I must agree with some of Ccoral419's technical critiques of the film. Lighting was certainly an issue for me.
There was also a lack of depth in the story that I was hoping to see. There were several instances where Lockhart was trying to convey a point, but unfortunately it opened more unexplored story threads that were left dangling for us to wonder about. These created motivations that became sometimes unclear and because parts of the story were not explored the reactions came across more as plot devices rather than honest emotions. Often plot points were rushed to get to the next event in the story rather than finding a particular focus to the drama. Sugar Lyn's performances were subtle, nuanced and fearless for the subject matter and I enjoyed the wise sage character of Clair played by Diane Farr. Jackson Davis' performance was also well done, however he didn't really have depth of character to fully explore, I'm sure he would have relished.
I liked that it came across as an anti-Halmark movie. One devoid of the purtianical morality tales shoehorned into them, that is often seen in those productions.
As someone who has some exposure to swinging, it was clear to me that Lockhart either has experience in this area or has done extensive research. She conveyed the principal issues most couples must deal with in such a lifestyle, "honesty" and "trust". Break either of those and there is often friction or outright trouble in a relationship. The reason why "swingers" stay together is because they share a brutal honesty with each other that often is missing in traditional relationships.
This is to be honest, a titillation film. Provocative by design, but also honest about what the lifestyle is about and what it takes for a couple to participate in it. That said, I liked it for what it was in terms of story, but the technical aspects were certainly distractin.
Review of Palm Swings
