Overrated and overhyped

Just what I expected

Captivating movie !

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

The insecure Diana (Ellen van der Koogh) and her husband Julian (Danny de Kok) schedule to spend the weekend with an unknown couple experienced in swing in the house of Diana's parents that are traveling. They welcome the gorgeous Alexandra (Nienke Brinkhuis) and her husband Timo (Joep Sertons); however the sexy and attractive Alex inhibits the repressed Diana even more and excites Julian. Along the night, Timo discloses his real feelings about Alex and on the next morning, the relationship of the couple is tested. The low-budget "Swingers" is a surprisingly good movie. I was expecting to see an erotic and shallow drama but the story indeed has substance and brings a good discussion about the theme with believable characters. The stylish movie presents a non-aggressive eroticism and witty dialogs. This is the first film that I watch with Nienke Brinkhuis and her beauty and sensuality are impressive. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): "Swingers"

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.

This must be the best movie that was ever released in the Dutch language. The sound supports the images perfectly and the way how the nudity is filmed is very stylish, never seen someone do it like this. The way the characters are presented is unique, you discover slowly how they feel about certain things. The only thing that "disturbed" me (but very little and shortly) is that in some (short) scene's the light wasn't really perfect but hey... the budget was rather low so... I don't understand why some people commented this movie the way they did. Probably they are a bit to narrow-minded to handle the subject. Or they just can't stand: non-Hollywood movies, non "artistic" movies. This movie really is a masterpiece and is "a must see" movie!

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.