Spetters (1980)

Wonderful character development!

As Good As It Gets

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Writer Gerard Soeteman has called Spetters a modern day fairy tale. Viewed as such, it can be forgiven some of its rough edges and far-fetched plot turns. The three princes/spetters all take a shot at winning the love of the heroine. Destiny unfolds and each man learns who he is: a tragic hero, a repressed homosexual and an average loser. The men also measure who has the biggest cock.The movie apparently received a lot of criticism from gay and women rights movements of the time. In retrospect, I think this is because the gay character is treated just as cruelly by life as the other characters. Probably a more politically correct movie maker than Verhoeven would have made the homosexual the moral winner. I agree that his story is described in pretty broad strokes, to put it mildly. Of course, in real life, no person will discover his sexual identity after a rape. Still, I would defend Verhoeven here with the fairy tale argument.The protests of feminists are somewhat less understandable. Were they protesting against the fact that the heroine is a cold-hearted gold digger? But there is also a good-natured female character in the movie. And besides, why should a movie portray an ideal world? The camera work is great and the staging of the scenes has a nice flow to it. The motorcycle stunts are well done for a movie made on this budget. It is Verhoevens craftsmanship which keeps the movie entertaining all the while.

I really found much to like about this hard-edged drama. For one thing; its impressionable cast with characters like Rien and Fientje; and sharp cinematography make it a real winner. I enjoy watching this as a double bill with SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER; there are strong similarities between the two. The scenes are shot with a lot of earnestness and validity. I find it ironically saddening that the man who played Rien (Hans van Tongeren) committed suicide in 1982 two years after he played this role at the young age of 28. It's nice to know that Verhoeven has a gift with drama as he does with big action movies like ROBOCOP and BASIC INSTINCT. If you have the means, choose this movie.

I tried to be open minded, but basically, there are but three reasons to see this film: 1.) for a time-capsule view of political incorrectness, 2.) to see how much less sexually liberated American movies are (and Americans in general), and 3.) to see men get equal time (if not more time) in the full-frontal nudity department. Otherwise, it's hard to find anything redeeming about this. This film goes almost as far as the French film, "Romance", yet it was made two decades earlier. The difference is, "Romance" actually wrapped an interesting story around its explicitness, with more compelling characters and greater emotional depth. At the same time, this movie isn't bad enough to be "so bad it's good" either. Plus you've got the patented Verhoven too-much-testosterone curse, plus really unlikable characters, except maybe one. As usual, women's roles here are thankless, and the main female character seems to feel the only way she can get ahead is with a man she's boffing. This film also deals with gay-bashing and homosexuality as a subplot but it does not handle it sensitively (not surprisingly). An ultimately unpleasant viewing experience, I kinda felt sorry for the actors who appeared in it (one of whom later committed suicide--not to imply it was because of this film). (P.S. There's nothing any more brutal here than what was in "The Accused.")

It´s like the "Pulp Fiction" from the early 80s. We also see Rutger Hauer and Jeroen Krabbé before (American) fame. A Paul Verhoeven's film is direct, real, honest. Sex and violence are presents in our lives no matter how we try to hide. A lot of directors should learn from Verhoeven.