<?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: Tuesday 24 March: Bastards (18)	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.chelmsford-filmclub.co.uk/past-seasons/201415-season/tuesday-24-march-bastards-18/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.chelmsford-filmclub.co.uk</link>
	<description>An independent film society based in Chelmsford, Essex.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:32:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Maurice Moore		</title>
		<link>https://www.chelmsford-filmclub.co.uk/past-seasons/201415-season/tuesday-24-march-bastards-18/#comment-1091</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Maurice Moore]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:32:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.chelmsford-filmclub.co.uk/?page_id=1837#comment-1091</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I did not like this film not because of the subject matter or the nudity. I found parts of it irrelevant or disjointed to the storyline or characterisation. The disappearance of the child part the way through the film is an example. The film was not subtle. It was unnecessarily in your face. Having seen the traumatised Justine early on and head the Doctors view that surgery was necessary the later image of Justine with blood down her legs was unnecessary. I assume we can work things out for ourselves. Similarly the last images of the video were again clunky as the father had been seen on camera earlier. It was purient pornography disguised as art. It is altogether surprising it was directed by a woman. The film&#039; s view of men as powerful, manipulative, cruel is unsurprising and probably accurate. I have no objection to the film being shown it just could have been done better.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I did not like this film not because of the subject matter or the nudity. I found parts of it irrelevant or disjointed to the storyline or characterisation. The disappearance of the child part the way through the film is an example. The film was not subtle. It was unnecessarily in your face. Having seen the traumatised Justine early on and head the Doctors view that surgery was necessary the later image of Justine with blood down her legs was unnecessary. I assume we can work things out for ourselves. Similarly the last images of the video were again clunky as the father had been seen on camera earlier. It was purient pornography disguised as art. It is altogether surprising it was directed by a woman. The film&#8217; s view of men as powerful, manipulative, cruel is unsurprising and probably accurate. I have no objection to the film being shown it just could have been done better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
