Director(s): Pawel Pawlikowski
Country: UK, France, Poland
IMDB Rating: 5.3
American writer Tom Ricks comes to Paris desperate to put his life together again and win back the love of his estranged wife and daughter. When things dont go according to plan, he ends up in a shady hotel in the suburbs, having to work as a night guard to make ends meet. Then Margit, a beautiful, mysterious stranger walks into his life and things start looking up. Their passionate and intense relationship triggers a string of inexplicable events... as if an obscure power was taking control of his life.
|The Woman in the Fifth (Hi Def)||Resolution: 1280x688 px||Total Size: 3350 Mb|
|The Woman in the Fifth (DivX)||Resolution: 720x384 px||Total Size: 1130 Mb|
We have taken some photos of "The Woman in the Fifth". They represent actual movie quality.
robbeaus (16 May 2013)
I will say from the off, that my conclusion comes from reading otherreviews after seeing the film. Which left me confused and lost as towhat I had seen. Ethen Hawk arrives in Paris from who knows where, getsrobbed on the bus and reaches the end of the line. He ends up in aseedy cafÃ©, where he manages to get a room with no money in his pocketand seemingly on the back of being an American. Later the bar/cafÃ©owner offers him a job as a doorman letting people into anon-descriptive place of 'entertainment/bad things'. He meets hisestranged wife and daughter, as well as meeting a strange but alluringFrench widow, who needs his body and mind. He later discovers hisobnoxious neighbour dead in the shared toilet, and he has a brief flingwith a polish bar maid who just happens to be the same bar owner'sgirl. OK so far? If you see the film like that you will end up asconfused as most of us watching the screening as I did. However if youstart to think about the allegorical message of a serial killer,incarcerated in the system then it starts to make more sense. What thisfilm does for me is to take me on a journey as our 'Hero' arrives atthe entrance of the institution is stripped of all his possessionsapart from his passport or his identity and locked up in a series ofsmall rooms as he relates to the audience just what he did do to end upwhere he was. He fleeting contact with the police and his frequentevasion of them is the Hickockian hallmark of a man on the run. Therooms he lives and works in is his cell, Paris is but a backdrop inwhich to establish his story (perhaps his wife was French, as she isportray in the film)? But the cast of whom he reacts with his victims,including his wife and daughter. Reflecting on the film, I think onhindsight that it's not to bad, and I fact made me think about theboundaries that people set up for the self's and what happens whenthose boundaries are breached. All in all a good effort and one thatperhaps might do well with a second viewing?
edyn13 (15 May 2013)
You do not often get the opportunity to see such a beautifully craftedfilm. This film is seamless in the way it shows you what it chooses toshow you. Genius cinematography! If you compare this film to mainstream cinema, of course you are notgoing to be happy. This film is not mainstream and its not trying tobe. The way I see it is that everything you see and hear reflectsexactly what someone living with psychosis or another severe mentalillness would experience. The film has many similarities to "BlackSwan" in that way. The entire 90 minutes of the film you are taken on a psychotic journey.Nothing makes sense. There are glimpses of normalcy and then everythinggoes back to chaos with no real conclusion. The story's journey mimicswhat it must be like to be in the psyche of the mentally ill.The dark shots, the cloudy skies and colourless rooms are allreflections of Tom's twisted psyche. A metaphorical dark hell if youwill. My guess is that Tom is actually locked up somewhere. The imageson screen are really a portrayal of Tom's distorted thoughts during thepast 90 minutes while he stares blankly at the white walls thatsurround him.
russellmark (07 May 2013)
I eagerly anticipated going to see "The Woman In The Fifth". And...whynot??!! It starred 2 of our generation's finest actors..Ethan Hawke andKristin Scott Thomas.I remember sitting in the theater close to halfway through the filmthinking to myself "Now...this is a great film!". And then..withoutwarning...everything went "south" in a major way! And I went from"Wow...I love this film!" to "WTF???!!".The movie was a total waste of my time. And, maybe even worse, thislame piece of celluloid wasted the incredibly gifted talents of 2amazing actors.I've loved everything that Kristin Scott Thomas has done (up until "TheWoman In The Fifth"). Two of her best films were rather recent (theriveting French film, "Love Crime", and the gripping, wrenching Frenchfilm, "Leaving"). Even her most recent film, "Bel Ami", was extremelygood! And Ethan Hawke...what an amazing actor! i loved him in 2007's, "BeforeThe Devil Knows You're Dead", 2004's "Before Sunset", 2001's "WakingLife". And, of course, 2001's masterpiece, "Training Day"!But...why Ethan and Kristin decided to star in the major stinker, "TheWoman In The Fifth" totally astounds and mystifies me. I adviseeveryone to not see this total waste-of-time movie....
anthonydavis26 (06 May 2013)
* Contains spoilers * A friend in the cinema had already warned me ofwhat his friend and he had found not only a surprising, but aninexplicable, ending to The Woman in the Fifth, so I was on the alert.That said, in the dark and not tempted to look at my watch (or thephone), I nonetheless knew that it was an eighty-four-minuter, but hadno sense of how far in I was. Waiting for this surprise actually helpedme concentrate wonderfully, and it did not, when it came, seem out ofplace.What did keep me waiting was when Kristin Scott Thomas, who waspresumably the woman of the title, was going to appear, and I hadforgotten about the invitation that Ethan Hawke (as Tom) had been givento a literary evening: Which, it must be said, seemed as dire as onemight imagine, with even the effrontery of being asked for acontribution of twenty euros on arrival. If I didn't know that KSTwould be much better company than all of these old bores, I stillwouldn't have blamed Ethan for, having caught sight of her, wanting tofollow her (up to the roof, with the base of Le Tour Eiffel seeminglyin touching distance) and leave them behind.As to the way that everything was told (although, quite in the rightway, nothing did get told), what arose from an initial feeling thatthings were uneasy was one of mysteriousness, especially in relation toKST (playing Margit Kadar, half-French, half-Roumanian). Theseductiveness that she had shown so tellingly well in her role inLeaving* (2009) was not to the fore as such, although she did greet Tomin a very intimate way when he came to her flat for the first time, butwas simmeringly, almost glitteringly, present.And it was fine that she could see an attractive quality in Tom,because his glasses (I am probably not one to speak) didn't suit him,and his face was much better without them when, in the same scene, sheremoved them (we possibly hadn't seen him properly like that before,because, talking to his daughter through some railings, we just catchhim when he swaps glasses with her).Tom had an inward quality to him that made it seem as if he had noteven noticed that another woman (French-speaking Ania from Poland,played by Joanna Kulig) was taking an interest in him, until shearrives at his door very obviously dressed up and (likewise) takes himup to the roof. One almost thought, in the same way, that his curiositywould not get the better of him when on duty in his mysteriousnight-job (although his employer must surely have thought that, sooneror later, he would have that impulse), and that he would never go tothe 5th arrondissement (the Fifth of the title, or, in the French, LaFemme du VÃ¨me).I wanted to see this film again, but I may not have the chance - not atmy usual cinema, as it turned out that I had made it to the lastscreening - and I have ordered the book by Douglas Kennedy on whichPawel Pawlikowski based the screenplay that he has directed.All in all, this was a film that credited me as a film-goer to followconnections, to be confused, to work it out, and to construct areality. I was deeply reminded of Kafka, largely the sort of internallogic of The Castle and (to a lesser extent) The Trial, but that'salways fine with me.Tom, I think, is also creating a reality, and his drifting (e.g. hisapparent lack, after the initial concern, of action when he finds thathis luggage has been taken from him when he is woken at the busterminus at Quai de l'Ourcq, and then his inertia when, despite havingno real money, he is given a room (no. 7) at Le Bon Coin) is part ofthat. If I get the chance, I will watch it all over again...
Silver Arrow (05 May 2013)
I cannot tell that I fully understood this film but this captivatingand full of mystery atmosphere was enough for me to decide that it is agood movie. Pawel Pawlikowski examines many aspects of the humanpsyche: hidden desires, guilt stemming from past experiences, theeffort to find inner peace and many more. The fact that he tries to doso in an allegorical way makes the movie complicated and the audienceconfused. Very often in the film you can't tell what is real and whatis not and you can never be sure about the past of the two maincharacters. Ethan Hawke may be the one who struggles to survive in anunwelcome Paris and reconnect with his estranged daughter, but the keyrole is the one played by Kristin Scott Thomas. She is the ultimatefemme fatale who seduces Hawke and make him doubt about his past,present, about her, about everything.At the end of the movie it seems that she offers him a "magic" solutionto his problem, an emotional redemption at a very dangerous andambiguous cost. The cast is very good and especially Kristin ScottThomas with her aristocratic and hypnotizing presence throughout thefilm.
kanook-1 (04 May 2013)
OK I watched his then I got on here to see if the rest of the worldagreed that this was a steaming pile of Poo ! But apparently I must ofmissed something ? I sat here and thought over the movie and came tothe conclusion that my first response was right, this was a steamingpile of poo ! It started off OK, Guy on the skids, broken marriage,child with the ex, down on his luck, then it went into the greatmystery boredom spin. when it finished I thought WTF? Please trust me,some here saying its some kind of tantric genius movie , don't fall forit ! It has parts that you think are important but go nowhere, it hasparts that make no sense and are unexplained.This reminded me of some poncy Uni student assignment where they weregiven a camera and 60 minutes to write a script.This was a waste of time!
contato-370-986313 (21 April 2013)
Good movie first because of all the story that makes us watch it alltill the and and second because the widow! I loved her actuation! Ifyou compare it with the one in http://www.sitepor500.com.br you willsee it is great!Thou movie first because of all the story that makes us watch it alltill the and and second because the widow! I loved her actuation! Ifyou compare it with the one in http://www.sitepor500.com.br you willsee movie first because of all the story that makes us watch it alltill the and and second because the widow! I loved her actuation! Ifyou compare it with the one in http://www.sitepor500.com.br you willsee it at once Good movie first because of all the story that makes uswatch it all till the and and second because the widow! I loved heractuation! If you compare it with the one inhttp://www.sitepor500.com.br you will see it is great!
secondtake (21 April 2013)
The Woman in the Fifth (2011)Well, the reason this movie gets some pretty awful reviews is the utterconfusion of the plot. And yet it's a deliberate confusion--which is noexcuse. It just means this isn't quite bad filmmaking, but a baddecision or two taken too far.You see, the main character, played with ease and almost familiarity byEthan Hawke, is mentally unstable. He seems to have two distinctrealities, and these are easily confused by the viewer. And in one ofthese realities he does terrible things, though it isn't clear becausewe see those terrible things as innocently as he does (which is to say,not at all, it seems). The character, Tom Ricks, is an American in Paris, a writer ostensiblyin town to find and visit his daughter. But the mother's reaction tohis showing up at their house is the first clue that something iswrong. This seemingly smart and very nice fellow scares her to call tothe police. We see Ricks run to save himself from arrest but we don'tquite know if he's to blame or if the mother is just overreacting.The fact is the confusions in the movie are overwhelming. Maybe therewas a better logic somewhere that an editor, under pressure from aproducer or distributor, made much out of. Or maybe it was an artfuldecision to leave us bewildered, to spend time and emotional energygathering the pieces and clues. The director, Pawel Pawlikowski, hassomething of a success or two behind him and so might have pretensionsthat got the better of things here. In a way, the movie is better than it's overall impression by the end.There are numerous scenes that show a modern Paris very farremoved--and much more revealing--than the glorified city seen in bothmainstream French movies and American love letters like Woody Allen'srecent time-travel. And the acting is overall restrained andconvincing. In its bones, this is a substantial movie. Most of all, thecinematography is superb, some of the best creative stuff I've seenrecently, dependent not on creative editing but on smart visualseeing--framing, kinetics, focus, and so on. I think you could watch iton many levels with great pleasure if you knew ahead of time theoverall meaning and plot were going to be a mess.Without forewarning, I'm guessing it leaves mostly frustration andbitterness.
writers_reign (16 April 2013)
This is the kind of movie that the Producers clearly hope you willreturn to a second or even a third time in order to try to figure outwhat the hell is going on. There are those who will be reminded ofBuffet Froid and/or Comedy Of Innocence though compared to this entryboth of those were clarity itself. As always Kristin Scott-Thomas is amajor selling point and though it has to be said that she doesn'tdisappoint neither does she do much to clarify matters, least of all,does she actually exist or is she a figment of the protagonist's - whois, after all, a writer - imagination. Paris is rendered as downbeat aspossible in grays and blues and the nightmare, Kafkaesque settingserves the film well. Not for everyone.
rps-2 (15 April 2013)
Gotta problem here! Have no idea whatsoever what this movie was allabout. Yet I enjoyed it. The photography, the grim background music,the seamy surroundings in the gritty underbelly of Paris, the manyangry, brooding characters, combine to create a foreboding and ominousmood. Technically the film is a masterpiece. But what the hell is itall about??? A rather screwed up American writer goes to Paris and getseven more screwed up. What was going on in the mysterious undergroundbunker? Who committed the murder and what was the motive? Was their anyexplanation of the 1992 suicide? What was the stuff in the forest allabout? Who was the woman? What actually happened to the little girl?Where did our mixed up writer go at the end? You know from the earlyscenes that nobody will be living happily ever after. Indeed there issome reason to believe a couple of them won't even live at all!(Deliberately vague here to keep the spoilers as fuzzy as possible.)And why are there so many trains, train tracks and train sounds? If youlike to analyze camera angles and have an interest in film production,you'll enjoy it the way I did. If you like artsey dartsey symbolism andlong discussions about what it all means, this is your film. If youwant to be entertained, avoid it. If you don't want to get depressedand suicidal, avoid it like the plague. Really odd but very well donefilm!
Rogermex (14 April 2013)
OK, forgive me, I don't mean to be a snot. But please, gimme a break.At one point Margit's character explicitly mentions his "Polish Muse."Long before that, it occurred to me that this is about exactly that -the ancient and mythic, and therefore essentially human phenomenon ofthe artist (in this case a writer) and the influence of The Muse.The movie is a meditation and dramatization of what it may take for aserious artist/writer to move beyond drudgery and into the world ofartistic "reality." It may mean loss and isolation. It may meanrejection by societal norms. It usually DOES mean transgression. It maymean even insanity, intoxication, and exile from the comforts of homeand family.I'm not saying all those are GOOD things, or preferable. I'm justsaying that for many a great artist those are the prices paid in orderto dwell in a world where things can be said which enlighten the restof us.Evil may be involved. One's sense of identity. Procreation may be lessa matter of one's familial offspring than one's creative progeny.The main character's entrapment (symbolically imaged as like an insecttrapped in a web - Kafka knew this) may be like the artist's entrapmentin the world of commercial publishers, agents, gallery owners, etc.Ultimately, the hero makes a choice - the same choice seduced andcommanded by the "Woman in the Fifth" who is not actually of "thisworld." He must be hers - she will inspire him, and he will beenthralled to her.Any artists care to reply?
johnklem (14 April 2013)
A phenomenally ambitious, mostly successful film that (almost) atonesfor the cardinal sin that was Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris. It saysso much about cinema audiences that Midnight in Paris was so popular.Here's a film that is startlingly beautiful, utterly intriguing andperfectly cast, and with a drop dead gorgeous soundtrack. The result? Alot of very angry people because... it didn't make sense. No-onementions that the "Midnight" script had holes you could drive a truckthrough, because they had a good time. Wake up, people! You're gettingthe cinema you deserve and it ain't pretty. Or maybe it is. How aboutMark Wahlberg and a teddy bear? There you go. That works. Don't blameHollywood (where I live and work). You're voting with your wallets.Films like The Woman in the Fifth that need intellectual and emotionalinput from its audience are being stoned to death. The world's becominga Disney theme park and you're all accessories after the fact. If youthink that the word "consumer" is an insult, there's still hope. Take amoment. Watch this film. It isn't perfect. The balance between physicaland metaphysical is off and therein lies the confusion. Kieslowski(another obvious comparison) would have handled it better but he wasn'thampered by a literary source when he made La Double Vie. But... it'sfKKKing gorgeous. Difficult, challenging, flawed? Yes, but I'll take itover the processed pap that is the American mainstream anytime.
gradyharp (12 April 2013)
Douglas Kennedy's perplexing novel THE WOMAN IN THE FIFTH has beenfurther contorted by writer/director Pawel Pawlikowski for the film ofthe same name (aka La femme du VÃ¨me). If the viewer has read the novelthen the confusion of the story will not be as surprising as it is tothe novice viewer. In many ways this is a brilliant cinematicexploration of the fragility of the human mind, how events of the pastcan influence the manner in which we attempt to reconstruct a viablepresent. But in other ways this is a film that refuses to tell a storythat is logical and will leave many viewers with some serious headscratching by movie's end.Academic professor of literature and writer Tom Hicks (Ethan Hawke)seems to be fleeing America in the wake of a scandal simply because hewants to see his six-year-old daughter ChloÃ© (Julie Papillon): Tom'sestranged wife Nathalie (Delphine Chuillot) refuses to let Tom see hisdaughter, has a restraining order in place and seems fearful of Tom'scharacter (it is suggested that Tom may have been in prison for thepast six years). The police are called and Tom escapes onto a bus,falls asleep and s awakened at the end of the line having been robbedof this luggage and money. He is in the sleazy part of Paris inhabitedby North Africans and Moroccans and finds a degree of solace in a tinycafÃ©, the beautiful Polish waitress Ania (Joanna Kulig) offers himcoffee and introduces him to the owner, Sezer (Samir Guesmi) who allowshim to room in the filthy place, an offer that is accompanied by a'job' where he will be a night watchman in a warehouse visited byshadowy figures who must give a code for Tom to allow entry. Tom useshis night jobsite to write lengthy letters to ChloÃ© and spends his daysspying on her at her school. At a bookstore he meets a fellow Americanwho invites him to an evening reception for writers and there heencounters the very strange Margit (Kristin Scott Thomas), a bewitchingbut enigmatic widow of a Hungarian writer who is obviously attracted toTom and sets meeting times and places for them to engage in a tryst (inthe Fifth Arrondissement). Tom and Margit begin a tempestuous physicalaffair but at the same time Tom and Ania have an equally passionateaffair and there is always in the background Tom's obsession to reunitewith his daughter. But the story implodes with a murder, adisappearance, and a very strange change in the veracity of Margit'sexistence. It is at this point that the film becomes purposefullyderanged and bizarre and the audience is left with merely some ideasand clues as to what has really happened. How are these incongruousevents to make sense? Can they make sense? Is Tom succumbing to thesame fever that kept him sheltered for many days upon his arrival inbeautiful Paris? Has time somehow passed him by or is he living in aneven grander deceit than he first thought?The film is basically in French with English subtitles. Ethan Hawkestruggle with the French but that is credible for a 'just arrived'American. Kristin Scott Thomas offers her usual excellent skills as thestrange Margit and the remainder of the cast do well with what littledialogue they are given. The dank atmospheric cinematography is byRyszard Lenczewski and the correctly strange musical score (from anaria form a Handel opera sung by a countertenor to piano music excerptsform the Romantic era) is the work of Max de Wardener. PawelPawlikowski's moody, menacing, downbeat film takes something from thedirector's Polish compatriots Polanski and Kieslowski. It is offbeatbut for those who appreciate experimental cinema this is well worthyour time. Grady Harp
samkan (12 April 2013)
One of the first things one must examine of him/herself Immediatelyafter a film ends; e.g., as the credits roll, is, "Am I moved and, ifthe answer is yes, how so?". Don't ask yourself, "Should I decide tolike or dislike this film?". Don't just decide whether you had fun ornot. Rather, take a "gut check" to examine whether or not you perceivean experience that is going to stay with you awhile, maybe bug and/orannoy you, but definitely haunt you for a period.I'm guessing not too many films may do such to the average person.TWITF surely did such for me. I've as many questions and, yes,frustrations, that many of the other COMMENTERS herein have, even thepeople who gave TWITF one star. But I've still got that gut reactionthat this movie will linger we me a long time and linger in my top 50film list. Maybe it's the acting alone, though probably it all thestuff that make movies good; i.e., photography, directing, dialog, etc.Dunno. Don't care.Maybe the plot and intentions are truly nonsense. Doesn't matter. I'mamazed and intrigued. It's hard to get me amazed and intrigued. And ILIKE being amazed and intrigued. Films like AVATAR can razzle dazzle mewith eye candy and, yes, I'll keep coming back for more such sweets.But I like better the part of my brain that buzzes after seeing filmslike TWITF.
tigerfish50 (11 April 2013)
An American novelist arrives in Paris to reunite with his French wifeand young daughter after being released from an institution, but hisentreaties are bluntly rejected. Shortly after this setback, his moneyand belongings are stolen, and he's forced to take refuge in acell-like garret at a decrepit hotel owned by a sinister Lebanese, whoconfiscates his passport. He quarrels with a threatening foul-mouthedAfrican in the next room over toilet hygiene, and survives by taking anight watchman job in a claustrophobic Kafka-esque undergroundlabyrinth. Invited to a literary party, he meets the mysterious widowof an obscure Hungarian author and begins an affair with her, whilesimultaneously becoming intimate with the barmaid girlfriend of thehotel proprietor. Torn between his two paramours, the man's lifespirals downward into dangerous fragmentation, while he yearns for hisdaughter and obsessively stalks her school playground.The film's relentlessly downbeat tone is its major flaw, resulting in ashallow one-note attempt to make a 'deep' psychological movie. EthanHawke imprints an agonized look on the novelist's face for theduration, as countless camera shots through railings, windows andscreens provide sledgehammer clues the Parisian trip is nothing morethan the fantasy of an inmate confined in some stateside institution.The man's increasingly surreal misadventures represent his delusionsintermingled with memories. The two mistresses are clearly archetypesof good and evil: one, a nurturing young blonde Polish country girl -the other, dark, older, cosmopolitan, cynical and vampiric. Some of thecharacters' true identities seem fairly obvious: the hotel owner is theasylum governor - the African is a fellow patient - the barmaid mostlikely a nurse who brings the inmate his medications - the dark widowprobably a personification of the man's mother . . . or murdered wife.Who knows - or cares? Those who admire the film can unravel the puzzle.
Claudio Carvalho (10 April 2013)
The American professor of literature and novelist Tom Hicks (EthanHawke) travels to Paris to see his beloved daughter ChloÃ© (JuliePapillon) that lives with her mother Nathalie (Delphine Chuillot).However, Nathalie uses the restraining order to call the police andavoid letting Tom to meet ChloÃ©. Tom flees from the police and takes a bus but he is tired and sleeps.When he awakes in a poor neighborhood, he finds that his luggage andmoney were robbed. He goes to a bar and the Polish waitress Ania(Joanna Kulig) brings a coffee for him. He asks for a room and explainsthat he had been robbed and she asks him to talk with the owner Sezer(Samir Guesmi) that allows him to stay in a very low budget room andpay him later. Then Sezer offers a job of night watchman in a suspectbuilding. One day, Tom goes to a bookstore and is invited to a party with writerswhere he meets Margit Kadar (Kristin Scott Thomas), who is a translatorand widow of a Hungarian writer. She gives her address and telephone toTom. Soon Tom has a love affair with Margit at her apartment and withAnia on the roof of the bar. But Tom is also obsessed by his daughter,snooping around ChloÃ© during the days. When his next door neighbor atthe hotel that is blackmailing Tom is found dead, his only alibi isMargit. But when the police officers go to her place, they discoverthat she had committed suicide many years ago."La femme du VÃ¨me" is one of those movies like "Triangle" where thereis no explanation for bizarre and surrealistic situations. I am notsure whether the director Pawel Pawlikowski had this intention or not,but forget any explanation about the plot and simply enjoy (or not) themovie. David Lynch is the master of this style while Claude Chabrol was theFrench master of thrillers with open endings to make the viewer thinkand discuss possibilities. But this is the practically unknown PawelPawlikowski and I was disappointed with the lack of conclusion of thegood plot. But as an unconditional fan of Kristin Scott Thomas andEthan Hawke, I do not regret this strange experience. My vote is five.Title (Brazil): "Estranha ObsessÃ£o" ("Weird Obsession")
laura_macleod (01 April 2013)
One strives to make sense out of a film that cost Â£7 to sit through andtwo hours of precious life including adverts. There is a whiff of greatpromise with the wonderful Ethan Hawke and Kristin Scott Thomas - isthis going to be a passionate film about a man having an affair with amysterious older woman in her 50's? Or perhaps a crime thriller aboutthe Arab crime gangs in Paris or some other story yet to unfold? Hawkeplays a writer who is estranged from his wife and daughter and followsthem to Paris, after some 'episode' which seems to indicate he has beenviolent to them - he seems to be wrongly accused from the feeling atthe beginning. Then it all goes into lala land from here. The writerHawke plays, falls asleep on a bus and awakes to find all hisbelongings stolen. Instead of being a normal person , he goes no wherenear a police station(is he on the run??) and ends up in an Arabquarter and takes a lousy room in exchange for his passport. Oh, andthen he gets a strange job that allows him to be a security doorman forsome kind of illegal activity. It is all getting VERY unbelievable bythis stage and then he meet the mysterious older woman at a writer'sparty he just happens to get invited to. I'm not filling in on thedetails from then on - but it just becomes highly ridiculous, frommurder accusations and god knows what. The only illuminating thing atthe end of the film is that The Writer disappears from his bed in themiddle of the night and this seems to coincide with his young daughterbeing left alone in a wood and then found by the police. I am left tosurmise that The Writer is in fact in a mental asylum and all thathappens are drifts of thoughts that he has while incarcerated.If i tryto make sense of this film that was very silly, i may myself end up ina loony bin.
Framescourer (31 March 2013)
It's rather difficult to say what The Woman In The Fifth is about. It'scertainly not about the woman in the Fifth (arronidssement?), thoughshe be played by the iconic Kristin Scott-Thomas.It's more to do with the writer who loves or imagines her, played byEthan Hawke (lots of critical reaction to his non-existent Frenchaccent - well, he's an American, so he's more likely not to have one.He also speaks rather good French, which isn't mutually inclusive).There are flashes of memory or impressions - flashes across, if youlike - that suggest a sort of Don't Look Now tragedy either in thepast, present or fictional limbo. There are glasses and the resistanceto the operation that would discard them; a dodgy night job that usesCCTV and the threats that stop him from seeing what the camera sees.And there are colours, the teal blue of his modern garret and theorange of his lovers' lamps. The red spectrum of his daughter'sclothing and of his lovers (principally Scott-Thomas, but watch thedress change of the second woman). I also love the blissful, sunlightgolden section of the film where the grey and rusty train tracks moveacross into the forest green.The success of the film is in the magnetism between characters andtheir emotively elastic relationships. This is a European art housefilm of mainstream style, digressing from its genre thriller to createvortexes of emotional realism. It's a fine, engrossing film 7/10
Houda Ameur (24 March 2013)
I really was expecting more after reading the book, I certainly wasn'texpecting a movie about Dooglas Kennedy's book so when I heard thatthere will be an actual movie about this wonderful book that I lovedvery much, I got excited and was expecting something wonderful! Kind oflike a Joe Wright movie or something like The Bridges Of Madison County(magical and artistic), so you will understand that I was verydisappointed with the movie. I think, with such a beautiful story, thedirector and all the movie cast could have made something unforgettableespecially since it is based on a book that has many fans that like mehave been looking forward to seeing the movie and had higherexpectations.
napierslogs (24 March 2013)
"The Woman in the Fifth" throws us into the middle of the story.Seemingly a perfect way to start, a back-story is implied begging to betold, and future events destined to unfold to eventually come togetherin an interesting climax and dÃ©nouement. But the back-story never wasrevealed and the plot elements are indiscernible to the average eye.Tom (Ethan Hawke) is an American writer moving to Paris. His firstnovel was a moderate success and he is most likely suffering fromvarious creative blocks, probably not helped by the fact that hisex-wife has a restraining order against him, prohibiting him fromseeing his daughter. At this point, we are driven into a world of crime Â not surprising fora thriller, but we don't know what crimes yet. Broke and alone, Tommakes a deal with a shady "businessman", develops an affair with amysterious worldly woman (Kristin Scott Thomas) and then develops anaffair with a sweetly mysterious waitress (Joanna Kulig).For the few crimes that we do know were committed, it's awfully hard tounderstand why or by whom. The reality of the film and the imagination(or fantasy) element of the film are most likely impossible toseparate. Almost all viewers have come up with different explanations,if they came up with any.It can be interesting watching a jarring film and deduce whateverexplanation you like. It can also be disappointing if you don't come upwith any explanation that you like. I'm afraid I fall into the lattergroup.That being said, it's nice seeing Ethan Hawke in a lead role in anindie. And speaking French no less (not perfectly, but it fits therole)! The imagery and cinematography chosen for this film wereinteresting and walked the thin line between thriller and horror,helped along with a slightly off-beat score. "The Woman in the Fifth"is off- beat, if it's anything at all.
Review total: 20, showing from 1 to 20