Spruzzi

This is a real raw no nonsense 1970's Dutch film style movie. Lots of unsencored pictures with nudity and lot's of cursing. Typical for Dutch movies in this era. Paul Verhoeven really pushed the boudries with his films though.

While I wouldn't call this film anything great, it did manage to consistently keep me entertained and interested, and that usually isn't an easy task. The music stood out as a particularly effective part of the movie, as I often found it to be chilling. There were also a number of fascinating scenes in this movie, many of which would probably not be for all tastes. In fact, much like most Verhoeven films, this movie probably isn't for everybody, since it does get somewhat graphic at times. However, if you are a person who can handle the occasional disturbing image, then I would say that you should give this film a look.

rating 8/10

Spetters in dutch has two meanings: "splashes" (of grease, dirt or blood) and "pretty people/hunk".

This movie is quick. To me it's enjoyable as an action movie, but also as a movie like "easy rider", depicting bikers' life in holland of the late 70's. It wouldn't be dutch if there ain't some tits'n'ass in it. But I don't think the movie evolves around it. It deals much more with choices, luck and destiny everyone makes. And that's the reason why i think it's a good movie. Beyond the action sequences there's a moral to be found. I think the story shows many stereotypes of people and let's them all interact realistically. That's the true strength of this movie. and always keep in mind: it's dutch, and up to that time, there were not many action movies made in holland. shortly after this movie Paul Verhoeven went to Hollywood, to my knowledge partly because of the bad dutch criticism to this movie.

'Spetters' begins like one of the countless American teen coming of age "romps" we had to endure in the 1980s (....shudder...), but being a Paul Verhoeven movie things quickly become darker and more subversive. Verhoeven's most recent Hollywood effort 'Hollow Man' was a stinkeroo, but this shouldn't detract from his past achievements. Especially his brilliant output in the 1980s, a decade where mainstream movie making hit a new low (since surpassed I'm sad to say). Verhoeven didn't direct a bad movie in the 80s, which is something very few American directors can say truthfully. Even David Lynch gave us 'Dune' during this period. 'Spetters' is much tougher and confronting than you'd expect from scanning the basic plot line - three young horny guys pursue their dreams which centre around motorcross. That's what makes this movie so surprising and memorable. Verhoeven regulars Rutger Hauer and Jeroen Krabbe pop up in quite good cameos, but the movie is carried by the three young unknown (to international audiences) male leads. All are well cast and impressive. As is the foxy Renee Soutendijk, who would go on to play a major part in Verhoeven's next movie, the brilliant erotic thriller 'The Fourth Man'. 'Spetters' is raw and unpolished compared to many of Verhoeven's subsequent movies, but is definitely worth watching. Another winner from this often maligned director who I'm certain will one day get the attention and praise he deserves.

Verhoeven's fifth feature-length film was attacked by critics, financiers, and much of the Dutch people alike for being "decadent", or "perverted" when originally released in 1980. Twenty-four years later, and unlike what has happened with Showgirls, Paul is having the last laugh. Even his worst film, 1995's Showgirls, has a glimmer of redeeming value, but the difference in Spetters is that it doesn't need any.

At heart, Spetters is the tale of two young amateur motocross racers and their mechanic. Along with their girlfriend, their lives are irrevocably altered when they cross paths with a fast food vendor and her brother. The whole film runs like a slice of life, and nothing that happens in real life is too distasteful for the camera.

If you don't want elements of the plot revealed, you can stop reading now.

The film has been accused of being anti-gay, anti-women, and anti-disabled. Once again, Verhoeven gets the last laugh when it becomes clear to anyone who watches it with their eyes open that none of these things are true. The story of one character's sexual confusion is played out in graphic detail, sure, but it is portrayed exactly as it would happen in real life. Sure, not every experience of homosexuality is as negative as in Spetters, but enough are to make this portrayal valid. The main woman of the story simply manipulates the situation or uses it as best she can to escape a situation she wants out of. Any woman with an ounce of strength in her character will do the same. The character who winds up paralysed finds himself reflecting on what he has lost, and it is enough to make him lose all sense of value in his life. Again, this happens every day in the real world.

There is a reason why films by Paul Verhoeven attract a certain kind of fan. Regardless of whether he succeeds or fails with his artistic goals, I have yet to see him sell out to the lowest common denominator. I have also never seen a film directed by Verhoeven where the camera is moved extraneously, obscuring details for fear of what the MPAA might have to say. The viewer is spared no details, even if it might make them turn from the screen in disgust.

If I could sum up Spetters in one word, it would be "relentless". I've seen many a film or television show that claims to show what kind of extreme pressures teenagers or young adults live under. Spetters is the first film I have seen in two decades that even makes the attempt, and better still it comes uncomfortably close. All in all, I consider it worthy of a nine out of ten. There are some elements that seem at odds with what Verhoeven would like us to believe they mean, but the effect overall is surprisingly good. Anyone who wants to see what would happen if they merged realistic versions of your typical Brat Packer film with a realistic version of Days Of Thunder will be well-served by checking out Spetters.