De grot

De Grot is a very good film. The great plot comes from the novel by Tim Krabbé, who also adapted this story for the screen. Some really top-class acting, not only by Van Huêt, but especially by Marcel Hensema, who mostly did TV-work prior to his performance of Axel van de Graaf. The film seems to kick of as a thriller, and sets an excellent mood. Then we start to learn about Egon Wagter and Axel van de Graaf, and the story is revealed bit by bit in a very compelling flash-back structure, which adds to the more romantic aspect and the character-driven drama of the movie. In the end this all culminates into an emotional ending, that will grab audiences by their throats. Make sure you know as little as possible about the plot when you are going to see this movie. A must-see, especially if you liked 'Spoorloos' (The Vanishing's original screen adaptation).

The movie starts in killing suspence and ends in a typical way according to the writer's style (Krabbe). A must see for every filmfan capable of speaking Dutch. The DVD has been released and is worth the effort of walking to the shops. Dutch movies are never a succes unless they are shallow and action-minded and so was this film a total flop.

Broaden your horizon and see this movie!

This film, directed by Netherlands' Martin Koolhaven, is worth paying to see for the price of 8 bucks. It's a dramatic and character-driven tale, adapted from Tim Krabbe's novel. It's told by merging past and present events. The dialogue is cold and precise – appropriate to the characters. In this coming-of-age story, there's a strong corruption theme that leads to a couple of temporal crises -- drug running and mid-life! The adult and young actors are well matched for their character roles.

The thrilling flow of back and forth flash-takes offers different time frames, involving the lives of several characters. Fedja Van Huet as the adult Egon, and Erik Van der Horst as the young Egon, will leave viewers with very powerful food for thoughts about peer influences. Yep, a provokingly scary thought that a young man's destiny is determined by the strong forces of relationships – thematically similar to some of Thomas Hardy's works. Marcel Hensema as the adult Axel, and Benja Bruijning as the young Axel, energize the film with their charismatic, domineering, and psychological ploys. "People are lazy; they'd rather obey than have to think up something to want. They're grateful when you think of something for them." Axel's law? Perhaps! Axel truly belongs to the cheaters and seducers of society! With regard to their traits, manners, and ambitions, Egon and Axel couldn't have been better examples of two men sitting at the opposite ends of a pole.

The theme of opposites does come into play repeatedly. Attention should be given to Kim Huffman's Marcy and Kelly Touwslager's Marjoke to fully understand how the two relate at the end. Character development and motivation are well focussed throughout this film.

The concentration is on the 30-year Egon-Axel relationship to justify how persuasion could bring the downfall of a seemingly promising and sensible young man. For Egon to shake off Axel is like shaking off his own shadow. Done in a psychologically complex weaving of character presentations, this film does provide imaginative and suspenseful tension. It allows the characters to come together as young teens, settle them in separate frontiers, before re-uniting them for the final destinies.

Truly a satisfying psycho-thriller about friendship, desires, destiny and treason (amazingly, these themes came through with another film, "The Crime of Father Amaro", too!) It's fascinating to watch the characters trying to weigh their own identities. The film has some visually graphic sex scenes. Dialogue fluctuates between Dutch and English.

Tim Krabbe is the praised author of 'Het Gouden Ei', a novel that was put on the screen twice ('Spoorloos' and 'The Vanishing'). One of the Dutch writer's more recent works is 'De Grot', a psychological thriller about two totally different men, Egon and Axel, who meet at a youth camp and, surprising enough, become friends for dear life. Egon is a quiet, somewhat dull person, who spends his time studying and writing geography books. Axel, on the other hand, is a charismatic 'party-animal', a heavy drinking criminal whose everyday's concern is to get a woman into his bedroom. From the moment they meet, Axel has a strong influence on Egon, while the latter envies him because he has a good life without really doing anything (such as reading thick books like Egon); ultimately, Egon is even dragged by Egon into illegal practices himself, which leads to a fatal drug transport in a distant Asian country.

After having read the book last year, I was surprised the critics were quite positive about it. In my opinion, the book suffers especially from the complex structure. While Krabbe presents the story as an absorbing portrait of an uncommon relationship between two people, the plot becomes more of a puzzle: the many episodes are not presented chronologically, so that two successive scenes are seldom in the same episode. Because of this, the story feels surprisingly remote: you often need to know a character's background to really care for him or her. Another complaint was the fact that the main characters, Egon and Axel, are a little stereotypical. Egon IS 'the' dull intellectual, while Axel IS his exact opposite. In real life, such one-dimensional people rarely exist; in books and films, they always seem to be there, taking away a lot of credibility.

Despite all this, the film was a pleasant surprise, being much better than the book. The adaptation excels in its beautiful cinematography, humour and acting: Fedja van Huet (Egon) is one of the few Dutch actors who can make you forget he IS acting (which is, in my opinion, the highest an actor can achieve). The drawbacks of the film, however, are the same as the book's: mainly because the characters are one-dimensional, they are so predictable that it becomes annoying. Guess who wrote the script? Indeed, Krabbe himself. It is obvious that this talented director (that's what the movie makes clear anyway) is hampered by a deficient screenplay. Perhaps Koolhoven should just have chosen a better book.

7/10

The quality of De Grot is above average: you won't get bored, the development of the characters is consistent, the acting is good.

Even the children act good. It looks good, the sound is good, the editing is good.

Nevertheless, I have the feeling that there is one recurring flaw in Koolhoven's work, also in AmnesiA, the film he made just before this one. Too often scenes, dialogues, settings are too explanatory. If there is something we should not miss as an audience it is pushed in our face or said explicitly. A quote from De Grot: "At the time, you chose me as a friend merely to have someone look up to you". As if we couldn't see that ourselves! Or if we didn't notice, leave it unsaid, we will get it in some way or another anyway. Or a woman that says to her man out of the blue "what do you think about our relationship?" is way too explicit to demonstrate that something is wrong between them. I prefer to have a wealth of little subtle suggestions I may or may not pick up, it might work unconsciously. Never do I have the feeling that there is much of that in his work. Even Hollywood action movies assume more movie literacy.

With nudity he is too explicit also. I have had long discussions with Martin on this in the newsgroup nl.kunst.film but he is convinced that he can show whatever he feels like. I disagree strongly, only show if it is needed, and often the nudity in his films is not.

Pointless nudity in films also happens to be a persistent and decades old cliché about Dutch films, Martin apparently has no intention to restrain himself either.

Lastly, I have one objection to the oeuvre of Koolhoven so far.

Although he visually certainly has a unique signature in his work, thematically it remains quite superficial. In spite of his love for authors cinema and the freedom he has had so far to make author films, he does not seem ready (yet?) to reveal thematic concerns in his work. Perhaps I expect too much, but perhaps he dares not to make himself vulnerable yet, although he should. My compliments for style and craftsmanship, but without some more soul in his work it will never become the work of a genius. But he should be given all the means to make a larger oeuvre and might get to that one day.