Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Swimming Pool (Ozon)

Old 01-24-04, 11:59 AM
  #26  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Formerly known as "brizz"/kck
Posts: 23,425
cheap is exactly what the ending felt like...and the more I thought about it after, the less I liked it. The movie looks great, and I don't mean the nudity, but the ending absolutely ruined it for me....so it goes....
HistoryProf is offline  
Old 01-24-04, 12:57 PM
  #27  
MrX
DVD Talk Legend
 
MrX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,776
Originally posted by Jepthah
Things were going fairly well until the 'event' happened, then it just got more and more implausible, and the ending felt really cheap instead of profound or thought-provoking.
My thoughts exactly
MrX is offline  
Old 01-24-04, 04:04 PM
  #28  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,067
i watched it last night and i thought it was just ok. i would give it a 6/10. the ending can be looked at in two ways i guess. i liked the ending but it wasnt that big of a twist and didnt really do much in terms of "shock and awe" for me.

by the way, Ludivine Sagnier is a super hottie!
Caliking is offline  
Old 01-27-04, 01:04 AM
  #29  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Lighten up, Francis! (Funland)
Posts: 26,856
Originally posted by Frank TJ Mackey


I love the poster as well.

TopHatCat64 wrote:


And sadly the dvd cover will not look anything like that I bet, more big heads...


Hmmm...




Why did the suit change color? Was she wearing a suit in the first place?
Buford T Pusser is offline  
Old 01-31-04, 05:54 AM
  #30  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
onebyone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,049
Originally posted by brizz
cheap is exactly what the ending felt like...and the more I thought about it after, the less I liked it. The movie looks great, and I don't mean the nudity, but the ending absolutely ruined it for me....so it goes....
That is exactly how I felt too. I didn't like the ending but thought that maybe if I slept on it I would like it better, but it didn't work out. At all. The more I thought about it, the madder I got. I mean, really. I am a fan of some of François Ozon's other movies, but certainly not this one. I enjoyed it up to the "big" finale, but that finale killed the love cold.

Last edited by onebyone; 01-31-04 at 05:58 AM.
onebyone is offline  
Old 01-31-04, 04:37 PM
  #31  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 7,466
Originally posted by Buford T Pusser
Why did the suit change color? Was she wearing a suit in the first place?
Different versions . . .

Regular Version



Unrated Version
talemyn is offline  
Old 01-31-04, 04:53 PM
  #32  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 7,466
Originally posted by MrN
Spoiler:
Julie is a figment of Sarah's imagination. That's all thats important.
Whoa, whoa, whoa . . . I didn't see it that way at all. I saw it as . . .
Spoiler:
. . . the Julie in France was a girl who was just planning on crashing in the house and, when "discovered", began making up stories based on he things that Sarah mentioned about John and his family in order to cover her butt. Sarah thought that Julie actually was his daugher and Julie played along, building on the story up until she left.

I haven't had a chance to watch it again, yet, but, so far, all of the possible catch points to that theory seem to hold up.


Dang it . . . now I need to watch it again to see if my theory doesn't work out.






On a side note, does anyone know what the differences are between he R-rated and Unrated versions are?
talemyn is offline  
Old 02-01-04, 04:19 PM
  #33  
Moderator
 
Geofferson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: The Village Green
Posts: 39,166
I just got finished watching this movie. All in all, I was satisfied with the movie as a whole - though the ending threw me for a bit of a loop. Still not quite sure what to decipher.
Geofferson is offline  
Old 02-01-04, 11:25 PM
  #34  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Boulder, CO / Lemont, IL
Posts: 161
Originally posted by talemyn

Spoiler:
. . . the Julie in France was a girl who was just planning on crashing in the house and, when "discovered", began making up stories based on he things that Sarah mentioned about John and his family in order to cover her butt. Sarah thought that Julie actually was his daugher and Julie played along, building on the story up until she left.

I haven't had a chance to watch it again, yet, but, so far, all of the possible catch points to that theory seem to hold up.


Spoiler:
so you think the murder was real?
CUBuffsMike41 is offline  
Old 02-02-04, 02:20 PM
  #35  
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Right Behind You
Posts: 4,986
Pics?
lesterlong is offline  
Old 02-02-04, 04:50 PM
  #36  
Moderator
 
Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 33,492
As I interpreted it
Spoiler:
the entire movie is made up and we the viewer are watching Sarah Morton's story come to life in her mind's eye, the ending with John Bosload's daughter waving at Sarah was the indication that the "story within the movie's story" was 'fictional'.


I am surprised that there is an unrated version of the film available, the movie was pretty explicit and bordering on a NC-17 anyway.
Giles is offline  
Old 02-02-04, 08:33 PM
  #37  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 7,466
Originally posted by CUBuffsMike41
Spoiler:
so you think the murder was real?
Yeah . . . I did. If, in fact, . . .
Spoiler:
. . . it was all in her mind . . .
. . . then you are right, it is lame.

Here are a few of the things that I noticed that made me think the way I was thinking:
Spoiler:
1) When Julie has the conversation on the phone with "her Dad", she hands the phone over to Sarah and nobody is on it. Sarah takes this as John having hung up, but it would make sense, and add credibility to Julie's story, if Julie had just pretended to be talking to John, making it sound like she was getting scolded for disrupting Sarah's work. There would be no real point to having that scene if Julie was made up.
2) At the end of the movie, Sarah accuses John of having kept secrets from her (implying Julie and her mother) and John looks at her with a confused look on his face. If she was making the whole story up, there would have been no real reason to have said that.
3) Sarah asks John to give rhe inscribed copy of the book to his daughter. Again, there would have been no reason to do that if she had made up the story and Julie wasn't real, as she would not have known anything about his real daughter.
There are a handful of other things that made me think they way I did on the ending, but these are the ones that came to mind.

I would be pretty disappointed if it were the way you were suggesting . . . that would be a pretty cop-out ending. However, I'd really be interested in hearing some of your reasons for thinking the way that you have. I never had considered that interpretation and can only, personally, think of a few things that might support it. As much as I like my take, I wouldn't want to miss out on what he really meant.
talemyn is offline  
Old 02-03-04, 08:19 AM
  #38  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Lakewood,OH,USA
Posts: 1,927
talemyn - those are interesting points I hadn't considered - you've got me looking at it in an entirely new light. I think it does make sense that way.
bdots48 is offline  
Old 02-03-04, 08:31 AM
  #39  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Boulder, CO / Lemont, IL
Posts: 161
Originally posted by talemyn
Yeah . . . I did. If, in fact, . . .
Spoiler:
. . . it was all in her mind . . .
. . . then you are right, it is lame.

Here are a few of the things that I noticed that made me think the way I was thinking:
Spoiler:
1) When Julie has the conversation on the phone with "her Dad", she hands the phone over to Sarah and nobody is on it. Sarah takes this as John having hung up, but it would make sense, and add credibility to Julie's story, if Julie had just pretended to be talking to John, making it sound like she was getting scolded for disrupting Sarah's work. There would be no real point to having that scene if Julie was made up.
2) At the end of the movie, Sarah accuses John of having kept secrets from her (implying Julie and her mother) and John looks at her with a confused look on his face. If she was making the whole story up, there would have been no real reason to have said that.
3) Sarah asks John to give rhe inscribed copy of the book to his daughter. Again, there would have been no reason to do that if she had made up the story and Julie wasn't real, as she would not have known anything about his real daughter.
There are a handful of other things that made me think they way I did on the ending, but these are the ones that came to mind.

I would be pretty disappointed if it were the way you were suggesting . . . that would be a pretty cop-out ending. However, I'd really be interested in hearing some of your reasons for thinking the way that you have. I never had considered that interpretation and can only, personally, think of a few things that might support it. As much as I like my take, I wouldn't want to miss out on what he really meant.
Well, here's what I thought...

Spoiler:
Sarah actually did make up the juicy details of the story, including the murder and all of the sex. Because at the end of the movie, when Sarah looks down by the pool, the hot Julie is replaced by the girl with braces, leading me to conclude that Julie was actually there, and the movie we watched was the made-up, exaggerated story that Sarah was writing.

But what doesn't fit with my theory is the end. Doesn't Sarah see a totally new girl in the office? Different from the less attractive girl she sees at the pool?

CUBuffsMike41 is offline  
Old 02-03-04, 08:59 AM
  #40  
Moderator
 
Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 33,492
Originally posted by talemyn
Yeah . . . I did. If, in fact, . . .
Spoiler:
. . . it was all in her mind . . .
. . . then you are right, it is lame.

Here are a few of the things that I noticed that made me think the way I was thinking:
Spoiler:
1) When Julie has the conversation on the phone with "her Dad", she hands the phone over to Sarah and nobody is on it. Sarah takes this as John having hung up, but it would make sense, and add credibility to Julie's story, if Julie had just pretended to be talking to John, making it sound like she was getting scolded for disrupting Sarah's work. There would be no real point to having that scene if Julie was made up.
2) At the end of the movie, Sarah accuses John of having kept secrets from her (implying Julie and her mother) and John looks at her with a confused look on his face. If she was making the whole story up, there would have been no real reason to have said that.
3) Sarah asks John to give rhe inscribed copy of the book to his daughter. Again, there would have been no reason to do that if she had made up the story and Julie wasn't real, as she would not have known anything about his real daughter.
There are a handful of other things that made me think they way I did on the ending, but these are the ones that came to mind.

I would be pretty disappointed if it were the way you were suggesting . . . that would be a pretty cop-out ending. However, I'd really be interested in hearing some of your reasons for thinking the way that you have. I never had considered that interpretation and can only, personally, think of a few things that might support it. As much as I like my take, I wouldn't want to miss out on what he really meant.
Spoiler:
I think you missed the point, particulariy the third aspect. If you look at from the fact that at the ending: John's real daughter is seen waving to Sarah, Sarah knew about her, and yes the book was for her as she served as the basis for the 'fictional' Julie.

Julie and the phone incident was seen as a diversion and plot device, for Julie to convince her that she was talking to her 'father' so as not to have John come to the house and interrupt Sarah from writing the book, but specifically to cloud Julie's promiscous activities from her father.

If you take the story further and incorporate the second aspect you address and extend it further into 'fantasy realm' then no, this scene wouldn't be seen as redundant. The novel in the film (and the film itself) is a mirror ('water') image of the same identical events about a writer and the events surrounding a mysterious female, a murder, and the outcome of novel's fictional writer trying to get her book published. This ending could be in fact the end of the novel, not as the film suggests us to be.

Essentially the novel is a semi-autobiographical embellished account of the writer and the events/characters she creates,
Ozon deliberately blurs the line between the real and the fictional. There isn't supposed to be a clear cut delination between the two. If you look at the film this way, the back 'untold' story could branch off into endless possiblities and outcomes.
Giles is offline  
Old 02-03-04, 03:34 PM
  #41  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 21,994
I saw this movie in the theater way back in September on my B-Day but never saw the discussion here. Ludivine was a great little present.

I thought the movie was great until I looked at moviepooper.com and read that the "intended" ending was
Spoiler:
everything was made up.
I too thought that kind of like a copout, but now I see it might not have really had to be that ending in particular. I like the interpretation
Spoiler:
that the daughter was there and everything was just an exaggeration of behalf of the writer.
Dr. DVD is offline  
Old 02-03-04, 05:35 PM
  #42  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Originally posted by Dr. DVD
I saw this movie in the theater way back in September on my B-Day but never saw the discussion here. Ludivine was a great little present.

I thought the movie was great until I looked at moviepooper.com and read that the "intended" ending was
Spoiler:
everything was made up.
I too thought that kind of like a copout, but now I see it might not have really had to be that ending in particular. I like the interpretation
Spoiler:
that the daughter was there and everything was just an exaggeration of behalf of the writer.
How is "the daughter was there but everything was an exaggeration" any different from "everything is made up"?

Exagerated/Made up

Tomato/Tamato
Pants is offline  
Old 02-03-04, 07:29 PM
  #43  
New Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne, AU
Posts: 19
Finally saw this film, and found it fabulous - better than 8 Femmes.

I did enjoy the ending, and certainly the nudity was thoroughly enjoyed
Tsargrad is offline  
Old 02-03-04, 11:23 PM
  #44  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 4,182
Spoiler:
I think one telling scene that supports the viewpoint that Sarah has "fictionalized" her holiday (note the folder on her laptop has the initial novel titled "Rumpole's (can't recall the actual detective name) Holiday) is when Julie and Sarah are having a conversation regarding Sarah's novels and Julie says something to the effect "He (Dad) wants sex, blood, and violence. And that's what you give him." And Sarah does that in the novel "Julie" by embellishing her experiences with the real Julie.


Here are some interesting links:

Ozon Interview



Here is an excerpt from another Ozon interview:

iW: The big tease in this film is how the imaginary and the real link up. Is there a discrete moment when the real veers into the imaginary?

Ozon: I don't want to give you the key. I myself have an opinion about it, obviously -- but I wanted to keep the film open-ended and let every viewer imagine what he wishes. It's a movie that gives viewers the freedom to make their own film. I wanted to show that when you create, the lived, the imagined, and the written get all mixed together. When I make a film, it's as if I'd lived it. You share many emotions with the actors and characters. As I said before, when there's a murder in the film, I myself commit it, too. "Swimming Pool" keeps everything on the same plane: fantasy, reality, creation.

iW: Question: when John phones Julie in the country, and Julie hands the phone to Sarah, he's not on the other end. So what piece of that was real?

Ozon: What did you think?

iW: I didn't know what to think.

Ozon: Me neither. I wanted you to wonder: was it really John? Is Julie for real? Is she lying? Is John avoiding Sarah out of guilt?

iW: So this film is a kind of puzzle.

Ozon: Exactly. And it's full of false starts. It's like that when you create a story. You begin in one direction, then take another. The viewer thinks there's going to be a lesbian liaison between Charlotte and Ludivine -- but it turns maternal and tender. I thought it would be too obvious to get them into a sexual relationship. I lay down all sorts of clues, then choose one or another direction.

iW: The final scene at John's office is a mind-twister. Did his daughter ever actually go to Provence?

Ozon: What did you imagine? Okay, I'll give you my version. [He does, but I won't spoil the film by revealing it here.]

iW: Why the title "Swimming Pool?"

Ozon: The pool is like a virgin screen before the filmmaker writes on it. And it's Ludivine's habitat, the place where Sarah creates her.

iW: Why do you turn out films so fast?

Ozon: That's my rhythm. I like to keep moving forward – I don't need five years, like Kubrick. For me, if a film isn't completely successful, if it's not a masterpiece, it doesn't matter. Maybe I'll get it just right the next time out, or before long. I don’t look back. When a film is finished, it's finished. It's just like in love -- I need to keep moving.


Here's one man's (rambling) review: Review
Big Quasimodo is offline  
Old 02-04-04, 06:20 PM
  #45  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Formerly known as Groucho AND Bandoman/Death Moans, Iowa
Posts: 16,932
Originally posted by Pants
How is "the daughter was there but everything was an exaggeration" any different from "everything is made up"?

Exagerated/Made up

Tomato/Tamato

You exagerate facts, you make up fiction/lies. Exagerations have a basis in truth, fiction/lies need no such anchor.
majorjoe23 is offline  
Old 02-05-04, 12:56 PM
  #46  
MrN
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: B.W.I.
Posts: 3,699
I would say if someone is lying, they are trying to convince someone and so they have to have some basis - they attach the lie to a basis in truth to make it work. I'm sure there's exceptions here, like a murderer saying 'I didn't do it' but he would have to extend the lie to make it convincing.

Anyway, I don't think I've heard anything to convince me that Julie didn't exist in anything but Sarah's imagination. As someone pointed out earlier, the publisher's daughter was the inspiration for the book - but it was the imaginary daughter.
MrN is offline  
Old 02-05-04, 02:33 PM
  #47  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Formerly known as Groucho AND Bandoman/Death Moans, Iowa
Posts: 16,932
But then why no recongnition at the end? They bumped into each other. You would think there would at least be a smile or a look or something.
majorjoe23 is offline  
Old 02-05-04, 02:48 PM
  #48  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Originally posted by majorjoe23
You exagerate facts, you make up fiction/lies. Exagerations have a basis in truth, fiction/lies need no such anchor.
Either way what we see on the screen isn't what really happened, a certain amount of it is screened through the conscience of the author. Whether you call that "made up" or "exagerated" doesn't matter. They both boil down to "What we are seeing isn't what happened."

P.S. can we stop with the spoiler tags now, I don't think anyone who hasn't seen the movie is going to read a 2 page thread where people are argueing about the ending.
Pants is offline  
Old 02-07-04, 04:59 AM
  #49  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: So Cal
Posts: 8,617
This movie is deep. Is is amazing how a seemingly mundane story can be transformed into something so elaborate in the last 15 minuits.

Maybe I am reading too much into it but I have a few theories. I will start with the things I most believe to be true:

-Sarah has strong feelings for John and effects much of her thoughts.

-Sarah once wrote a love story a long time ago and presented it to John. He told her it was not very good, and convinces her to write crime stories instead, that was his bread and butter. She saves this story and resurects it on this trip.

-Sarah spent her time alone in France, there was no Julie, noone shows up to stay with her.

-Julie represents Sarah's career. The many men in her life represents that many novels Sarah has produced. There is very little love left in the act for both of them. Only once was she in love, this represents the earier novel she had produced (very romantic as Julie had characterised it).

-Julie's mother represents an earlier version of Sarah. I suppect the young and aspiring writer, not the bitter woman we see in the film.

-Sarah has a multiple personality disorder. Julie is a personality she creates. The most telling clue to this is the men that Julie sleeps with. Sarah is a much better match for these men. Flash back to the very first scene of the movie she says, "You must have mistaken me for someone else." Does she really believe this? Also notice how Sarah is somehow aware that harm has come to the waiter guy (sorry, forget his name). There is no justification for this, I think she knows because she did it acting as Julie.

-Acting as Julie, she does indeed kill the guy, because she goes into a jealous rage that he is more attracted to Sarah than herself.

- In the last scene where we see her sleeping with the old guy, we either finally get a glimpse of her playing Julie (in her bed) or we see her realization that Julie and her are the same person.

-Had Sarah been at the house before? Dose she remember it as Julia's familiarity with the place? I am not sure how this would work myself, but there seems to be alot of emphasis on Julia's mother. I wonder what that means, and how it fits the puzzle.


Other possible scenarios:

1) It was all real. John has two daughters that are very similar. Sarah acts way out af character and conceals a murder for someone she just met. Flashback scene does not make much sense.

2) It was all a dream. It was all in her head, she imagined the whole thing. She started imagining what Johns daughter might be like, and created this whole tale. This way nothing needs to make sense. Major plot letdown.

3) Daughter does show up at the house but we see the fictional character that Sarah is crafting, rather than the real Julia. The scene where Julia passes Sarah without recognizing her does not make sense.
Aphex Twin is offline  
Old 02-14-04, 09:06 PM
  #50  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Heat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 16,701
Personally, I'm leaning towards the "it was real and the Julie that she met was some stranger that walked in off of the street", though this scenario from the post above does sound very real to me, this would explain where the "mother's manuscript" came from.

-Sarah has a multiple personality disorder. Julie is a personality she creates. The most telling clue to this is the men that Julie sleeps with. Sarah is a much better match for these men. Flash back to the very first scene of the movie she says, "You must have mistaken me for someone else." Does she really believe this? Also notice how Sarah is somehow aware that harm has come to the waiter guy (sorry, forget his name). There is no justification for this, I think she knows because she did it acting as Julie.
Also, what are the differences between the 'R' and 'Unrated' versions? I just saw the 'R' rated version.
Heat is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.