User reviews

Swimming Pool is a first rate film from French genius François Ozon. This thriller makes best use of everything that makes cinema great, and it is therefore a delight to view. Swimming Pool follows Sarah Morton, a British author that travels to her publisher's dream home in France in order to have a rest while she works on her new book. However, her tranquillity is soon disturbed when her publisher's daughter; a sex-crazed, good time girl, turns up out of the blue and turns Morton's rest into something quite different. One criticism that could be, and has been, made of this film is that not a lot a lot happens. That, however, depends on your viewpoint; the action is stretched, but the relaxed tone of the film blends magnificently with the beautiful French scenery, and Ozon's attention to detail with the characters ensures that, although slow, Swimming Pool never descends into boredom and there's always something on offer for it's audience to enjoy. I, personally, was completely entranced from start to finish.

The casting of Charlotte Rampling as the uptight British novelist really was an inspired move. She's absolutely brilliant in the role, and you can't imagine anyone else playing that character to such a degree. Speaking of great casting choices, Ludivine Sagnier is similarly brilliant as Rampling's sexy co-star. She brings just the right amount of insecurity and lustfulness to her role, and it's not hard to see why Ozon continues to cast her in his movies. The film is very melodramatic, but never overacted; and this is a testament to the quality of acting on display. Swimming Pool benefits implicitly from a haunting soundtrack, which perfectly accents the happenings on screen, and certain points in the movie where the soundtrack is used are truly electrifying. François Ozon is truly one of cinema's greatest assets at the moment. This is only my second taste of his work (the hilariously fabulous 'Sitcom' being the other), and if his backlog and future releases match the quality of the two films I've seen from him so far; he may well become one of cinema's all time greats.

Makers of erotic thrillers need to be careful, as that is a genre that, if not handled carefully, can quickly fall prey to silliness and excess (think "Fatal Attraction"). "Swimming Pool" is a thriller in the style of "The Deep End," and more than once I was struck by similarities between the two in their respective tones and reliance on water as a recurring visual motif. Also, both films have a middle-aged female as the protagonist who becomes involved in covering up for the actions of a child (in "The Deep End" a literal child, in "Swimming Pool" a figurative one). Also, both films are completely unpredictable. Neither goes the direction in which the viewer thinks it's going to. However, "Swimming Pool" is much more abstract, and its ending leaves you wanting to watch the whole thing over immediately with an entirely different perspective on the action. This gimmick always makes for a memorable ending in movies that employ it, but too often it makes the rest of the movie seem somewhat pale in comparison, and this is the case here. "Swimming Pool" plays tricks with your perceptions, but the finale to which the film builds seems somewhat anti-climactic when it finally comes.

It's a leisurely paced film, and you'll need to have patience with it. You'll also need to have patience with the main character, played by Charlotte Rampling. Rampling gives a fine performance, but her character is really unlikable (intentionally so), and it's always a liability for any story that focuses almost solely on one person to make that person unlikable, or at least sympathetic.

"Swimming Pool," though billed as an erotic thriller, is really about the creative process (I think), and I won't say anymore about that because to do so will give away the ending. It's an interesting idea, imperfectly executed.

Grade: B

A British mystery novelist called Sarah Morton (Charlote Rampling) is really blocked, so she's bored by her successful series de mysteries and while seeking inspiration for her new book. She then accepts an offer from her publisher John Bosload (Charles Dance) to stay at his home in Luberon, in the South of France. So Sarah arrives in her publisher's home in the South of France, where she eventually finds inspiration. Sarah takes a fine break at thr Provencal holiday home and finds the relaxed paradise creatively stimulating until his teenage daughter (Ludivigne Sagnier) turns up unannounced. Sarah interaction with his unusual daughter sets off some touchy dynamics. Tension coming to a head when the promiscous girl brings home a handsome local waiter (Lamour) the older woman has been slowly befriending. Tired of London and Dive into this summer's sexiest mystery !. On the surface, all is calm !.

An interesting drama in which tensions, jealouses , suspense and nudism developing throughout. For all its many twists which by the end probably become a little perplexing for the inattentive. It's a decent film with colorful cinematography, intriguing score and nice interpretation, but all of them can't compensate for the superficiality of the movie's hackeyed premise. Moreover, some of the scenes in English are clumsily developed and some details are downright implausible. Ozon's movie is derivative and predictable , that's why do blocked crime writers always fantasize themselves into a scenario which will restore creativity. Terrific performances from Charlotte Rampling as the uptight, repressed British mystery author who seeks a wrong place to rest and Ludivigne Segnier as as the tempting and seductive young woman who arouses unspeakable passions.

Yorick Le Saux's sumptuous camerawork succeeds in build a mood of febrile sensuality. Adding a suspenseful and mysterious musical score by Philippe Rombi in the wake of the composer Bernard Herrmann, Hitchcock's regular. The film was professionally directed by Francois Ozon, but turned out to be a bit slow and implausible at times, though definitively engaging the viewer. Ozon is considered to be one of the best French filmmakers. His favorite director is Rainer Werner Fassbinder, that's why he made 'Peter Von Kant'. Ozon considers filmmaking a "parallel world", in which he flees the boring everyday life. Ozon calls actress Romola Garai his muse. Member of the 'Official Competition' jury at the 62nd Berlin International Film Festival in 2012 and he has won several prizes. Ozon is a prolific writer and director who has made all kinds of genres with penchant for comedy and drama, such as: ¨By the Grace of God' , 'Été 85', 'Le Refuge', 'Peter Von Kant', '5x2' , 'Angel', 'Dans la maison', 'Swimming pool' , 'Le temps qui reste', 'Criminal lovers', 'Everything Went Fine', 'Sitcom', among others. And his last one, a crime comedy titled 'Mon crime' (2023). Rating Swimming Pool: 6.5/10. The flick will appeal to Charlotte Rampling fans.

Swimming Pool (2003)

All I had heard before recently viewing Francois Ozon's Swimming Pool is that the lead actress, Ludivine Sagnier, was searingly sexy. Well, if that's what you want in a movie, you might agree. But it lowered my expectations, nearly to the point of not watching it. In the end, Sagnier's character is mostly coy and bratty, and her nudity, in France around her own very private swimming pool, shouldn't really be an issue-- except maybe for the viewer. For me, there was sometimes a mismatch in my head between watching the actress and watching the character, and if this is a flaw in some movies, here, in some basic way, it ties into the intention.

This is an odd starting point, for sure, but it is Sagnier's brazen outwardness that makes the more complex role played by Charlotte Rampling take on interest. How else to portray the theme of a woman who uses her body and her confidence to seduce the other characters in front of an older woman who wishes she could do the same? Swimming Pool really isn't about sex, but it absolutely is about the appearances that lead to sex--of being sexy, to put it a little stupidly--and Rampling increasingly takes on the role of viewer within her own character, and she ends up as perplexed as we do. All to good effect.

The minimal plot is about the failure by a successful novelist to see alluring from allusion, fact from fantasy. It's about storytelling, fiction, and ultimately fear of failure. The reconstruction of the past becomes the inner confusion in the mind of the main character, a charming and effective Rampling playing a novelist who was once, by all the hints, the very seductress suggested by the younger woman.

This is certainly a film worth watching. For some it will seem willfully confusing to the point of manipulation--the viewer is fooled and taken for a ride, and it feels confusing for the sake of confusion. For others it will seem endlessly mysterious and clever, even if requiring a kind of blindness to certain narrative conflicts (which may or may not be logically resolved by the end--I watched parts a second time to check). Right from the start there is an ingenious mismatch of facts that you start to brush off, and when things develop in ways I don't dare suggest for fear of ruining it, these clues grow in meaning. It will certainly be great for discussion, heated or not, and that's a sign (for me) of a good experience, though not necessarily a superior movie.

It is notable how economical the filming is--the setting is limited, the characters few, the range of situations reasonable and not requiring trickery or effects. And it comes down to Rampling, above all, holding the psychology together. It shows how little you need to take a good plot idea and flesh it out, sexist voyeurism or not.

I first saw this film on HBO in 2005 and now own it. HBO and others continue to run it. It is a very mature, engrossing film with a metaphorical plot. From the opening credits it immediately begs for your attention and once it has you in its grasp, you will find you cannot escape. A successful author of a series of mystery novels but bored with her work, Charlotte Rampling goes to the south of France for looking for fresh ideas for a new book, begins down one avenue and then changes direction. The location, photography and performances are exceptional as is the set design, replete with elegant simplicity that flows past your eyes. You are drawn in so well you can taste the wine and feel the pool's water flowing around you. The actors, especially Rampling and the actress who plays Julie, are impeccable. The Swimming Pool is a totally wonderful experience. Dive in!

It has some interesting elements and Charlotte Rampling is excellent. The story has some meta-elements of her being a mystery author and getting caught up with some of her subject matter while on a writing getaway. It's primarily about her being a voyeur and using some of these observations in her novel.

It had a decent ending which made me want to give it a little bit higher of a rating. Overall it's well-made but unremarkable.

This film owes a great deal of gratitude to the second collaboration between Francois Ozon and his leading lady, Charlotte Rampling. They ought to team up more.

As with the previous film, Under the Sand, this is an enigmatic piece of cinema. This film, I believe, has more to do with Sarah Morton's imagination than with the actual story presented to us. There are so many hidden clues within the story that everyone will have a different take in what is presented in the film and what the actual reality is.

Francois Ozon is not a boring director. He will always present an interesting story, fully developed, with many twists to get his viewer into going in different directions trying to interpret it all.

Charlotte Rampling is magnificent as Sarah Morton, the repressed author of mystery novels. Ludivine Sagnier is very good as the mysterious Julie, the alleged daughter of Sarah's publisher, but now, is she really that person?

The ending will baffle the viewer. This is a film that will stay and haunt one's mind for days.

In London, the successful and weird middle-aged writer of crime and mystery novels Sarah Morton (Charlotte Rampling) is passing through a phase of lack of inspiration. Her publisher John Bosload (Charles Dance) invites her to spend some summertime days in his house in a small town in France, where there is inclusive a swimming pool. He also suggests her to make the experience of writing about a different theme to break her block. Sarah accepts the invitation and travels to the wonderful and lonely place. A few days later, she starts writing again, but her quiet rest is shaken with the unexpected arrival of Julie (Ludivine Sagnier), the sexy daughter of John. From that moment on, reality and dream blend in Sarah's world.

"Swimming Pool" is a film with ambiguous conclusion by François Ozon. I did not dislike this movie, but I believe it is indeed an excellent idea, wasted in a very disappointing conclusion. There are many unexplained subplots and the story is completely open to the most different interpretations, and of course I have mine. But without reading any information or clue from the writer and director François Ozon about his real intention, it is impossible to give a precise clarification. Europeans usually like this type of open-ending to discuss about, but in this situation, the film does not give necessary hints about the real intention of the plot. The viewer can speculate only. Charlotte Rampling has a magnificent interpretation, Ludivine Sagnier has a very erotic performance, but to become an excellent film, many clarifications are missing. The Unrated DVD from Focus Features offers deleted scenes that may help the interpretation that Sarah was alone in the house. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Swimming Pool: À Beira da Piscina" ("Swimming Pool: On the Edge of the Swimming Pool")

Note: On 21 January 2025, I saw this film again.

I think there are two sides in Ozon's filmography; one is more related with theater and a sort of theatrical fantasy, in huis clos fictions, it is the side of "Huit Femmes" and "Gouttes d'eau sur Pierres brûlantes", and the other side is more realistic and intimate, like in "Sous le sable". The first one is embodied by Ludivine Saignier whereas the other is embodied by Charlotte Rampling. And I believe that here, in "Swimming Pool", he tries to combine these two sides of his career, joining these two actresses and creating a fiction between realism and dreams, in a sort of fantastic huis clos around a country house with a swimming pool.

But I think it is a failure. The dialogues are artificial and often sound false, maybe because they are in English written by a Frenchman, and some second characters' acting is really bad. The story is not original at all and plays with a joke that is becoming a cliché: the invented movie, just like "Adaptation", for instance. This joke may justify the bad dialogues and acting because you can say that the writer is inventing a bad fiction, but anyway I don't find this satisfactory. Besides, Ozon lacks completely of subtlety and destroys very heavily any kind of ambiguity regarding interpretation, with a cheap remembering flashback in the end, he explains the whole movie which was pretty clear after you think of it for a while. He makes all the work that should be done by the viewer, destroys his active work of interpreting the movie and does it in a way that lacks of elegance. In short, he builds a movie around a cliché that he doesn't even transform, and destroys what is interesting about it, the interpretation on the viewer side and the ambiguity. If the movie worths to be seen, it is because it has some beautiful shots, not to many, but it creates some great moving images. To conclude, it is really a mediocre movie with a quite bad story but technically very well done. "Swimming pool" is just technique without poetry.

Our neighbor Donna has a knack for buying offbeat DVDs, and 'Swimming Pool' is one of the more. She asked us to see it, and explain it to her. Charlotte Rampling plays the central character of Sarah Morton, a writer who seeks new inspiration at her publisher's vacation home in the south of France. All is well and quiet until Julie (pretty and nubile Ludivine Sagnier) shows up, claiming to be the daughter that Sarah's publisher failed to mention. Sarah and Julie are like fire and ice, oil and water, acid and caustic. Everything that Julie is, carefree, bold, and over sexed, Sarah isn't. Then, what we see developing is Sarah using Julie as the inspiration for her writing. Sarah begins to encourage Julie. And Julie provides much inspiration! This isn't a movie for those put off by nudity or the French habits of liberal sleeping around. But for those who like a clever and absorbing story, that will tingle your brain cells when it is over, having you asking "What exactly happened?" , then you will probably enjoy this one.

SPOILERS follow, quit reading if you have not seen 'Swimming Pool.' As the story progresses, Sarah gets less annoyed with Julie's bratty and loose behavior, and actually seems to be inspired to experiment a bit too. Things turn sinister when Julie is putting off the night time poolside advances of one of the men she brought home, and ends up murdering him. Instead of admonishing Julie, Sarah helps her dispose of the body. The next day, when the village-dwelling gardener shows up, threatening to discover the deed, Sarah offers misdirection by stripping and inviting the old gentleman to her room for sex. BIGGEST SPOILER -- when Sarah gets back to London, her publisher's offices, meets 'Julia', the young daughter who looks and acts nothing like 'Julie' of the movie. My best interpretation, which is also based on comments by writer/director Ozon, is the 'movie' in France was in the imagination of Sarah, starting when she opened her window at night, and which was actually the book she was writing. As the movie ends in London, Sarah shows her publisher John the manuscript for 'Swimming Pool', which he doesn't like. Then she gives him a copy of the published book, telling him he knew he wouldn't like it, because it was a parody of him, and had someone else publish it.

Update: Saw it again January 2011 and it is a great movie to re-watch.

A successful crime fiction author, Sarah, is suffering from writer's block and needing solitude and a change of scene her publisher suggests she take a spring break in his holiday house in the Luberon part of France, which she does and it seems to be working. Then the publisher's sexpot daughter, Julie, shows up unexpectedly and Sarah finds her presence, let alone pertness and promiscuity, a major irritation. To this point it is all perfectly believable, but then things start to become a little strange and, from a script point of view, rather ad hoc. For example, no explanation is given for Sarah finding one of Julie's bikini bottoms in the garden and why it should result in Sarah rummaging through Julie's belongings. The murder seems clumsy and pointless (and would leave a lot more evidence at the scene than that shown) and the disposal of the body rather pedestrian (not that more inventive methods in real life have prevented detection). The ambiguity presented at the end is designed to make us ponder whether it all really happened or was just a real-time fantasy with the eponymously titled book the result, unfortunately it rather draws attention to the script's shortcomings instead. On the plus side, the casting is good, it is nicely filmed and edited, the location is very pleasant and those who like the poster shouldn't be disappointed.

This movie is a real precious piece of art ,and the acting done by "Charlotte Rampling" deserves my thanks and appreciation and admiration too, i didn't think that it's going to amaze me with such twisted plot , this movie is in my ten most confusing ends movies , you will not be able to find an appropriate,logical interpretation for the story that easy , every explanation will refuted by another explanation from another viewer,therefor i think this film plot was accurately and purposely done to confound the viewer/mind-blow them so every one has to make interpretation that fits them .

This movie spends most of its time trying to make you decide if it's horribly boring or a brilliant slow burn. But it is undeniably entertaining.

I truly don't understand the acclaim this movie is receiving. Usually to get critical acclaim a movie has to be in French, in Black and White and BORING. I guess having some French and being both boring and ANNOYING did it for them. I was initially intrigued by the plot and Charolette Rampling's portrayal of an author's quiet desperation. Then I was titillated by Ludivine Sagnier's beauty. But ultimately I was angered by the careless plotting--as one reviewer put it, you know a plot is in trouble when a DWARF appears for no apparent reason! But the condescending ending made me want to scream at the screen saying "you wasted my time for THIS?". I'd recommend you wait for this movie to appear on cable and watch it only for Ludivine Sagnier's stunning beauty (Charolette Rampling also doesn't look too bad for 58 years old, either). My rating: 3/10.