Most helpful positive review
222 of 239 people found the following review helpful
I can't understand what some major reviewers hate this movie
on September 27, 2007
As many here have said, this is a beautifully shot, gripping, unforgettable movie, a great addition to the honorable genre of WWII flicks. In fact, the father of one of my colleagues, Dutch himself and in his 70s, said this was the best film he has ever seen. So I don't understand why, if a man in his 70s who is from the WWII generation himself did not find this film "prurient," so many reviewers have insisted that it is. The scene that most of the prudes seem to find gratuitous is (spoiler alert) the scene in which the Jewish heroine prepares herself to pass as a blonde bombshell so she can seduce the German officer. Clearly, she is going to have to dye or shave hair other than the hair on her head in order to pass as a natural blond. The movie shows her doing this. Why is it not gratuitous? Because the scene sets up the love triangle that will result in the conflict in the last third of the movie. It is absolutely essential to the advancement of the plot, and in my opinion, any reviewer who can't see that is not only a fussy old woman, but also not much of a reviewer. So if you have not seen this movie because you've read a review that trashes it on the grounds of prurience, please reconsider. And consider this: the most recent Ang Lee movie is so sexually frank that it got an NC-17 rating, yet there hasn't been a single review which has trashed it on the basis of its gratuitous sex. That says to me that some major reviewers are only interested in criticizing Paul Verhoeven rather than commenting honestly on his film. Another reason to see this movie is Carice Van Houten. She not only convincingly plays a 40's bombshell, she has that same 40s movie-star quality that you can't take your eyes off of. Truly, you could watch this film 100 times and never get tired of her. She is irresistible.