Swung

Do not be mislead by the title. I personally think the movie is underrated because viewers are looking for a movie on swinging or some erotic story, while this is accurate image of issues of modern relationships, love and sex. This is quite frank image with characters you may meet at your family or work. Dialogues and plot are top notch and can be interpreted on many levels. Even the nudity says something different than typical smut movie and has different purpose. I think this move deserves a lot more attention. Yes, there are some issues with acting, budget was for sure small, yet, I was surprised by the feelings it left after I finished watching it.

I had really hoped "Swung" was going to be one of those inspired indie dramas that I'm always seeking out, but soon enough, seemed the choices the writer got more implausible and felt borderline Hollywood cliche and melodramatic. A beautiful spainish journalist living in Edinborough or Glasgow? is competing with colleages for racy stories at work, and since her husband has ED, maybe investigating swingers will spice up his intimate life. Then the storyline takes these almost TV movie twists, things that are funny aren't meant to be humorous, like overdosing on viagra. Later, they cast Elizabeth McGovern (Downton Abbey) as an american tantrist and guru. Why not a british tantrist? These choices just seemed out of place the whole movie and it affected the flow and quality of the experience, which made me convinced it's a first time director. Sometimes less is more, and I felt that the good set-up of the movie wasn't followed through.

Not sure why its rating is so low, but I enjoyed it. Chose it thinking it would be something I could laugh at, but it turned out to be a drama that was well-performed and held my interest. Definitely enjoyed seeing Ms. McGovern in a role far different from the annoying oracle she played on Downton Abbey. The sex scenes are erotic enough but not overdone, and the focus is on the relationship of the couple.

Seen on DVD. Here I am at the beginning, thinking that this story will go somewhere and seeing good actors laying out a reasonable plot. But the more they exposed their characters, the more I started shouting at the screen to 'get real!'. The male lead, David, seemed like a 'normal' guy at first, but he became more unbelievable as the movie went on. Who would really act like that!? He's got this attractive partner who wants him sexually, and he can't get it up. Yet, there he is, only minutes later in the movie wanking off to some swinger ad. Oh, come on!

What he gets away with doing at the swinger club in the end is not believable - the club would never have let that happen (and we viewers should know that), yet we are shown a preposterous scene just to get to the end of the movie/plot where they 'live happily ever after'.

I only wonder: is this anything like the book? or, have the filmmakers left out important plot points?

The two leads were likable and i believed their relationship and chemistry. The film started well, with some nice humour and warmth about erectile dysfunction and keeping a sex life alive, but did start to lose its way towards the final act as things got a little more serious and there were some strange choices for the dramatic finale (the black room was at least original, but a little... weird) But the film was short so never dragged and was well shot with a decent soundtrack. Worth a watch as it's good to support independent films and also it's at least trying something a bit different. I saw a few reviews who seemed to think it was supposed to be making a bit statement about the swinger scene or erectile dysfunction (!) but i never felt that was part of it, it was just a backdrop for the characters to explore their problems. The film was well made for a low budget and passed the time without being boring.