User reviews

Sex sells. That is something Dutch author Ronald Giphart is very well aware of. This was evident in the first filmed novel by the author: 'Ik Ook Van Jou' but even more in 'Phileine Zegt Sorry' (Phileine Says Sorry).

The original novel is hilarious, quick, witty, from a female perspective, but written by a heterosexual male author. The novel is full of quick one-liners and so is this move ('I believe in sex at first sight' and 'We don't care you have a low self-esteem, just don't bother us with it').

The thing is a quite weak story as 'Phileine' demands a quick witty approach, which Robert-Jan Westdijk (the director) seems to be perfectly able at. He seems to have understood what the story is all about: Phileine, a super-bitch, follows her boyfriend Max to New York, where she finds out about the rather exclusive approach he's giving to Shakespeare's 'Romeo and Juliet'.

Although the movie is quick it has quite some flaws. Westdijk doesn't take enough time to finish off some crucial scenes. The final scene has been handled off quite fast and almost messy and the movie really lacks emotion at times. Westdijk doesn't seem to wanna fall in the pit called 'false sentiment' but in stead of carefully avoiding it he doesn't seem to use any of it in 'Phileine'. To be perfectly honest one wouldn't care less whether or not Phileine regains the love of Max or how she handles it. She's a bitch, so she'll survive and go on with her live.

Kim van Kooten however is perfectly cast and throws in the one-liners one at a time from scratch. Michiel Huisman may be nice to look at (all pumped up) but is rather disappointing as the flat character of Max. This is also due to his rather poor acting qualities. Roeland Fernhout's part as the androgynous Jules is unforgettable and could have used deserved more screen time.

The novel already makes use of too many character with their individual story-lines that push away the main story-line: the one between Phileine and Max, but in the movie this gets annoying at points.

Fortunately Westdijk's quick approach makes up for a lot but not for everything. 'Sometimes the movie is just better than the movie', says author Giphart in a cameo (please no more cameos in any of his movies!). I am afraid I have to disagree with him. But then again: is the movie ever better than the novel?

Still 'Phileine Zegt Sorry' speeds up hope for the Dutch movie industry (especially now that governmental finance has been abolished) and especially for Dutch rom-coms.

Based on the popular Ducth book by Ronald Giphart, who even has a cameo appearance to say the movie is better than his own book, 'Phileine Zegt Sorry' ('Phileine Says Sorry') is a movie that has some pretty funny moments but is not very special. The humor that was there in the book sometimes works on the screen but most of the time it does not. One thing that most people do agree on is that Kim van Kooten is the perfect Phileine, and her performance is in the spirit of the book.

Still, some things just don't work on screen. The style of writer Giphart is very important in his books and director Robert Jan Westdijk has tried to translate the style to the screen. Sometimes it gives us some nice moments but very often it fails and therefore things look strange. I think the movie is fun enough to watch and Van Kooten is worth to see it, but just don't expect too much.

Well, I have to admit that I (like most of the people from Holland) think most of the Dutch movies are plain bad. Seriously. Most of the time, I even got a good reason for that because most Dutch movies are bad. But it wouldn't be fair if I'd call this movie bad.

Phileine zegt sorry is a very good movie to Dutch standards. OK, Ronald Giphart is definitely not the most literal Dutch writer and he really overuses sex in his books, but isn't that typical for Dutch writers? In fact, aren't Dutch movies known for that too? Turkish Delight is a good Dutch movie, yet has a lot of sex in it. Oh well, I think I should tell you what makes me like this movie, not what makes it less bad.

I think Kim van Kooten is great as Phileine. OK, she might overdo the bitchiness sometimes, but most of the time the girl's just good. She has a good timing for one-liners and even though even I (as a 16 year old... No, we're not brainless) think Ronald Giphart overuses cursing in his books, Kim van Kooten makes Phileine enjoyable to look at and listen to.

I really like the movie's soundtrack, as, throughout the movie, it just seems to fit in the place where it is.

I like a lot of the scenes in the movie, as I think there's enough emotion in it to make it an enjoyable movie. Yes, call me crazy, but I thought the end-scene was very emotional. This might be because I'm still young and I have no life-experience whatsoever, or something, but just because I'm a teenager doesn't mean I'm emotionless.

But there are some bad points in the movie too. For example, the dutch actors that pretend to be American. Bad English or American accents in a movie really irritate me, and because a lot of Dutch people don't have a perfect English accent I don't think they should be portrayed as English or American. I found this especially annoying in Kenan Raven's case. But then again, I think Kenan Raven is annoying to begin with. His face looks completely emotionless to me.

I thought some scenes in the movie were pointless. For example, you had Gulpje and the guy from the restaurant. The whole restaurant scene was rather pointless, just like a few other scenes.

But I liked most of the movie. I don't think everyone will like it as it's dutch and therefore a bit sexistic, but I do recommend it to people my age.

7/10.

'Phileine zegt sorry' is an adaptation of a Ronald Giphart novel (he's in the film, praising the film as better than the book). His novels are notorious for sexual explicitness, humor and lightness of tone. The film manages to capture this tone. This makes it an entertaining film with Ally MacBeal-like effects to emphasize the emotions of the lead character (Phileine). The cosmopolitan attitude of the characters, the sexual explicitness and the place of action (New York) gives it a Sex and the City touch. So the atmosphere is OK. However the film just doesn't give enough story to make it great. In the book this lack isn't a problem, however film is (as we all know) a different medium. The story line is too thin and sometimes not very credible. This is also due to the the low level performance of some the actors (especially the 'American' characters). Kim van Kooten however gives a superb performance and is a good enough reason to go and see it.

So 'Phileine zegt sorry' is not a memorable meal but a nice expensive snack.

This film is rather absurd and weird at times, having opposite effects. At some moments the absurdness of the film, works in it's favor and at other moments it clearly does not. The introduction sequence, for instance, which at first seems to be an homage to James Bond, quickly becomes strange (maybe unappetizing) for many people and if you ask me, there is no sense in that scene with the ‘oldies' whatsoever. Another perfect example is the scene in which Phileine is in outer space ‘dancing' to some music. This scene does make a bit more sense than the one described before, but is just too lengthy as are other scenes in the film and as a matter of fact, the ending as well. But no feat, not everything is bad in this film. The film is pretty good, until Phileine (Kim van Kooten) meets Joanne (Leona Philippo). From that point on there appear the first signs of weakness, the mentioned lengthy and sometimes unnecessary scenes. From that point on the film manages to go on on a pretty good level, but I found it to be less than the first bit and the film actually hits rock-bottom in it's end, which is way too lengthy. If it wouldn't have been for the ‘screamer' ending, this one would have gotten a 7 out of 10. But the way it is it does not deserve it. Sure the film delivers some laughs, sure there is a lot of female sex talk, but in the end it is only moderately enjoyable, due to the unsatisfying ending that remains in mind. Even females, who are in fact the target audience, should see that.

6,75 out of 10

PS: At least it COULD have been better

At most times books and movies have very different styles and completely different constructed stories. Some of the book stories and styles simply don't translate well to the big screen. The book "Phileine zegt sorry" written by Ronald Giphart is one of those books that doesn't translate well to the big screen. As a movie "Phileine zegt sorry" leaves a pointless impression. It's one of those movies which makes you wonder after you have seen it; Why did I even watched this in the first place?

It's pretty obvious throughout the entire movie that it's one based on a novel. It features some typical book elements that I'm sure work well in the book but feel completely pointless in the movie. It also has some characters walking around in the movie that feel absolutely pointless and serve no purpose at all. On top of that it's incredibly irritating that most of the New York characters are played by Dutch actors, almost as if there weren't any available actors in New York. their American-Dutch accents are notable and at points even irritating.

The two main actors Kim van Kooten and Michiel Huisman are really great but van Kooten couldn't prevent me from being irritated by her character Phileine at times. Her character is over-the-top and really pushes it at times. I would had dumped her almost immediately! but again, this is not van Kooten's fault, she plays her character with lots of profession and passion., simply blame the story.

Appereantly this was supposed to be a comedy but there are no real laughs here. Also as a drama it isn't serious enough. I think this is the main reason why this movie leaves an overall pointless impression. The movie is just mostly about Phileine talking rudely about mainly sex and acting like an uncontrollable young hormone filled-woman.

The movie however deserves credit for how it looks. The cinematography by Bart Pot is most excellent, especially for the scene's in New York, where this movie is set for about two-third of the entire movie. The editing by Peter Alderliesten keeps the pace high. Robert Jan Westdijk isn't an horrible director he has just been given horrible material to work with.

I can't think of any reason why someone should ever watch this movie.

4/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

At times, I'm proud to be a Dutchman. I admit it. Then, there are other times, when I feel quite ashamed. Funny thing that mostly happens after watching a Dutch movie.

I can live with the shortcomings the Dutch film-industry has, like little money and few actors to carry a movie. But that is not an excuse for the complete and utter garbage Phileine Zegt Sorry is.

The first thing that went wrong is that the movie is based on a book by Ronald Giphart. Now, I don't think anybody above the age of 16 that has a good pair of brains appreciates his work. So why make a movie based on one of his books? 'Ik ook van Jou' was crap as well, so why go for yet another one?

Even the combination of Westdijk and Van Kooten (which worked well in Zusje) can't make this waste of time, money and tape work, as the story is stupid, the characters not believable and the ending one of the worst in movie history (oh my, she said sorry!).

Everything sucks, from the 'mother who has sex in her daugthers bed with 4 guys at the same time', through the 'robbing When Harry Met Sally thing' right until the Dutch actors playing Americans, and making a crappy job of it. Stupid beyond belief.

Now here's the best part: this movie actually won several awards in Holland. Dutch cinema must be dead. Get me out of here!

1/10 and a place in my bottom 10.

This was the first Dutch movie I've ever seen in the theaters. I've got the book, though I've only read the first couple of chapters. I suppose I really should go back and read it further, because it started out cool, I just got distracted.

The author of the book actually says in the movie that he likes the book better than the movie, and oh can I believe it! I really didn't expect anything like this... one of the main reasons I went was because a friend of mine wanted to go and stare at Michiel Huisman. I was seriously impressed. It had everything from fun to anger to.. how the actors dealt with the final scenes was absolutely breathtaking, sitting on the edge of your seat drama. Let's just say this movie has everything from throwing rocks through windows (don't ask) to pretending to come in a classy New York restaurant (as I said, don't ask) and a pornographic version of Romeo and Juliet (I think the only lines in it were: "Where for art thou, Romeo?" and a whole lot of groans...) and an absolutely beautifully shown character development.

Right. I'm practically rambling. I'll make my point. I enjoyed this movie. It had a bit of everything and I left the theater happy. I gave it an 8/10.

Genre: Drama / Comedy / Romance. This is what IMDB says. It's a drama to see that it isn't a comedy and you'll probably get romantic with the audience, since watching the screen will ruin one and a half hour of your life.

As Dutchman I mostly feel embarrased with the typical Dutch movies of the last decades. Swearing, sex and agression, preferably a book converted to a movie. Here it's the same.

For those of you who know BNN, the Dutch broadcasting organisation that has a trademark for rudeness, dumb&dumberness and programmes full of sex and swearing: yes, this movie has its trademark all over it.

The actress Kim is overacting as a bitch and the story is so dumb that I really can't believe the hype when it was released.

Too little depth, too bad. Following the book by Ronald Giphart word for word, this movie doesn't have much to say. It doesn't fascinate the viewer, it's just another love story that has been tried to make interesting by making the main character talk into the camera in the middle of some scenes. Makes you remember Saved by the bell and Ally McBeal. The Lead-role is played by Kim van Kooten, and if you like brunettes you'll probably like her. Good for you because the sex-scenes could make up for lack of story / plot-line. She ends up saying she's sorry for all the things she's done, big deal. This scene (which should be the climax of the movie) doesn't seem to express it's importance to the viewer. An average movie that has some humorous scenes in it and Kim van Kooten is a very attractive woman ;)

Even though the author of the novel (Ronald Giphart) has a cameo in this movie where he states that the movie is in fact a lot better than the book - this film is absolute crap.

I love Giphart's books, and Phileine Zegt Sorry is one of his funniest, but the adaptation is too slow, has too little funny moments to be a comedy, the actors are worthless (surprisingly, even Kim van Kooten's performance is below par) and the storyline proves to be too thin for a movie. And as usual in Dutch film, everything is covered up by lots & lots of nudity.

My conclusion: stick to the book and spend your money on some of Giphart's other novels instead.

2/10

I have read the book and I laughed. I saw the movie on the Dutch Film Festivl and I laughed. I'm thinking back to the scene where Phileine is intending to give Max the pleasure of his life and I'm laughing. This is by far the most humoristic Dutch movie I saw in my life!

In stead of what some people say about this movie, I think it is one of the best Dutch movies nowadays. The special effects are good for a movie from Holland. I don't know if the movie is better than the book, 'cause I didn't read it. But I heard from some friends that the film was better, and even the writer said it in the movie.

I really enjoyed this movie, it was fun. OK, like the most dutch movies, there is some nudity indeed. That's a pitty...

Sure, I'm not a fan of Ronald Giphart's writing. I've never liked any of his books. But I was more than willing to put that aside for a moment and give the movie-adaption a chance.

It took me about 5 minutes to realize that this movie was going to be bad. In retrospect, these first 5 minutes were a blessing, because a good 20 minutes later I just wanted to die. Just to put an end to this fever-ridden nightmare of a movie.

I'm not bothered by nudity, sex and whatever profanity at all, but if done wrong, it just creates an empty feeling of embarrassment. Imagine a hormonal 15-year old, saying out loud every thought that erupts from his horny brain. That's what the 30-something Phileine (Kim v Kooten) in this movie behaves like. I have met quite a variety of people in my life, but I've never met anyone even remotely as horny as the people in this movie. I cringed, seeing how this piece of crap confirms every cliché about dutch cinema. And the worst thing? The writers/creators seem proud if it.

Every line spoken by Phileine is 1. spoken in 200%-speed mode (this seems to be a necessary parameter in most dutch movies for some reason) 2. loaded with a truly embarrassing wish to be funny and cute. Reminds me of that guy on a party failing to be clever; you know what I'm talking about. 3. meta-meta. Yep, the protagonist is looking into the camera, speaking to you directly. In a condescending way, too. It'll knock your socks off!

Like a previous review aptly stated: this movie has overstated and meaningless special fx. It looks like someone just got a new Adobe Premiere update and loves the hell out of it.

I really started laughing when I recognized dutch soap actors posing as Americans. If their horrible acting wouldn't give them away, their big fat dutch accents would. Like.. really?

This movie completely loves itself. I think that's my main problem with it. It's trying to be cool, fast, fresh, funny. Kim van Kooten is an unconvincing actress. She was supposed to be a likable bitch in this movie and she completely failed at that. The rest? I was surprised Michiel Huisman got a leading role in David Simon's brilliant series "Treme". He was horrible in this movie, but then again, everyone was horrible in this movie.

Moviebuffs in the Netherlands are having a hard time with homeland cinema. Very rarely there's a dutch title that is any good. Phileine Zegt Sorry redefines why we are skeptical. This is lesson-material. I'm going out of my way and vote 1/10 for this, just on a mission to bring that rating down. Wish I wouldn't have to.

I have not read the novel but I liked this picture because of the many quick mood changes.

There are so many emotions that change quickly all the time. One time the characters in the picture are serious and then one minute later everyone is laughing. And the next minute Philene and Max have some sort of serious conversation. You maintain watching this picture because all emotions occur so fast after one another.

What I also liked in this picture was the age of the characters. It looks like they are in their mid-twenties or something. I can imagine that the same story could apply to teenagers but also to people above 60.

That's my opinion. Nice movie!

I wonder how many people ignored this, expecting a frothy Hollywood romcom (or worse - watched it expecting the same)? Thankfully it is far from that.

It is a whip-smart adult comedy of manners, with elements of Candide's dawning grasp of reality, or Manon Lescaut's disparity between what is acceptable to committed partners.

Phileine is a deliberately annoying brat, inexcusable until we meet her mother and all becomes clear. She has a circle of equally spoilt friends. She falls for Max just as his work takes him overseas, but follows and plunges his blossoming career into chaos just as it is taking off in the worst Shakespeare adaptation ever.

But that is only the beginning. Phileine (and Max) break the fourth wall, make love, fight, mix with New York's artistic fringe and brash money men. Events spiral, Phileine spreads dysfunctionality, loses and regains friendships, earns an American fan base, and witnesses a revolution in daytime TV weather reporting.

Does she grow up? Watch it and see, but don't expect Sandra Bullock.

I'm not going to claim this is a perfect movie. It has its flaws, and it seems that most other reviews here see these most clearly. But for me, the flaws did not define the movie, far from it. The plot is simple enough: Kim van Kooten (in a brilliant performance, I wish she made more films like this and Zusje) follows her boyfriend Michiel Huisman to New York on his "business trip", and must deal with the half-truths he told about precisely what his business was. It is not the plot that makes this movie great, it is the inventiveness in storytelling. There is definitely great influence from well-known classics like Tom Jones, Annie Hall, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and very possibly Jean-Pierre Melville's Magnet of Doom, but with a 2003 digital effects update that causes much of the polarity in the other reviews. I don't typically enjoy absurdist humor, but I found myself constantly laughing in amusement and surprise at the startling use of effects and van Kooten's quick asides to the camera. The film gets very sleazy at times, and it could be argued that this sleaze is a centerpiece, but I would instead define the film by the emotional journey of these two lovers, who make terrible mistakes and cause each other harm, but ultimately can apologize and forgive each other, and I thought that much was very well done. I have not yet read the book, but it's high on my list after watching this film. There is some debate about how well it adapts the book, but this does not affect my evaluation of the film; I'm not evaluating what could have been but what is. I expected that this would be a trashy romantic comedy like so many other Dutch romantic comedies, but to me this one rises far above.