Director Laurent Bouhnik had an interesting idea, but it didn't translate well on screen. I consider almost every aspect of this film a very rough draft.1. Character development is almost non-existent. 2. The narrative is choppy and many scenes are unnecessary. 3. The plot lacks direction. 4. The acting is okay at best. 5. None of the characters are particularly likable.Bottom Line: I've read several reviews that praise this film for it's success in it's depiction of eroticism, however, Bouhnik's overly-heavy focus on sex and erotic behavior doesn't leave enough room for the characters or the story to develop properly. I will admit that there are several (individual) scenes that are strong--diamonds in the rough, if you will--but when the film was over, I had taken nothing from it, felt nothing during it, and was generally uninterested in the story and the characters.

Wow, other reviewers see this as pornography. Take another look. It's about connection and disconnection in French society, in which sex and discussions about sex are used as a central vehicle for showing relations between men and women in French society (or at least younger ones). Note that the director never shows anything above the waist of the nude women in the shower chattering away about sex and men. Note that all the characters are missing each other needs and hence at odds and frustrated. Note the scene in the plaza where everyone is self-absorbed. Note that the author starts the movie with a message that he still believes love is possible. Where the movie fails most is not in its failure to do more than vaguely allude to the background situation - unemployment and a shipyard strike. Why those are even there is never clarified. Rather, it was the director's inability to bring the story to completion without implanting an implausibly happy ending that left me wondering what was the point of it all. If French social relations are pretty much the same as they were 25 years ago, then the director's gotten quite a bit right. Unfortunately, he didn't know where to go with it. That's why, in spite of the good acting (for the most part), I gave it only six stars.

Many people like erotic movies. Many people do not like hardcore movies, simply because hardcore movies are not artistic. I am one of these people, and I like this movie.Another movie that is mimic to this one is another French movie called Baise Moi. However, Q is more artistic and better made than Baise Moi. Not only with better casting, but with better storyline.The close up shooting in bathroom is impressive, it perfectly demonstrated the beauty of woman. I truly like the director's taste. Those scenes are beautiful and unforgettable.The story is not complicated but the thought beyond that is very true: a man and a woman, when live together, must be compatible and matched each other both mentally and physically. If it doesn't happen, a true love would not be generated. And the two people will get in trouble if they still stay together.I would give an 8 out of 10 for this movie.

Yes, this avante-garde 2011 production certainly has multiple UNsimulated sex scenes (boy-girl and girl-girl), but this nicely-shot film offers MUCH more than that, and its story could NOT have been rendered properly without those scenes. Set in a small port on the English Channel coast -- probably around Normandy -- the story revolves around the misadventures of a half-dozen or so young middle-class early-twentysomethings who all seemingly lack motivation to do anything more with their lives than work in menial jobs (or steal cars, in a couple cases)...and have sex (the poor current economic situation in France is implicitly blamed for this, it seems). Brassy-slut-who's-really-just-looking-for-love-and-the-perfect-guy Cecile is the pivotal figure. It's quite interesting to see how she interacts with all the other key characters, and how her actions end-up actually helping a variety of people with their relationships. Turns out there's actually a HEART above that vagina...