bap_tsagio I am trying really hard to remember a World War II movie that is worst than this one! And believe me... I have seen a lot, from many different countries.Really poor acting by Carice Van Houten and some other actors combined with a boring script that tried really hard to be subversive but didn't make it. The 5 stars I gave were ONLY for the production, the director of photography and the acting of Sebastian Koch & Christian Berkel.If you want to see a good WWII movie about Europe I would recommend "The Cranes Are Flying" (1957), "Come And See" (1985) or even "The Pianist" (2002) but definitely NOT "Black Book".

maria-ricci-1983 I cannot understand how this movie gets 7.8 in IMDb. It is a complete disaster! How a tragic, dramatically dense and tense theme (promising extraordinary things had a talented scriptwriter taken the job) ended up as a bland cartoon with linear characters and all disrespect for credibility is something truly unexplainable.There is not a single credible scene in the movie; nothing sticks to the golden rule of plausibility: neither the direction, nor the acting and much less the script. Even if this is based on real events, the director has managed to present them in the most unbelievable way, not once, not twice, but scene after scene until the end, making the spectators sigh with regret and repeating to themselves "Oh, come on! Not again! Is this a joke?".The characters in a Disney cartoon have more depth and hues than the ones we find here. Lieutenant Franken?? My goodness, his villain smiles and his acting deserve to be nominated among the worst of the decade. The arch villains in Batman (the 60s TV series by Adam West) make more complex characters.The twists and turns in the plot, which should have contributed to create tension and suspense, are so serendipitous, stretched out and poorly presented that they make you laugh or cover your face in embarrassment: "Is this Saturday Night Live and I have missed the initial credits?".In short, although I was very well predisposed to enjoy this movie when it started, I couldn't have been more disappointed.

Paul Hesp I once knew a Dutch lady who as a young girl had lived through the Battle of Arnhem. Asked what she thought of the film 'A Bridge too Far' she said: 'It wasn't like that at all'. 'Zwartboek', a film on the theme of resistance and repression in the Netherlands during World War II, has an even more tenuous link to reality, although Verhoeven has invested heavily in making the thing look realistic: dialogues in four languages; lots of historic vehicles and aircraft; celebrations of the liberation modelled on colour pictures available from those days; soup kitchens with boys scraping out the food containers; the delectable Carice van Houten dyeing all her hair in order to become Aryan Ellis instead of Jewish Rachel. That includes her pubic hair, and here we get a glimpse (or two) of what Verhoeven really wanted to do with this picture: make lots of money. Which is fine, and not something most Dutch film directors are good at.'Zwartboek' is not a documentary. But if you spend so much on recreating reality you might as well do it properly – I want value for money when I watch a film. Knowing a few things about pre-1960s planes I felt cheated right at the start: Verhoeven might have rented an authentic German plane to intercept the American bomber – they are available. Then, in order to gain height, the stricken bomber jettisons its bombs. Quite logical, but it would do that in one go, not as shown: one, just a splash in the lake… two, a bit of an explosion right next to the little yacht carrying Rachel and a friend which briefly rocks the boat… three – wham!!! There goes the remote farm in which she hides from the Nazis. These are on the spot in half a minute (I timed them), Rachel's identity card is found and the fun can start.Some scenes in the film hit home alright. But there is just too much nonsense: A river barge is to take a number of refugees through the Biesbosch marshes to the safety of the liberated south of the Netherlands. This sort of thing did happen regularly towards the end of the war, but not on that (dangerous) scale and the skipper would (a) never have set out in broad daylight; (b) have made sure that his passengers were hidden below deck instead of lounging on top as if on a cruise. But of course that makes it easier for them to be shot, which happens. After a hit in the forehead the indestructible Rachel makes her escape.Ellis and the rather nice Sicherheitsdienst officer (something of a contradiction) she will eventually bed for the sake of the resistance get friendly over… his stamp collection! Well, this apparently happened in those days: I read somewhere that war-time US president Roosevelt seduced a woman that way. (Our heroine – a feminist touch - does the philatelic seducing).Why on earth would the baddie risk his life in the shootout in the cellar of the SD building? And why would the Germans have bothered setting such a risky trap when they could quite simply have blocked the coal chute of the cellar? (Likely answer: because then there would have been no reason for a shootout).The cauldron of ordure poured out over Ellis as a suspected 'Moffenhoer' (Nazi whore). It is a fact that those suspected of collaborating with the Germans were often subjected to inhuman treatment; but this is Grand Guignol theatre, Wagner from the sewers.I was soon laughing again, though. The near-final scene, where the baddie gets screwed (literally) in his coffin, was straight out of Polanski's 'Fearless Vampire Killers'. A real howler.I have known people who were in the Dutch resistance, who were imprisoned in German camps, who spent years in hiding. I am pretty certain that they would have found this film cheap, in spite of all the expense, and that they would have said: 'It wasn't like that at all.'

Rameshwar IN Wonder how this stayed under my radar for so long while having so many things in excess - runtime, dramatization, graphic content be it sex or violence, production values, contriving, the number of characters and tragically failed missions. But what was hard to believe was the text that said in the beginning - based on real life events. Were they just referring to WWII in the backdrop? Though Carice van Houten gives her best shot, this multidimensional dream character was never converted to an Oscar vehicle.Backdrop is Denmark has come under Nazi rule and Jews are fleeing the country. Carice van Houten (Rachel Stein) is a Jew living in hiding. When her hideout is blown, she tries to make a run out of the country. She gets together with her family and gets on a boat. Rachel alone escapes a ruthless slaughter when a German patrol boat intercepts them. After she smuggles herself back into the city helped by a resistance group, she decides to fight for their cause. Her role is to setup a honey trap to a German Captain and assumes a new identity as Ellis de Vries.Carice van Houten fits the role perfectly upon her looks where she has to be equally cute, sexy and generous on nudity. Production values were extravagant for bringing an authentic feel to the period. With too many melodramatic moments and a highly commercial approach to presentation has not done enough justice to live up to the words in the beginning 'Based on real life events'. The resistance group is full of caricature characters you will find in any sort of group - an aggressor, a thinker, a comedian, a guilt driven paranoid etc. The dilemmas, perspectives and consequences that happen on the immediate aftermath of German surrender to the Allied Forces has never been dealt before - that too this period is not just a commentary based factual display but a proper thriller thread is induced here. Background score found wanting of elevation at certain moments, the action sequences look dated for its time.Seduce you through sex, violence and drama