The crimes of Charlotte Rampling

***SPOILERS***

Ozzy has gone the mysterious route before- with great results I might add- so why does Swimming Pool seem post-climactic all the way through?
Don't get me wrong, I loved the flick. Ozon is honing his craft with the greatest of tools. If this film is any indication, he's just taking well known territory and exploring it with more panache.

Ludivine Sagnier is an actress I admire, but she helped me out in predicting the ending. Knowing her previous work so well puts me at a great advantage. She is letting her intelligence shine through and I can read intelligence like no one's business. (However the truly great actresses make me forget that "if it ain't on the page, it ain't on the stage", & allow me to get jiggy with the movie. You didn't do it this time, Ludivine. Maybe in 5x2?)

Charlotte Rampling. She could run a master class on acting.
My favorite scene in the film is when she is "set up" by Julie to dance and smoke dope.
First Char dances like an ostrich at a barn dance, but she slowly gets "groovy" to the tunes and sole male in the house. Spellbinding scene. The close-up of her in the chair while dance music fills the air lets you know the film is all Rampling.
I was in my movie-watching element during this scene..
Another triumph for Foxtrot Oscar.

Just saw it. What a screwy ending!

This is one of those films that leaves you to ponder the unlimited possibilities that it plays out for you.

While I enjoyed the film to the utmost possible, I must bring up a question that is constantly also brought up in The Usual Suspects .


SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
So, what exactly DID happen and what didn't? Was the entire thing a figment of her imagination, and things were always just quiet? Or did some things happen, like the REAL daughter was ALWAYS there, and she just made up the character loosely based off the REAL Julie? There are a lot of questions, but that's what make this movie fun and cleverly entertaining.

I like to think that "the real Julie" was never in the movie- we see her at the end, thus Ludivine was a definite criminal intruder- no, INVADER of Morton's life. (Which is why the ending is so devastating).

However, Ozon gives the viewer a great gift: You are left to draw your own conclusions about whether or not Sagnier is a figment of Rampling's writers' exhausted & uptight mind or whether the events depicted REALLY HAPPENED.

I believe that Ludivine's Julie somehow knew both the real Julie and Morton- and boldly committed murder knowing that she'll get away with it. (by manipulating Morton.)

What conclusions do you draw?

I don't think the fake Julie was actually real, just a figment of Sarah's imagination. I believe if she HAD been an intruder, Sarah would have exhibited a greater impact when she saw the REAL Julie.

I agree with the fact that the "real" Julie was never actually there. I think that Morton merely took the idea that the publisher had a daughter and ignited a creative process which to us seemed real, but it was just another novel playing out in her head.

That's the genius of Ozon for you.

Neither one of us is wrong and he knows it. Therefore he escapes criticism about pandering. Smart guy, Francois Ozon.
I hope you see more of his films. He is already a master imho.

To be honest I had never heard of the guy before this, but I can agree that he is one smart fellow. Here's another question:

SPOILERS

Even though (how I see it) it's a figment of her imagination, why does Frank get killed? What exactly was Julie's motive for this action? I vaguely recall her saying something about doing it for Sarah's book, but that's pretty confusing.

A great point, I thought, to back up my thought of the FAKE Julie being just a figment of her imagination is a line that Sarah omits to her creation. She says all her books are about blood, sex, and money, and Julie is basically all of those things in one person, creating a surreal character.

Julie says she killed him for Morton's book, but that's just an excuse to me. It wasn't really why she did it.



I think she did it because she wanted to see someone suffer: Frank, Sarah, the real Julie, Julie's Dad-who knows!

That's the real mystery...Why would this beautiful young woman want someone to have such mental/emotional anguish?

To quote Joe Pesci as David Ferrie in JFK: "It's a mystery in a riddle wrapped inside an enigma!"

Jesus, you just made this so much more hard for me.

I'm gonna go to bed now, haunted by the insane complex themes of this film. I'll talk again in a few days.

"Your nightmares are just beginning"...

I look forward to your "Jerry Springer final thought".



BTW, seeing as how I've "ëxhausted" you, I'll give you my final thoughts and let this thread die:

***REALLY SERIOUS SPOILER***

Until Julie found out what Sarah was up to on her laptop, it was just a game.
(She was probably just goofing off, having a grand old time fooling "Miss Marple" about being "the bosses' daughter"). Why? It's irrevelant. Not the slightest bit important.

At this point the film kicked into high gear:

Julie wanted to see Sarah suffer because Sarah was an opportunist, a stuck-up bitch who only cared about herself, someone who judged others harshly and who had the ignorant audacity to invade someone's intimate privacy with the intent to exploit that person in a novel that was real, NOT fiction. That's why I think Sarah reacted the way she did when she saw "the real Julie". The shock was so great she was just stunned into silence.

Sarah got a taste of her own medicine.....life imitating art?
She got played like a fiddle by a complete stranger.
I can see why Ozon thought this would be a compelling story to film.

ALSO!

I realize that if I believe my own conclusions,
I must admit that "the fake Julie" is the most insane, psychotic female character in the history of film. BAR NONE.
I dare anyone to come up with a movie chick who is more vindictive than this character.....

That chick from Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. But she was just manipulative, not psycotic, so never mind.

SPOILERS SPOILERS

And here's another thing that came to mind last night to me. Was Julie's mother's death, truly an accident. Did it involve Julie's scar, and it was just a car accident. If it was, it was brilliant, and very well played, keeping us suspicious of the scar, and then just being able to dismiss it easily.