it was ‘about’ will need some further refection – digestion. But absorbing!
 =&gt; Enjoyed the film very much – love Kristin Scott Thomas anyway – not quite sure what actually happened in the film but didn’t think that really mattered. An enjoyable way to spend the evening – very art-house!

‘Good’: 12 votes
 =&gt; Would like to speak to the Director and perhaps then understand what it was all about
 =&gt; For an enigmatic story it failed to draw the audience into any of the mystery – was Tom truly violent (he hardly seemed so), had he been in prison or Hospital, was Margit a ghost/figment of his imagination/manifestation of his dark side? Did any of us care?
 =&gt; Promising start, intriguing middle &amp; unsatisfactory, unresolved &amp; unconvincing end. Where was it supposed to be going?
 =&gt; The write’s muse is a demanding mistress!
 =&gt; Not what I was expecting – a bit of a muddle at the end!
 =&gt; Remember we are told he is mad
 =&gt; Seemed incomplete. More info – too many unexplained facts.
 =&gt; Didn’t understand. But perhaps that [?] comprehend all meanings of ‘vive la différence’. Excellent photography
 =&gt; Good in parts. The events didn’t hang together as well as they could have.
 =&gt; Mysterious. I shall be confused for a long time…
 =&gt; Entertaining but difficult to understand.

‘Satisfactory’: 6 votes
 =&gt; A muddle [?] &amp; quite dull
 =&gt; Too confusing even though I had read the book! Didn’t feel it had a point.
 =&gt; Acting superb – but where was it trying to go?
 =&gt; [?] – even in a rubbish film, Kristen S.T. is credible. Did he get the part because he can look soulful? Started well but then dribbled into inanity.
 =&gt; I like films with an understandable ending, so it didn’t really do it for me! Fun though!
 =&gt; Woody Allen has better jokes!

‘Poor’: 5 votes
 =&gt; The worst, most pretentious film I have ever seen at the Film Club. A very long and tedious 85 minutes.
 =&gt; Too clever for me
 =&gt; Baffling; in the end, it just didn’t add up.
 =&gt; Not sure what this film was about in terms of the story. OK, we appreciate he is a tortured soul, but that only takes you so far. Too much is confusing in this story.
 =&gt; Oh the impenetrable mysteries of the tortured male soul… About ½ way through I even found the cinematography annoying. In another story it could have been good. Worst film so far, by far! About 80 minutes too long. And Kristin Scott Thomas – what a waste to have her playing such a ridiculous role! PS: I did like the ‘realism’ of the Parisian scenes, especially the café &amp; horrible digs, which v. much reminded me of student days in 1968

2 comments without a vote:
 =&gt; Puzzled?
 =&gt; I didn’t understand it]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>‘Excellent’ 3 votes<br />
 => A bit alarming<br />
 => Intriguing &#038; thought-provoking<br />
 => Not sure I understood it! But still enjoyed it.</p>
<p>‘Very Good: 6 votes<br />
 => The Shining meets 10 Commandments!<br />
 => If this was a crossword, I would not have solved it. Not everyone goes to Paris and has two women during the length of a film.<br />
 => Enigmatic and other-worldly; an unravellment!<br />
 => I can tell you what ‘happened’! but to say what it was ‘about’ will need some further refection – digestion. But absorbing!<br />
 => Enjoyed the film very much – love Kristin Scott Thomas anyway – not quite sure what actually happened in the film but didn’t think that really mattered. An enjoyable way to spend the evening – very art-house!</p>
<p>‘Good’: 12 votes<br />
 => Would like to speak to the Director and perhaps then understand what it was all about<br />
 => For an enigmatic story it failed to draw the audience into any of the mystery – was Tom truly violent (he hardly seemed so), had he been in prison or Hospital, was Margit a ghost/figment of his imagination/manifestation of his dark side? Did any of us care?<br />
 => Promising start, intriguing middle &#038; unsatisfactory, unresolved &#038; unconvincing end. Where was it supposed to be going?<br />
 => The write’s muse is a demanding mistress!<br />
 => Not what I was expecting – a bit of a muddle at the end!<br />
 => Remember we are told he is mad<br />
 => Seemed incomplete. More info – too many unexplained facts.<br />
 => Didn’t understand. But perhaps that [?] comprehend all meanings of ‘vive la différence’. Excellent photography<br />
 => Good in parts. The events didn’t hang together as well as they could have.<br />
 => Mysterious. I shall be confused for a long time…<br />
 => Entertaining but difficult to understand.</p>
<p>‘Satisfactory’: 6 votes<br />
 => A muddle [?] &#038; quite dull<br />
 => Too confusing even though I had read the book! Didn’t feel it had a point.<br />
 => Acting superb – but where was it trying to go?<br />
 => [?] – even in a rubbish film, Kristen S.T. is credible. Did he get the part because he can look soulful? Started well but then dribbled into inanity.<br />
 => I like films with an understandable ending, so it didn’t really do it for me! Fun though!<br />
 => Woody Allen has better jokes!</p>
<p>‘Poor’: 5 votes<br />
 => The worst, most pretentious film I have ever seen at the Film Club. A very long and tedious 85 minutes.<br />
 => Too clever for me<br />
 => Baffling; in the end, it just didn’t add up.<br />
 => Not sure what this film was about in terms of the story. OK, we appreciate he is a tortured soul, but that only takes you so far. Too much is confusing in this story.<br />
 => Oh the impenetrable mysteries of the tortured male soul… About ½ way through I even found the cinematography annoying. In another story it could have been good. Worst film so far, by far! About 80 minutes too long. And Kristin Scott Thomas – what a waste to have her playing such a ridiculous role! PS: I did like the ‘realism’ of the Parisian scenes, especially the café &#038; horrible digs, which v. much reminded me of student days in 1968</p>
<p>2 comments without a vote:<br />
 => Puzzled?<br />
 => I didn’t understand it</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
