Swingers

Despite the title and context, there's not really a lot of sex in this (and certainly no hardcore).

It is, however, quite an interesting drama capturing the interplay of the four characters in all the various combinations, with periodic naked episodes.

As such, it examines the state of contemporary marriage from a variety of perspectives and could thus be a "conversation starter" if seen as a couple or in a group.

Personally, I found three of the actors to be pretty convincing with the fourth being a bit static - so for a single-location, small cast film (presumably thus low-budget) it's not bad.

Worth a look.

Swing low - no pun intended. And I have to admit, I never ... how do I put it? Explored the world of swinging. I'm not sure how comfortable I would feel. But don't knock something you haven't tried. One thing is for sure, everyone has to be honest and open about it.

Of course when an experienced swinger pair meets a "virgin" swinger pair ... well you know that there are things to explore there (no pun intended). And the movie may have nudity and some titilating scenes, but it is about emotions and about relationships. About the depths of human nature. About what limits you set for yourself ... really well played and well written. Visually (video wise) this has not aged well - at least the version I saw didn't look too good. That aside and if you don't mind the movie does work ... because the central theme does not age.

After having had it's release in Belgium, the press is mostly very positive about this film. Regardless of what other comments say, they are unanimous about the acting... it's good! The characters are believable, the dialog is witty and to the point. All this from actors who are either unknown, or known from the more 'light' televisionseries. Notable magazines like HUMO or newspapers like DE STANDAARD recognize the shortcommings on the technical features (it has been shot on video) but they give the story, actors and makers all the credit for delivering a suprisingly good Dutch film. Swingers is a "contemporary, wellmade and subtle piece of cinema" and they are "pleasantly surprised"

Judge for yourself.

I saw the movie twice: once in the cinema and once on DVD. I must say, it's looks better on DVD, because the director uses close ups a lot. In the cinema the movie also seems to drag a bit. At first I thought the movie was shot on 16 millimeter, but in scene one I saw the artifacts common with DV, so I knew what to expect. Contrary to another comment, which said the cinematography sucks, but can't tell why, just that it stinks. I think it was very brave to go the classic way and give room to the story, instead of using that old style of 'innovative cinematography' ofter associated with DV. The person who wrote the comment, fotorobbert I recall, has an approach that is quite wrong: the question is, does the choice the filmmakers made fit the way the story is told, it's not about how yóu think it should be done. His added remark that another Dutch movie called Costa looked better is utterly stupid considering that movie was shot on 35 mm and had at least 100 times more budget. The question is more: why have the producers chosen to shoot on DV when they knew they were going to release the film in the cinema? Well, maybe they didn't at the time. Still, on DVD it really found it's place.

Swingers' problem is more the way the story is told. What is the main question? What is the main conflict? What genre is it? It's start out one way and ends another. Sometimes that works, this time it just feels strange. The cast is stellar at times, but is uncomfortable at others. There seems little room for improvisation or even to let a flow go. This gives the movie a cramped feeling sometimes. And I must say: the story itself doesn't help either. I personally think it's too simple given the characters the actors put out. It at times feels like a paint by numbers exercise. Next time, the writer director should get out there and try to be on his edge of creativity. He has the ability, but he's seems very restricted. Let's see where this man will take us next.

I don't understand the people here. The film is neither as good as as bad as some people say here. Except for De Kok the acting is OK. The problem with the film is mainly the script. The characters are not believable. The sex is done okay, but the psychology behind the people makes very little sense. The film doesn't look good, but what do you expect? The film was shot for very little money on video. Off course then it doesn't look as good as a normal film, duh! The one thing I do agree on is that the music is bad. Sounds like a cheap soft erotic film from the '80's. The film is not good, okay, but you have to give some credit for pulling this of without any money.