Sex with Strangers (2002) User Reviews

If Jerry Springer Show Had Come Out With A Movie... This Would Be It!

[id_unplugged · 5/10 · 13 October 2007]

I would've much appreciated if they had chosen real (hot looking) actors, with a good script to cover this subject matter. Hairy, bald and ugly sex --we can all do without. Add whiny, twangy, chauvinist southerners with control issues and you have a recipe for disaster of titanic proportions.

And at closing they tell you that Sara, after having been dumped by Calvin and losing her job as a teacher (after the movie outed her as a swinger), has a new boyfriend, but continues to see Calvin... the guy had a tiny little pecker, is she retarded, or what ?.

It's a Jerry Springer Show made out into a movie.

Couldn't they have found one positive example? It's not that difficult...

[AMadLane · 26 July 2003]

As a long-time aficionado of this and similar lifestyle choices, I merely want to stress to the curious that this film paints sexual sharing in a very poor light. Maybe it's Seattle, maybe it's the filmmakers' aims, maybe it's the fact that these people are mostly looking for it with relative strangers, but all of this film's subjects (especially the men) come off as controlling and, in the case of the younger guy, downright juvenile. Hopefully someone will redo this topic soon, and in a more balanced way -- perhaps e.g. attending a Lifestyles convention in Vegas, or the like, to give the uninitiated a better frame of reference. This was extremely depressing, which real sex sharing is often anything but...

Illustrates pitfalls of swinging

[jen_faerie · 6/10 · 22 January 2006]

While it wasn't brilliant, there were aspects of real swinging that were fairly well covered. If anything, it's a good movie to watch if you're in a swinging couple or open relationship as the pitfalls are well categorised.

It doesn't really matter if it's real or recreated or scripted, as the issues covered are real. Speaking as a swinger myself, it does show the difference between social/emotional and sexual relationships. The older couple has a better view, that you have to be very strong in your relationship and have very firm ground rules, such as not 'playing' separately, or keeping the other informed of whereabouts.

Emotional attachments are a lot harder to deal with than casual sexual liaisons (ask anyone accused of having an internet "affair" when they've never met - its emotional infidelity) if both partners agree. But both do need to agree, and pressure is a no-no. All of this is shown in graphic detail in the movie.

Not so good if you're just curious about the lifestyle, more geared towards those already in it, or just starting in it. Best of luck!

What you don,t know!!!!

[carmancor · 6/10 · 20 January 2007]

It just come to be that I know the lead people in this move. They are not to be made out as actors they are real swingers. I have not been with them my self, but I hear they are a ton of fun. LOL. I have talked with them a lot about this movie, and they never said anything about it all being scripted!

These people were always nice and did not push there life style on anyone. If you were not in to that, they would let it go! As all of us should know that editing can have a lot to do with it. You should know that they both had great jobs, and as far as I knew that they were model people in there lives. I know longer see these people anymore, but I wish them all the best in there lives. Also thank them for being brave enough to make this film. Thanks C.W.

Concerns about authenticity overshadow any remaining qualities

[argv · 5 February 2002]

Joe and Harry Gantz are known for the reality-based television series Taxicab Confessions, where hidden cameras are placed in taxis, and passengers are recorded telling intimate details about themselves to the driver. The series has won many awards for documentary, and served to usher in a new and unique way of peeking into people's private lives.

In the film, Sex with Strangers, the Gantz brothers are up to something new again, but this time, it's not entirely clear what it is. I'll explain that in a moment.

On the surface, the film appears to be a documentary, following three sets of couples who "swing" - that is, have sex with other couples. James and Theresa are classic swingers who aggressively seduce couples wherever they go; their protégé Calvin attempts to share his sexual freedom with two jealous lovers, Sara and Julie; and psychodrama almost displaces sex for Shannon and Gerard, who aren't sure whether swinging is the way to go to preserve their marriage. By embracing a free sexual lifestyle, all of these swingers have to constantly deal with issues of trust, power, intimacy and love.

It's so real, and the plots move along so well, and the dialog is so well chosen that… wait, is this really a documentary? Or, is it really a scripted movie with actors that make it look like one? About 30 minutes into the movie, my attention drew to certain technical details like, "how did they get a camera into that really small space? Oh, and there's another camera angle! Oh, and a third! Wait, that space couldn't possibly fit all those people and all those cameras and still be an authentic scene. Do people really act natural in such settings?" Then I started noticing things in the dialog: too perfect. Words chosen well. There are times when people sort of stutter over their words or stop to think a moment, but not nearly often enough. I've seen a lot of documentaries, and few are as polished as this.

And then there's the climax - the ends of all the stories just come together too well. The scenes appear to be too set up, and the scenarios too concocted. I started feeling "lied to". I went to the production notes and the movie's web site, and my suspicions were raised even higher. Words are also carefully chosen, such as: "Most documentaries search for defining moments[...] This extraordinary film is filled with such revelations..." Note: It doesn't call itself a "documentary", it calls itself a "film." Reading it carefully, the entire text appears to be chosen in a way that could suggest that they were prepared to be disclosed. If you read the official sites of other, known documentaries, they are overwhelmingly explicit in the background of the film, how they went about it, and many other things. But for this film, it's all very ambiguous.

If I'm right, the film's main problem is that it's relying on a gimmick of lying to the audience much the same way Jerry Springer and all those "talk" shows were. The appeal of those shows was the notion that the "guests" were real people. When it was disclosed that it was all staged, those shows lost their appeal.

I don't care that I'm lied to, but if you're going to do it, there's a lot more intelligent ways to go about it. Championship Wrestling is one example. Everyone knows its fake, but that's part of the fun of it. (I don't particularly enjoy wrestling, but I recognize and acknowledge its appeal to others.)

If I'm wrong, and the film is actually real, I fault the filmmakers for making it too simplistic and not fleshing out more of the culture and environment of the lifestyle and the people behind it.

I don't dispute whether serious research went into this, as the notes indicate. (A year was spent with couples to learn their lifestyle, but it doesn't specifically say that these were the people in the film.) Either way you look at it, the film came across as a soap opera, where the main intent is to taunt the audience with risqué scenes, villains and victims, and the drama of people making clearly stupid choices in their mates. Sex with Strangers positioned itself as a documentary to give serious insight into swingers and their lifestyles, but it didn't - it just showed a few selected couples and tunneled the entire movie into only their lives. While it showed very realistic portrayals, they were all two-dimensional.

Interesting roadshow.

[goodellaa · 7 May 2002]

I'd be sorry to learn this documentary was fake but not too surprised. The whole thing is a little neat and tidy. It was involving and amusing enough that I didn't feel like being critical. I'm not really old enough to remember but it seems like one of those sex documentaries that would play breifly at the town theatre, make a good amount of money, and then blow out again before the curious had a chance to collectively decide to be offended. The sex is not very graphic by modern (porn) standards but the dialog is. These people have a lot to talk about, too, since some people either don't start out or don't stay strangers.

Cheap titillation pretending to be a documentary but it is disturbingly grim, staged (if not faked) and follows a group of people who are selfish and rather unpleasant and not the type of people I'd like to

[bob the moo · 21 June 2004]

A HBO documentary film that examines the lives, motivations and feelings of several American couples who 'swing' and have sex with other individuals and couples. The film follows several couples including a man who is having group sex with his girlfriend while he continues to be married behind her back; a couple who make it their goal to have as many sexual partners as possible in one night as well as organising a small orgy with three other people; and finally a man who has a swinging partner as well as a 'real' girlfriend – who feels pressured to be involved in the swinging but unsure how she feels about it.

I wasn't going to watch this film because I know that HBO has a reputation for making sexual documentaries that really only try to be whacking material but The Times stressed how unerotic that it was and I assumed that it must be more serious than I assumed – but I was wrong. The film was rather grim and unerotic but it is not for lack of trying, and this failure doesn't make it more interesting or reflective, it just makes it have even less value than it did. First of all let me just say that, although I don't think this was all faked, it is undeniable that much of it (including the sex) is staged or recreated for the camera. It is slightly arousing because, lets be honest, the idea of group sex with several women will be appealing to many men, and the soft-core footage of sex will probably satisfy teenagers who are unable to get their hands on hardcore stuff. But to be honest none of these people are great looking and the ability to get lost in this supposed 'fantasy' in significantly reduced by the fact that we sort of know these rather unpleasant people.

The film has no real insight and, to be honest, to real aspirations to really take a critical look at this lifestyle. The focus seems to be on how much fun it all is and just providing titillating talk and several soft-core scenes. I was horrified to see that those who appeared to be emotionally suffering due to their swinging were mostly presented as 'wrong' and were not allowed to really have much screen time (although we had many sex scenes). The people in this movie are not evil or cruel but they are simply driven by only one thing – their own sexual desire. Where their desire is like their partners then that is fine but the two couples who have a half that are reluctant simply bully their spouses or just ignore their feelings – but the film sides with the partner that favours sex over their partner's emotions. I felt almost ill when one guy asked his girlfriend to be a witness at his wedding where he would marry his swinging partner (but still live with his girlfriend), and he doesn't see anything wrong with it!

Overall this is a shameless piece of titillating tat dressed up as a serious documentary. The people are not even examined never mind judged and we don't really learn anything about swinging other than it is seemingly full of selfish, self-centered people who put their own sexual gratification above all else. The sex scenes are made less sexy by this – at least with porn it doesn't matter whether or not you like the people but that is not the case here: they may provide some material for teenagers to get off to but most right minded people will find it rather grim and more sobering than arousing.

Concerns about authenticity overshadow any remaining qualities

[argv · 5 February 2002]

Joe and Harry Gantz are known for the reality-based television series Taxicab Confessions, where hidden cameras are placed in taxis, and passengers are recorded telling intimate details about themselves to the driver. The series has won many awards for documentary, and served to usher in a new and unique way of peeking into people's private lives.

In the film, Sex with Strangers, the Gantz brothers are up to something new again, but this time, it's not entirely clear what it is. I'll explain that in a moment.

On the surface, the film appears to be a documentary, following three sets of couples who "swing" - that is, have sex with other couples. James and Theresa are classic swingers who aggressively seduce couples wherever they go; their protégé Calvin attempts to share his sexual freedom with two jealous lovers, Sara and Julie; and psychodrama almost displaces sex for Shannon and Gerard, who aren't sure whether swinging is the way to go to preserve their marriage. By embracing a free sexual lifestyle, all of these swingers have to constantly deal with issues of trust, power, intimacy and love.

It's so real, and the plots move along so well, and the dialog is so well chosen that… wait, is this really a documentary? Or, is it really a scripted movie with actors that make it look like one? About 30 minutes into the movie, my attention drew to certain technical details like, "how did they get a camera into that really small space? Oh, and there's another camera angle! Oh, and a third! Wait, that space couldn't possibly fit all those people and all those cameras and still be an authentic scene. Do people really act natural in such settings?" Then I started noticing things in the dialog: too perfect. Words chosen well. There are times when people sort of stutter over their words or stop to think a moment, but not nearly often enough. I've seen a lot of documentaries, and few are as polished as this.

And then there's the climax - the ends of all the stories just come together too well. The scenes appear to be too set up, and the scenarios too concocted. I started feeling "lied to". I went to the production notes and the movie's web site, and my suspicions were raised even higher. Words are also carefully chosen, such as: "Most documentaries search for defining moments[...] This extraordinary film is filled with such revelations..." Note: It doesn't call itself a "documentary", it calls itself a "film." Reading it carefully, the entire text appears to be chosen in a way that could suggest that they were prepared to be disclosed. If you read the official sites of other, known documentaries, they are overwhelmingly explicit in the background of the film, how they went about it, and many other things. But for this film, it's all very ambiguous.

If I'm right, the film's main problem is that it's relying on a gimmick of lying to the audience much the same way Jerry Springer and all those "talk" shows were. The appeal of those shows was the notion that the "guests" were real people. When it was disclosed that it was all staged, those shows lost their appeal.

I don't care that I'm lied to, but if you're going to do it, there's a lot more intelligent ways to go about it. Championship Wrestling is one example. Everyone knows its fake, but that's part of the fun of it. (I don't particularly enjoy wrestling, but I recognize and acknowledge its appeal to others.)

If I'm wrong, and the film is actually real, I fault the filmmakers for making it too simplistic and not fleshing out more of the culture and environment of the lifestyle and the people behind it.

I don't dispute whether serious research went into this, as the notes indicate. (A year was spent with couples to learn their lifestyle, but it doesn't specifically say that these were the people in the film.) Either way you look at it, the film came across as a soap opera, where the main intent is to taunt the audience with risqué scenes, villains and victims, and the drama of people making clearly stupid choices in their mates. Sex with Strangers positioned itself as a documentary to give serious insight into swingers and their lifestyles, but it didn't - it just showed a few selected couples and tunneled the entire movie into only their lives. While it showed very realistic portrayals, they were all two-dimensional.