User reviews

The history of a girl who finds a wounded dealing drug boy (by obligation), had excited to me in the beginning of the film. But the film became long, eternal... slow and with a prediscible end. Only the performance of Laurien Van den Broeck is worth the trouble, but this it does not do that the film reaches to the 5 points. In order to spend the short while it is well, but you do not wait for too much...

I followed the movie without any problems. The two young actors have great potential for the future. It beats the heck (the movie) out of some of the sewage spewing from Hollywood for sure.

Strengths: Cinematography, locales, chase action, Lauren character. Weaknesses: Overdone toiletry; weak, uncomprehending dialog. This coming-of-age, diminutive waif seems too street-wise for me; stretches credibility. Pilgrimage scenes border on the ridiculous.

I totally agree with the 2005 review by the man from England. There were so many holes in this plot, if it even had one, I fast forwarded through the violence at the end as it seemed the most senseless thing in the whole movie. The men who were looking for the boy to get their drugs out of him "literally" seemed no different from the one who simply shot him and walked away in the opening scene! I am surprised he lived as long as he did with a teenager treating his bullet wound with a bandage! (and then he was running around!?)

Numerous American reviewers on this site reveal their limitations in their comments. A lot of what they criticize or complain about in this movie are things that take us deeper into the moment of the story that takes place in a different world than they're familiar with. I was also thrown off a bit, until I realized that this wasn't from the European world of film that I'm used to (France, Spain, Germany, Italy).

Larien (playing the main character) is brilliant. What the film does lack is over-played dumbed-down dialogue and over explanation. The settings nicely reinforce the various moods. The girl's coming of age theme is brilliantly played out with subtle and not so subtle devices.

This is just about as bad as it gets folks. If this is 'European art' then the words 'Emperor's clothes' springs to mind. The only skill the director and producer have is to lead you along so that just as you think it can't get much worse, it does. The number of flaws in the plot is countless and I won't list them all here. The baddies drift around in their car; we are led to think they are following the two main actors, in which case why don't they just pounce. The final image of the girl, rotating as it does back and forth, summed it up for me: No one knew where this movie was going and no one knew how to finish it off. Uggh. I hope this was not made with European taxpayers money, but I have a horrible feeling it was.

In my opinion the Dutch movie scene has been enormously enriched by Moonlight. Even without many words, director Paula van der Oest puts together a clear, interesting and compelling story. The acting of especially the very young Laurien van den Broeck was fantastic. Feelings and emotions come across the screen very convincingly.

But the editing, cinematography and art direction in this film really put it next to its American huge-budget brothers. In contrary to most previous Dutch productions, these aspects are incredibly professional, even comparable to i.e. 'The Sixth Sense' as to creating tension and atmosphere, and to 'Requiem for a Dream' as to editing.

I've seen the movie in Nijmegen, as part of a weekend-long review of the Dutch Movie Festival, and had the chance to attend a 'talkshow' with director Paula van der Oest as one of the guests. A great experience.

Foreign readers, please don't let yourself be scared off by the Dutch crew: not a Dutch word is spoken during the movie, set in Luxembourg. Main language is English. Dutch readers: absolutely go see this movie! It will show you the enormous progress of our very own filming scene.

If there was a message the director of "Moonlight" was trying to put across, I missed it. However, one thing is certain, I got my fill of two kids' bathroom habits (or lack thereof.) We are not told why a young 13-year old girl, who is obviously loved by her parents and well-taken care of, decides to secretly harbor a young boy who has been shot once in the leg and once in the abdomen. Why she doesn't tell her parents remains a mystery. Of course, how she determined the boy's wounds were a result of being shot is even a more perplexing mystery. He doesn't speak English (or any other language in which she is apparently fluent.) This film begins with a very absorbing plot, but unfortunately the birds ate all its breadcrumbs, and inevitably along with its viewers, the film becomes fatally lost.

Even when what you will see is like a smorgasbord of usually very trodden plots, Moonshine is definitely one of those films that sticks like fly-paper to your senses and mind. The story -an impossible for American films, is all sounds and visuals. Dialogue is kept to the utmost minimum. So, the many usual attractive and not-so-convincing plots employed throughout the film, mesh up perfectly.

I'd like to point out how important it is to know what you're doing when using so many clichés already used by others: here, even when you know what will happen -somehow, at least, the captivating lack communication between the main rôles and the hyper-psychological use of sound with some of the most stunning visuals I've seen simply using light and lenses the way they should be used, do the part to have you riveted to your seat.

The inherent beauty of the two kids who play very adult rôles in this coming-of-age-per-force film make it even more palatable. The music is outstanding at making your nerves spike instantly or sharply contrast with the visuals. I'd use this film to teach a thing or two about "eye- lighting" and "the importance of the way how you tell a story instead of what you tell to convey it"... the virtual absence of dialogue may be one of the most amazing feats of this film. Two thumbs up!

The guy at the videostore did not recommend it. A friend of mine did and i am glad i rented it. Afterwards the guy in the videostore confessed that he only saw the first ten minutes. Anyways, good movie, interesting subject. The kids play really good. mysterious surroundings. good camerawork. YEP! well done guys.

Laura Van den Broeck plays the piano and discovers blood and runs to the garden shed. She discovers Hunter Bussema wounded and nurses him back. He is her secret. The parents who adopted her are remote in the modern mansion. They escape. The journey they take is a magical coming of age delight where they dance in the Moonlight. They go to a fair. They wash car windows. The house her father bought is their refuge, but the killer drug dealer finds them. It continues with never a dull moment, because director Paula van der Oest loves Laura Van den Broeck's every move and facial expression. Her face is extraordinary in its individualism. She is someone who does exactly what she wants to do. The cataclysmic ending fits such a person.

A thirteen year-old girl living in a magnificent round and mostly glass house in the middle of nowhere finds a boy in a dilapidated building on the property. He is bleeding from gunshot wounds from some mobster types who left him in the woods. The girl bandages him up and hides him from her oblivious mother and father.

The bad men continue to pursue the boy who is a drug mule, which leads to some extremely unpleasant scene for recovery of the contraband. The pair go on the run to avoid the monster types. Mom and dad continue their clueless behavior as the kids wind up on a bus with nuns. I had a momentary flashback to my Catholic school days. The two leads are excellent but the story a bit of a stretch. Overall, a decent film.