The movie had potential, but ultimately wasted it. Potential was for an intriguing tale of voyeurism and vicarious living of an author's/researcher's life through the lives of the people she interviews for her work, and ultimately how this affects her.In reality, the movie goes down this path, but pulls its punches and goes nowhere. For all the nudity and sex, the movie isn't that gritty, ultimately. (The sex and nudity is a bit tame, anyway). I was expecting a profound ending, but was very disappointed. There is no life changing, just voyeurism. Solid performance by Juliette Binoche in the lead role. Good support from a cast of unknowns.

I have just watched "elles" and wasn't expecting much after reading some pretty poor reviews. However, despite its subject matter, this is not the gratuitous sub-porn that some would have you believe. It is more intelligent and sensitive than that. It's also far from trivial.As usual (and as most have conceded) Juliette Binoche is terrific. Her masturbation scene reminded me of Ingrid Thulin's in The Silence.I also thought that a nice touch was the Spider-Man toy in the laundry room, that JB removes from the basket and places on top off the washer and tumble dryer. It gets in the way, and falls back into the basket. And you can see/feel that this has probably been done so many times before.I loved this film and feel it has more to offer upon repeated viewings.

Why do 'art' films have to be slow? It appears some film makers forget their actors' faces are many times life size and a discriminating audience are attentive ... like this one. When a point has been made, move on. This seems unfamiliar to this film maker. That's the first point. Point two : yes, the two girls are having paid sex with married men; yes, they are doing things the men's wives possibly don't care to do, but where is the love? There's a conventional assumption that paid sex is gloomy,glum and unreciprocated. Pity. Final point : There's a possible film here : three stories in parallel- each echoing and counter pointing each other. But this didn't happen, except in a superficial way. A serious pity.

Faced with just the title and the name Juliet Binoche the actress is clearly the main - if not only - reason for watching this. If then the dirty-raincoat brigade read a review and note the subject matter then there is a second selling point to be noted. As it turns out both consumer groups are catered to and Binoche weighs in with another outstanding performance without breaking sweat. What is less easy to discern is a point of view; if, as we are led to believe, the number of young French girls happy to combine university seminars with hooking is on the increase, is this a good or a bad thing. Discuss. Journalist Binoche spends the entire film researching an article on the subject which will appear in Elle. She confines her research - at least as far as the film is concerned - to one-on-one interviews with just two hookers who are equally active students. Initially Binoche is inclined to view the girls' lifestyle as humiliating despite assurances from both girls that they more or less enjoy sex - both orthodox and unorthodox - with men mostly old enough to be their fathers and it is clear that it is Binoche who is more inclined to change her lifestyle in the wake of the interviews. Whilst certainly watchable it's difficult to see this one proving durable.