Maria Fahlsing By twenty minutes into the film, I was already tired of hearing Fiona call Cyril and Hugh "Baby" every few minutes. As the story progresses, she continues to say "Baby" at least fifty more times. This gets extremely old very quickly.I found the disjointed, time-jumping method of story-telling to be a bit hard to follow.Also, I think that the sexual nature of the relationship between the two couples started too quickly after everyone met. It seemed unnatural. There should have been a more gradual progression toward full swap. I'm still not sure what the point or moral of this story is.The chastity belt scene was really hard to watch. Hugh is a sick, twisted, sadistic bastard. What Kathryn could possibly see in him is a complete mystery. Also, I fail to see what Cyril sees in Fiona other than eye candy. Overall, I liked the movie for its exploration of open marriage and alternative sexuality.

vyto34 Sheryl Lee gets to play a dull-witted strumpet--now isn't that creative! Her supposed love interest, Colin Lane, is no heart-throb, but does get to play a tight-arsed boor. Charles Dance is good and likable, but cannot save this turkey. The decayed, picturesque Latin American village is photographed gorgeously, but the movie is better with the sound off.

joekaz The plot was weak, and the story a bit stupid, but I really liked this film. The mood and atmosphere appealed to me. It's set in an old village in a tropical setting, the characters were all a bit mysterious. There's a big psychodrama between all of the characters. You never find out what motivates any of them, but the tension and wondering kept my interest, so I give this an above average rating.

lib-4 I thought this would be a sexy movie but it was not- it was just full of hot air and trite sentiments. I loved his other movie Angels and Insects but this movie was not up to that one at all. The acting was bad and the story was stupid. The only person who was somewhat believeable was Hugh's wife. A waste of time