<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: I&#8217;ve Loved You So Long</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ruthlessculture.com/2008/11/04/ive-loved-you-so-long/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ruthlessculture.com/2008/11/04/ive-loved-you-so-long/</link>
	<description>Jonathan McCalmont's Criticism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 21:00:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan M</title>
		<link>http://ruthlessculture.com/2008/11/04/ive-loved-you-so-long/#comment-28</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ruthlessculture.wordpress.com/?p=36#comment-28</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dr --

  I suspect that you&#039;re right. Presumably they would have done an autopsy, found the problem, considered the mother&#039;s medical background and then tried her for euthanasia rather than first degree murder.

  I think the story up until the end was so perfectly constructed in terms of emotions that anything less than her actually murdering her child is a cop out and a betrayal.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dr &#8211;</p>
<p>  I suspect that you&#8217;re right. Presumably they would have done an autopsy, found the problem, considered the mother&#8217;s medical background and then tried her for euthanasia rather than first degree murder.</p>
<p>  I think the story up until the end was so perfectly constructed in terms of emotions that anything less than her actually murdering her child is a cop out and a betrayal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr Drama</title>
		<link>http://ruthlessculture.com/2008/11/04/ive-loved-you-so-long/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dr Drama]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:24:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ruthlessculture.wordpress.com/?p=36#comment-27</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No, I didn’t feel a fool for doubting Juliette at the beginning. Emotionally, I wanted her not to be guilty. But simultaneously I wanted her to be guilty – I wanted to understand why she killed her child, and the whole structure of the film led me to expect some convincing, subtle and wonderful revelation – built into the story – explaining why she had killed her child, and yet now was deserving of forgiveness.

(So, yes, to some extent the film was analyzing me.)

When the revelation came I was gobsmacked. In terms of the script, okay, her behaviour throughout was consistent and psychologically truthful. The dénouement was cleverly worked into the action so that we saw what happened to the child rather than just being told about it. The storytelling was true to its visual medium.

But outside the film, in real life – would a mother have been sent down for 15 years for what, in effect, was a mercy killing, however silent she was at her trial? And would her family have been ignorant of the dead child’s terminal illness?

I didn’t believe they would. 

I have never seen a compelling emotional narrative turn so quickly into nothing through sheer ineptitude. I have never felt so tricked in a cinema. The brilliance of what went before made the reversal all the more shocking. Sorry – you can’t do that to an audience.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, I didn’t feel a fool for doubting Juliette at the beginning. Emotionally, I wanted her not to be guilty. But simultaneously I wanted her to be guilty – I wanted to understand why she killed her child, and the whole structure of the film led me to expect some convincing, subtle and wonderful revelation – built into the story – explaining why she had killed her child, and yet now was deserving of forgiveness.</p>
<p>(So, yes, to some extent the film was analyzing me.)</p>
<p>When the revelation came I was gobsmacked. In terms of the script, okay, her behaviour throughout was consistent and psychologically truthful. The dénouement was cleverly worked into the action so that we saw what happened to the child rather than just being told about it. The storytelling was true to its visual medium.</p>
<p>But outside the film, in real life – would a mother have been sent down for 15 years for what, in effect, was a mercy killing, however silent she was at her trial? And would her family have been ignorant of the dead child’s terminal illness?</p>
<p>I didn’t believe they would. </p>
<p>I have never seen a compelling emotional narrative turn so quickly into nothing through sheer ineptitude. I have never felt so tricked in a cinema. The brilliance of what went before made the reversal all the more shocking. Sorry – you can’t do that to an audience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan M</title>
		<link>http://ruthlessculture.com/2008/11/04/ive-loved-you-so-long/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:19:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ruthlessculture.wordpress.com/?p=36#comment-12</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[William --

I think that&#039;s quite possible.  One of my favourite films of recent years is The Woodsman and that is a film that never forgets even for an instant that the central character is a scumbag child molester and yet it is capable of partially redeeming him.

I&#039;ve Loved You So Long goes for the redemption but there&#039;s nothing to redeem.  Hence the suspicion that actual the target of the &#039;analysis&#039; is not Juliette, but the audience that is quick to think &quot;oooh... terrible woman&quot;.

So I don&#039;t know if I&#039;m regretting that this wasn&#039;t a completely different film but there&#039;s still the feeling that the film&#039;s central character gets off far too easily and, frankly, if they wanted to make a film about people&#039;s hysterical reaction to certain crimes then there are better ways of going about it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>William &#8211;</p>
<p>I think that&#8217;s quite possible.  One of my favourite films of recent years is The Woodsman and that is a film that never forgets even for an instant that the central character is a scumbag child molester and yet it is capable of partially redeeming him.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve Loved You So Long goes for the redemption but there&#8217;s nothing to redeem.  Hence the suspicion that actual the target of the &#8216;analysis&#8217; is not Juliette, but the audience that is quick to think &#8220;oooh&#8230; terrible woman&#8221;.</p>
<p>So I don&#8217;t know if I&#8217;m regretting that this wasn&#8217;t a completely different film but there&#8217;s still the feeling that the film&#8217;s central character gets off far too easily and, frankly, if they wanted to make a film about people&#8217;s hysterical reaction to certain crimes then there are better ways of going about it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Wall</title>
		<link>http://ruthlessculture.com/2008/11/04/ive-loved-you-so-long/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[William Wall]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:28:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ruthlessculture.wordpress.com/?p=36#comment-6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Couldn&#039;t agree more. Fine film that copped out at the end. I wonder where that ending came from? From Claudel himself, or pressure from his producers (or the marketing department)? My second novel was turned down by several US publishers because of the unredeemed ending involving the murder of a child. One publisher actually said that if I was prepared to rewrite the ending they would take it. In my case, rewriting the ending would have meant writing a new book, but I wonder if that&#039;s what happened here.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Couldn&#8217;t agree more. Fine film that copped out at the end. I wonder where that ending came from? From Claudel himself, or pressure from his producers (or the marketing department)? My second novel was turned down by several US publishers because of the unredeemed ending involving the murder of a child. One publisher actually said that if I was prepared to rewrite the ending they would take it. In my case, rewriting the ending would have meant writing a new book, but I wonder if that&#8217;s what happened here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

