Interesteg What makes it different from others?

Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

rodrig58 "What is life, what is pleasure, what is love?" is asking the man on the bench (Etienne Chicot) towards the end of the film. Really, who can answer? And I would add myself: why people get married? Some only for two months, as another character in the film ? We have many scenes worthy of a porn film with explicit sex, very nice indeed. And we got on the other hand scenes of dialogue between the main character, Sandrine, and all the other characters, in which she tries to find answers to the toughest questions of the humanity. Well played, a little boring, but captivating. Carole Brana, Nadia Chibani and Lise Bellynck, like Three Graces, are very convincing in the roles of three women seeking at all costs the Absolute Ecstasy (through mega-orgasms).

kosmasp If you see the directors work as a trilogy (first of them being released 2002) and this being the last part of that very loosely based trilogy, then I don't think there is much arguing, that he seems to have saved the best for last. The story seems more coherent, though the trademarks are still there. By that I don't mean the beautiful women, but the talking about everything. Trying to understand feelings or the world in general I suppose.Not that you'll get answers that are satisfying (no pun intended, other scenes in this might be very satisfying), but the movie tries to get into the head of our main actress. The talk about freedom and boredom/routine may challenge you to think about a few things. Maybe it won't, but that is the clear intention of the director. The supernatural element is kept low this time around, but you'll get a fair share of that too. An (erotic) adventure you may want to take

ronchow This film attempted to be more than a skin flick by blending some more serious, philosophical elements into basically a story of sexual pursuit. It was not a bad mix - until this 'levitation' scene which I think ruined everything. We all know levitation through mental power is physically impossible so I don't understand why director Brisseau chose to bring it in.Sandrine, the protagonist in the film, was not happy with conventional sex with her boyfriend, and made an effort to seek pleasure in other ways. So over the course of the film you see beautiful women doing it, and what they did is pleasant to watch. An older man, an ex-physics professor, came into the story and he in some way played a fatherly role to Sandrine, educating her on other aspects of life including the universe and basic physics fundamentals such as the speeds of sound and light. What is good about the story is the interlacing of sex and physics appeared to work in some way too.In a nutshell I think this film is worth viewing for some of the erotic scenes, and the dialogues between Sandrine and the older, wiser friend. It could have been a much better film if other fine tuning was done and the absurd scene omitted.

shy-2003 Honestly speaking, this film has some brief sentimental moments, some good music, some good screen shots.However, unfortunately, these good factors were SPOILED by BAD factors in the film, such as in addition to passionate straight couple sex, there are also lesbian sex and group sex, which made me and at least some other movie goers feel DISGUSTING ! Besides, the "philosophy" through the Old Man character in the film did not appear to be very persuasive ! I am happy that near the end of the film, the new boy friend (Greg) of Sandrine (the main female character) fell for another girl, giving Sandrine a shock which, to me, she deserves because formerly, she made her initial boyfriend (Fred) shocked by her self masturbation even though he just made love with her !!!