5 To 7 : Your responses
Peter, that was a fun little film tonight. Except for one friend, the others I spoke with liked/loved this fantasy. It made for very interesting post movie conversation. Basically …Why would a woman such as Arielle fall for a rather nerdy, unsettled man who actually had little to offer? Especially compared to her elegant, handsome, successful husband? Maybe Brian’s passionate love for her was addictive, more so than an open marriage. Maybe she felt that passionate love should not be so liberal. (Or maybe women just love passionate, talented artists. After all, consider Mordecai Richler and his wife Florence. She, an elegant, stunning woman left a perfectly good husband to run away with a penniless unknown, slightly uncouth writer.)
Other thoughts were that she looked older than in her 30’s. Also, the film could use some fine tuning: it had that good amusing Hepburn/Tracy type dialogue, but it felt like two films. One filled with joyful repartee, and the other bending heavily under a cloud. It went quickly from comedy to drama.
For me, this film had a special meaning. I have been attempting to buy a bench in Central Park for years. If fact, I went there 2 years ago specifically to choose a bench and decide on the dedication. (It would be my memorial bench) Unfortunately, the week I was there, (in Oct.) a freak snowstorm occurred which brought down so many trees that the Park was closed. I haven’t gone back since, so the project is still in limbo.
I’ve seen many of the benches shown in the film. The one that said “She had the lamb chops” being one of my favourites. But I also found out that one of theideas I was playing with for my plaque has already been used. (“We’re home”). Back to the drawing board.
I found the film a marvel, and intend to tell as many people I can reach not to miss it. A convincing love story bound to take Americans by surprise, as it did the young Brian.
The casting was perfect. Has the great Glenn Close ever been better? Every scene was just long enough to tell the story. One of the women who spoke after said she enjoyed the journey provided by the gentle pacing. So did I.
I always enjoy the energy your friend – Dr. Rappaport? – gives to the Q&As although I don’t always agree with him: I remember he was bored with “Two Days One Night” starring the luminous Marion Cotillard. He asked me if I was furious with him tonight and I said yes: why would he take off for a leak in the middle of a good movie?
I hope you keep him as a regular.
P.S. Nice tribute you gave to Paul Almond.
Dear Peter: I really enjoyed the film 5 a 7. Thank you for taking a chance and showing it. Very sophisticated, loved the setting, beautiful cinematography, dazzling female lead, great parental couple bit, witty repartee. I would recommend it as an antidote to all the violence that abounds. On the lines of My Summer in Provence, When Harry Met Sally, etc. Worth distributing.
An unlikely love story (but why not?) set in New York: he’s 24, Jewish, an unpublished writer, she’s 33, French, sophisticated, a married mother of 2. Cameos from real-life New York powerhouses in the arts, cuisine, and politics as well as knock-out performances by Glenn Close and Frank Langella as Daniel’s disapproving parents in several brilliantly written scenes. No guns, no bad grammar.
I was totally charmed by this movie!!! The writing was clever, playing on our imagined stereotypes of French family life and sophisticated New Yorker’s supposed every day life. She was completely charming and gorgeous and seduced most of the audience myself included. That he could win her over, this unpublished wannabe writer, gives us all hope.
The idea of newbie but charming leads positioned against stars like Langella and Lambert Wilson is novel and works like a charm. As for sophisticated New York, of course, Alan Gilbert of the NY Phil , Julian Bond and others are typical guests at our small intimate dinner party, enlivened by two perfect NY children.
This is what movies are all about. BRAVO
P.S It will sell and build an audience
Peter – I loved the film, thought it could use some editing, but mostly, it was a charming frolic, at least that’s how I viewed/experienced it.
Those looking to psychoanalyze these characters miss the point – I see it more as a Woody Allen-esque romp (complete with judgmental Jewish parents, delightfully done by FL and GC – she didn’t play it ‘jewish” enough but that’s just me).
Now, you can use this if you don’t give attribution to me, I WAS that 33 year old woman (although not divorced, not a mother and not beautiful) who fell in love with and lived with for 2 years a 26 year old starving writer in NYC (he later went on to become a famous Pulitzer prize winning biographer/ historian). His parents were also shocked and judgmental when he brought me home one Thanksgiving.
These stories DO happen, but even if the viewer doesn’t have such a direct experience to reference, it’s still a delightful movie! Oh, and I loved all the great NYC footage – the bench inscriptions were a lovely note….and better that they didn’t refer too literally to the next scene.
Hope this is helpful. Thanks for sharing this with us.
Okay I didn’t hate it last night. I love movies about NYC but I found it really sappy and a cross between The Notebook and The Way we were. Felt it was much more of a film made for tv!!
I guess I am a bit of a cynic.
I thought that the movie was not up to our usual standards.
You would think that a film which is being touted as a feel-good rom com, with enough Hollywood names to make one notice, would easily be able to find some distribution…I guess that is until the movie is actually screened by the distributors.
We can sit down and talk about the details if you like but briefly, it was poorly written, badly directed, hardly edited and the casting was questionable, at best. I can easily see why this film has problems.