Rating: 
Summary: Great Expectations, but disappointed none-the-less
Review: This film stayed with me for at least a day after viewing it. I thought and thought about what the ending might 'mean'--my thoughts led me to this conclusion: This movie is just rambling and boring by the end. Like other reviewers, I kept waiting for the suspense to happen. Nothing. By the end I was just glad to tune out. Perhaps this film is apt to please those with wild imaginations (one person assumed Julie was a product of an incestuous affair...blah, blah). I am glad I rented it, in that I know that it was over-hyped. I also think it was well-cast. I like Charlotte Rampling-- and Ludivine Sangnier is stunning. I suppose it's worth a watch if you enjoy copious nudity--though I didn't find it particularly offensive, just ample.
Rating: 
Summary: not worth buying
Review: I knew I would be disappointed when I bought this DVD, because I was in Europe at the time it was running in theatres there, and I knew it was a crowd pleaser, but I didnt think it was so bad. I was just curious because sometimes, what pleases to the crowd turns out to be a good movie (like Amelie, that one was really good). But indeed, Swimming Pool is a bad movie, the play of the actors is bad, there is absolutely no originality in the treatment of the topic ( lesbian attraction between a real lady and ghostly one, oh yeah Francois Ozon thought probably he was gonna have the same succes in cannes as Lynch's Mulholland DR. did in 2001...), and from a cinematographic point of view it is flat out ordinary. So if you're curious, rent it out in some vidoe store before you decide to buy it.
Rating:
Summary: Don't Believe the Hype
Review: If I saw Swimming Pool fresh, I'd give it three stars. But expectations were high from reviews, and the film was a let down. I heard the film's end "pulls the rug out from under you," so I was waiting, and waiting... (and hitting the time button on the remote)... and finally "rewarded" with an anticlimactic ending. The building, scary soundtrack signified that something shocking/climactic was going to happen... I'm still waiting. The director tricked us and sent the film in an unexpected direction, and/or the ending was an easy way/cop out. It felt like the latter, but I don't know the filmakers' intentions. Director's commentary would have been nice, so we could hear some insight. (I don't think this is some masterpiece that would be devalued by explanation). As Swimming Pool ends, re-thinking the whole story in a new, post-"twist" context just doesn't seem worth it. And the story leaves a lot of loose ends (not even red herrings, really): What's up with the scar, mother, and the midget? Food for thought? I wanna know! :-). The film has good acting and a fresh, minimalist look and feel (except the hype soundtrack -- that tops the action). Just don't get your hopes up. First check out "Mulholland Drive," a superior take on a similar theme.
Rating: 
Summary: François Ozon's subtle and strangely surprising mystery
Review: I would say that "Swimming Pool" is more sensual than it is erotic, although ultimately the nudity in this film is secondary to the story. Sarah Morton (Charlotte Rampling) is a British writer of crime fiction who apparently find no joy in her writing, her popularity, her publisher, or any the idea that any other writer might be writing something worth reading as well. Everyone is waiting for the next installment about her detective and she in uninspired. So her publisher (Charles Dance) offers her the use of his villa in France as a place where she can retreat and come up with a new book. Once there Sarah explores the house, taking notice of the leaf covered swimming pool in back, and visits the nearby village. She also begins to write, and although we have no idea what she is writing about, Sarah seems productive and happy.Then Julie (Ludivine Sagnier), the daughter of her publisher shows up. She is an unexpected guest, not only because Sarah assumed she would be alone, but because she did not know he had a daughter. If anything, Sarah has been waiting for him to show up so that she can get in a little relaxation with her rest. Instead Julie shows up and violates not only Sarah's privacy but here sense of propriety. Julie tends walk around topless by the pool and apparently shows no sense of discrimination in bringing home men to sleep with. We know Sarah disapproves of such practices, but this does not stop her from watching Julie, whether she is swimming in the villa's pool or making love to some strange man. It then becomes clear that not only is Julie becoming a part of Sarah's novel, but that something is going to happen; Philippe Rombi's score for this 2003 film foreshadows this even if the plot does not arouse our suspicions. "Swimming Pool" is usually described as being a thriller, but that strikes me as being off the mark. It is more of a mystery, but in a subtle way, which explains why it is difficult to talk about director François Ozon's film without giving away too much. This is the sort of film where you are going to have to go back and at least watch the end of the film again, if not the entire thing from start to finish, to make sure you understand what happened. You might actually have to do it more than one before you figure things out and are satisfied with your understanding of the film. What helped me out in untangling this film was that for most of it I kept asking what Sarah was writing. There was clearly a connection between what was happening and what Sarah was writing, but I kept waiting for Ozon to show us what that was, which, in the end, only goes to show how much I was fooled by this film. In this regard the film ends up being surprising rather than shocking, in keeping with the subtlety and sensuality of the film. Be aware that there are two different version of "Swimming Pool" available on DVD: R-rated and Unrated. The difference between the two is that there is full frontal nudity in the unrated version and there are two key things to know about this. First, this is by no means gratuitous nudity. I would go so far as to say the nudity was actually character driven in this film. Second, I heard about all the compliments Diane Keaton was paid for being so daring in "Something's Gotta Give," and I have to assume that many of those people simply did not see "Swimming Pool" even though in terms of length and context the two scenes could hardly be more different.
Rating: 
Summary: Great One
Review: This movie is decent. And the movie ain't as bad as people say.
Rating:
Summary: great movie
Review: This movie is not as bad as people say. And this movie to be hot.
Rating:
Summary: Not so good
Review: I rented this movie because of the reviews on this site. Unfortunately I was misled. For people who enjoy plot twists at the very end of the film go ahead rent this. If you like looking at a young beautiful woman go topless for much of the film, go ahead and rent this. But if you want something interesting and compelling to watch rent a different film. The acting is so, so. The plot is actually predictable, even given the twisted ending. And the stucture of the film needs a lot of work. Whoever thought that spending twenty minutes watching somebody get unpacked in a new house and settling into a routine was interesting film needs to go back to film school and start over.
This film functions best as sort of a softcore pornography but it aspires to be hitchockian. It misses the mark.
Rating:
Summary: Whoever thought this was a good idea?
Review: And then suddenly I woke up! Remember that whole season of Dallas where Bobby Ewing died, and how they eventually brought him back? This film isn't exactly as annoying as that but it isn't much better either. You'll wonder why you bothered for the last hour. Very forgettable
Rating:
Summary: Engrossing but unsatisfying...
Review: This film could be described as the cinematic equivalent of blue-balling: it's pretty enjoyable from beginning to just before the end, at which point it suddenly peters off into a rather cheesy and well-worn plot device in place of a real climax and resolution. It'd be worth repeated viewings, mainly for all the delicious nudity, mainly of the very yummy Ludvine Savignier but also the aging-yet-still-strangely-sexy Charlotte Rampling. The script, acting, and camera work are solid. I agree with the reviewer who said this film proves you don't need gazillion-dollar actors and budgets to make a decent film. Not a bad way to spend 2 hours...
Rating:
Summary: horrible
Review: this movie is incredibly disturbing, and i should know because i am the teacher of art and acting education at a very famous college. look all i am saying is that i don't know who in their right mind would want to even think about watching this stupid movie, like they would have to be like foxy or something!!!
|
