Dolf e la crociata dei bambini

In the end of the sub-seventeen soccer game between Holland and Belgium, the selfish teenager Rudolf "Dolf" Vega (Joe Flynn) does not assist another player and loses the goal and the classification of the Durch team. He feels bad and when he meets his mother Mary Vega (Emily Watson), who is researching a prototype time machine, in the laboratory, he decides to return in time to fix the game.

He steals the access card of his mother and during the night, he breaks in the laboratory. However, he does not fit the correct date in the display and he is sent to 1212. He is attacked by marauders but he is saved by the young Jenne (Stephanie Leonidas), who is skilled in sling and is traveling through the forest to join The Children's Cuzade to Jerusalem. Dolf puts a milestone on the spot and follows Jenne and her friends. Sooner they join the Cruzade that is led by Father Anselmus (Michael Culkin) and a group of young noblemen. Dolf names himself Rudolf, the Duke of Rotterdam, and is assigned to take care of the children. When Dolf misses the chance to return home and is stranded in the Thirteenth Century, he follows the Cruzade and discovers the treacherous plan of Anselmus of selling the children to slave traders. But how can he convince the children that their charismatic leader is a traitor?

"Kruistocht in Spijkerbroek" is a Dutch-Belgian-Luxembourgish-German production with a pleasant and entertaining adventure. The story has flaws, the conclusion is weak, the CGI and costumes are very simple but the film is highly attractive for children and also for adults. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Cruzada, Uma Jornada Através dos Tempos" ("Crusade, A Journey through Time")

I just saw crusade in Jeans, and have to say it really impressed especially if you take in to account the low budget (12 million dollars) that the production had to deliver the epic feel. I truly hope that this movie takes of internationally so that the 2 trilogy's that she wrote can be made into really extravagant and big productions that can truly deliver the epic feel that I had when I read those books.

But back to crusade in Jeans even though some adaptations where made for the big screen it still stays very true to the original story and also delivers a great feel of the middle age period. I truly liked the way the ipod is used in the movie but also the gradual change from modern western clothing until the complete change towards middle aged clothing. There not much to improve about the movie although a thought that a couple of effects could have been done a bit more believable.

All in all a great movie to see, go see it or get it on DVD when it's released.

I waited for ages to watch this film, because as a lover of the book (which is highly recommendable for both older children and adults, in Dutch or in translation)I was afraid to be disappointed - and I was.

The director (who made some very qualitative other movies) was aiming at a younger audience than the mid teens that the book was meant for, andfor that group, he did a good job. It's an adventure film which is at the same time quite historically accurate and informative for that age group.

For me and my contemporaries who read the book in the 70s, 80s and 90s, and who think back to it with great love, the film is an abasement.

Many plot lines were changed. Some choices are understandable: women get a bigger role than they did in the book for example, technology has changed, and some parts of the story had to be left out so that the film wouldn't be too long. Some choices are less understandable, but probably sounded good when they were argued for by the scriptwriter: the main protagonist Dolf's personality has been changed substantially, many characters have been written out, new plots have been introduced. None of it works. The plot is incoherent, very unbelievable and lacks suspense.

The acting is poor.

The costumes are completely unbelievable because they are just too clean and new. The locations are also too clean. But mostly, the props annoyed me, especially the medieval paper and books - somebody learned how to make paper by hand and then reckoned that was enough to make it look medieval.

But the thing that irritated me most was the fact that the two hundred odd extras playing the children in the crusade look like happy, well-fed, healthy children in a high budget school play rather than the ill, starving, dirty, wild, desperate children that Thea Beckman portrayed so powerfully in her book.

I'm not saying they should have starved the child actors, obviously that's impossible. Nor am I saying they should have stuck to all the original twists and turns in Thea Beckman's plot, that would also have been impossible. You see, making this book into a film... is impossible.

There were a lot of bad choices made when making this film. The casting director, costume director, scriptwriter, and of course the director himself all made some bad choices. Would other choices have made for a better film? Maybe. Would they have made for a good film? No. In the end, the only important bad choice for this film was the very first one: the choice to make it.

Or, Crusade in Jeans, as the international title goes. Based on a book by a Dutch writer this film tells the story of a young Dutch guy that ends up in the middle ages after a strange incident involving a time traveling device. He ends up in the middle of the German forests and found by a group of people from a crusade. A crusade of children that is heading towards Jerusalem.

I haven't read the book and as it is a children's book I probably won't get around to doing that now so I can only comment on how it is as a film. The film plays as a children's film: little rough action, no intense drama that gets more than a few seconds of screen time. I guess I might recommend it to kids between 8 and 12 years old. Anywhere outside that range will probably be bored by it. As was I.

Being Dutch I must say I was annoyed by the fact that everyone spoke English instead of the languages that were spoken in these countries back then: Dutch and German. I was even more annoyed by the fact that quite a few actors spoke the typically heavily accented English that non-native English speakers speak. I feel the film would have been better if the spoken language had been Dutch/German. That would probably mean even less chance in other countries though.

Altogether it isn't an entirely bad film, but it is meant for a rather narrow group of people. What makes it better is the way the scenes were worked out - most of them rather attractive. Getting the amount of children they were using to do what they needed to do is a true feat that I have a high amount of respect for. Still, it isn't an attractive film that I would ever pick to watch again.

6 out of 10 kids crusading for the better world.

Crusade in Jeans is one of the most popular Dutch children's books. There have been plans for a movie for several years now, but due to the budget it was never realized. Until now. Ben Sombogaart, Foreign Movie Oscar nominee for Twin Sisters, directed a solid, exciting and even moving version of the book. Even more praiseworthy: the budget was only about 10 million euros (12 million dollars)!

This English spoken movie is about 16 year old Dolf Wega (a great Joe Flynn). He just screwed up an important soccer match and wants to use the scientific experiment of his mother - a time machine - to go back in time to fix it. Unfortunately he types in the wrong data and arrives in the year 1212. He almost gets mugged by two thieves but he's rescued by Jenne (Stephanie Leonidas). He joins a children's crusade heading for Jerusalem and with his modern wit and responsibility he becomes the actual leader of the group. But what are the real plans of the people who organized this crusade? And why are they heading for Genoa in Italy instead of Israel?

Compared to the book director Sombogaart took the liberty of changing a lot. Jenna wasn't in the book for example. Neither was the soccer play. But all these changes work out fine. The Dolf from the book was almost a super being. But in the movie he's much more human: he's afraid, venerable and not that strong physically. If you filmed all the scenes from the book you'd have a movie that lasted about 4 hours. Now it runs a little longer than two. Although we were watching a version that wasn't 100 percent finished – some of the special effects were lacking, the soundtrack needed more music – I was pleasantly surprised by the scope of the movie. There were some SFX scenes with big crowds giving the movie an epic feel, but most of the time Sombogaart kept the action small. And that worked out fine because of the way the actors performed. Both Joe Flynn (Dolf) and Stephanie Leonidas (Jenne) were great. There's a real chemistry between the two, making you really care for the characters. And of course there's Emily Watson, giving a great performance as Dolf's mother.

So was it a flawless movie? No, some things could have been better. The building up to the end for example, realizing why the crusade was really organized. That could've used a little more suspense. The look of the streets in the Middle Ages: it all looked too clean to me. But then again, I have never been there myself.

But the piece de resistance was really the moving ending. It differs a lot from the book, emphasizing the fact that they're actually two different things. Unlike other films I know I will still pick up the book again to read it. This movie hasn't spoiled that for me. Crusade in Jeans is a great movie that everybody should see. I sincerely hope that it will also be released in the States and England, because this film deserves to be successful. Go check it out when you have the opportunity!