bbraat Let me insert a positive comment prior to my trashing one of the plots of the film: I thought it was great the way the filmmakers handled the nudity and sex. I wasn't shocked by it but rather I found it to be natural and expected when it was shown. often I find that movies that shy away from showing sex use its absence to titillate, for example, the well placed prop or hand that blocks the view of genitals. such practices only serve to draw MORE attention to those body parts. In this film, the casual nudity and sex only served to demystify themselves. It was no porno, the point of the film was not sex. Sex was merely one of the vehicles from point A to B. Good work. I'll have to raise my rating to commend the makers for the groundbreaking WAY they told the story. Many films have offensive plots that never make this much of an impact.Now to my complaint about one of the film's plots: A badly written movie that reminded me of "Valet Girls" and "Angel" ('High school honor student by day, Hollywood hooker by night' not the Buffy spin-off) without their humor. The writing was on level with the porn movies made at the time. (Yes, the porn writing at that time was in it's heyday but it was still bad writing.) To focus on one of the most egregious part of the plot: Even listening to the director's commentary didn't help explain the whole ridiculous and insulting gay-subplot. Ah, so getting gang-raped by a bunch of guys late one night will make you gay the next day. (i wonder if that would work with lesbians?) So maybe sexually repressed heterosexual women could be helped by gang-rape? Once they get banged they'll realize that they like it, will become sexually liberated, and will show up at the rapist's house the next day for some snuggling as Eef did. A component of good writing is that, even if the revelation about a character is surprising, a viewer should be able to go back in the film and realize that it was foreseeable. In this movie there is nothing that Eef did that showed him to be gay any more than were his friends or the viewers. 1. the measurement scene: it wasn't his idea, it's not uncommon, and if that means he's gay, then his two friends are even more gay. 2. The gay-bashing scene: even if it was his idea, his friends and their girlfriends were at least if not more brutal than he was. 3. Failing to get erect for his girlfriend: as he said he was drunk, I'm sure this has affected most of the film's viewers at one time or another, and from the dialog it seemed as if it had never been a problem before. In fact the other couple also had a problem that prevented them from having sex. 4. Watching the gay sex scene: yes, he watched it briefly but immediately his idea was not to relieve himself sexually. Instead his immediate idea was to use it to make money to win the favor of the girl. If watching three seconds of that scene makes him gay it makes everyone of the viewers who watched it gay as well. 5. Does a twenty year old really living in Rotterdam in the 80s need to be reminded that homosexuality is an option? There is porn of every variety on every newsstand in that country. Legalized prostitutes have delineated districts. If he wanted to have gay sex he probably would have by this point.

Maarten van Krimpen I don't know why I like this film so much...I think there are so much element of the film which are just so dumb and silly, but at the same time, this is just a film that keeps spooking around in you're head and makes you want to see this film for the second time, and for the third time, and for the fourth time, and so on... The story is, I hope, familiar with all you guys who are reading this review, so I skip that part. It's just the sort of story I really would like to see more in Dutch films, and not in the way Johan Nijenhuis does it. A story with real emotions, and where people turn out really different than you think they are for real. Eef here for example, the homophobic who turns out to be gay himself. You don't see that kind of stuff in 'Volle Maan'. The things I really don't like about this is, most of all, the really childish humor in this film, like at the gas station where Eef asks a girl 'Shall I put that in?' (Zal ik m er even insteken). Lame, but I guess that was just 'cool' in that time. But I think this film is excellent just because of the raw manner of filming, with in general not brilliant acting performances, but just very touching.

John Primavera This film is no "Saturday Night Fever." For one thing, "Spetters" is more of an art film; while the other reeks of commercialism throughout. The music by the Bee Gees, moreover, makes it look more like a record album vainly attempting to be a film. Second, sexual repression in SNF more impacts the lives of the American kids than it does the Dutch boys. The garage scene in the latter film (where the three young bikers compare erections to see who gets first crack at the carny gal)would be judged too homo-erotic for American audiences to take, for instance. While the American boys go disco dancing for fun; the dutch kids try testing their courage in more dangerous ways, such as bike racing. While the only death in "Spetters" occurs when a biker deliberately crashes into a moving truck (a suicide, rather than living his life as an impotent cripple); the American dies falling off a bridge while stunting! Even the role models for the two groups of young men are different. While John Travolta admires a poster of Al Pacino, an actor, on his bedroom wall and takes pride in his hairdo; the bikers' hero is a national cyclist whom they want to emulate and become someday. Defining manhood, in American terms, becomes just another marketing tool(since Travolta has no aspirations to act); while the three bikers know the way to manhood lies through courage, not false glamor and appearances.The scene where one of the bikers gets paid back for robbing and beating gay men by being gang-raped by tough-looking homosexuals, is excellent. Here the tables are turned in a way we would never see in American films, since gays are supposed to be victims who never fight back against their attackers. This demonstration of courage to defend one's honor and dignity makes "Spetters" a far superior film than SNF. SNF, despite all its trendiness as a barometer of the seventies, treats both its men and women as garden variety, working-class stereotypes. For genuine closeness, heroism and male-bonding, check this one out at the video store (make sure it's the uncut 123 min. DVD Director's version). A better coming-of-age film you will never see.

bas rutten "Spetters" by Paul Verhoeven is sort of a Dutch coming-of-age movie about a number of teenagers that want to get the **** out a small, depressing and boring town. Nothing new here.The problem is that this movie can't decide what it wants to be. There are too many serious topics to consider this a comedy, but the characters are way too one-dimensional and the situations and developments are way too absurd to consider this a drama. Some scenes are dead serious, some scenes are (supposed to be) funny, it all goes back and forth in a very awkward manner. I know it's possible to mix drama and comedy in a successful manner, but it certainly isn't happening in "Spetters". Then, of course, there's an awful lot of sex and nudity. People not from the Netherlands might be shocked how far this movie goes, but then again, I've seen worse in Dutch movies. Suffice it to say that the nudity adds very little and isn't the least bit erotical or tantalizing. It's just there. Finally, since this is an old Dutch movie, the sound is utterly terrible. The characters all seem to be lip-synching (poorly), the sound effects don't sound right, and the background music is terrible. Although Dutch is my native language, subtitles wouldn't hurt. The acting is decent, though, (there are a lot of famous actors in this movie), at least by Dutch standards. Paul Verhoeven is great when directing over-the-top action spectacles (Starship Troopers, Total Recall) or dark thrillers (Basic Instinct), but he should probably stay away from drama, comedy, or any combination thereof. *1/2 out **** stars