Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA gang of wealthy ne'er do wells rape and terrorize women for fun and force their husbands to watch. A police detective tries to catch them, but can he break their twisted loyalty to one ano... Tout lireA gang of wealthy ne'er do wells rape and terrorize women for fun and force their husbands to watch. A police detective tries to catch them, but can he break their twisted loyalty to one another?A gang of wealthy ne'er do wells rape and terrorize women for fun and force their husbands to watch. A police detective tries to catch them, but can he break their twisted loyalty to one another?
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Avis à la une
Get a bunch of hormonally-stoked, wealthy, presumably-untouchable teen boys together in an iron-clad clique and let the proverbial sex and mayhem fly. Released in 1973, around the time David Hemmings had his hands full with "Unman, Wittering, & Zigo," and James Mason was dealing with "Child's Play," this youth delinquency story centers around a group of six well-to-do, but never-do-well teens who perpetrate rape and extreme vandalism. Bryan Marshall is the put-upon detective in Amsterdam who is assigned the case after a particularly graphic gang rape takes place in his metropolitan jurisdiction. All leads point to a Dutch seaside town and the six lads, who are seen as upstanding youth in the community, as the perpetrators.
The intriguing element about this otherwise slow-moving affair is the realistic bent director Fons Rademakers brings to the proceedings. The gang rape which opens the film has an air of frank reality not seen in many films during the '70s. His technique doesn't excuse the horrifying nature of the moment by using quick-cut editing, or slashing guitars on the soundtrack, or wild lighting and intense close-ups, all of which would be the way most commercial-driven directors of today would handle this sickly scene. We are forced to watch, along with the victim's husband, as she is taken by five of the six members of the gang. The vision of her just watching her husband with disgust is a hard image to shake.
Rademakers introduces naturalistic elements like this throughout. An interrogation scene of the boys' girlfriends by Marshall (which includes the barely-on-screen presence of Sylvia Kristel) is handled with nuance usually reserved for Hollywood A-type dramas. The natural, everyday-life approach to dressing and undressing (Marshall is seen full frontal, as is his prostitute girlfriend, the entrancing Alexandra Stewart)is executed in a manner completely devoid of any awareness of the camera. A Harrison Ford or Ben Affleck will always take care to cover their privates in a "bedroom" scene with a sheet or a back turn just at the right moment, which immediately makes an audience remove themselves from the story, thinking, "oh, that's right, he's a star; he doesn't want his ding-a-ling to show." Here, it's not cinema verite, but it is just natural.
Even though Marshall's not shy about revealing his shortcomings, it can also be noted he isn't shy about showing much range in his acting abilities. Both he and the criminal lads display a woefully limited amount of acting chops. On the other hand, the women in this film emote a more believable and compelling performance.
Unfortunately, the music score is oftentimes obnoxiously introduced. It sounds like the same cue is dropped in at varying points of transition without any thought of its dramatic effect or variance in rhythm or pitch on the scenes. It's quite distracting from any drama being built up on the screen by Rademakers.
Overall, the mystery of the story, which centers around a cult-like devotion amongst the boys, doesn't lend any surprises nor any suspense-filled moments. It's fairly threadbare. But the naturalness of certain scenes mentioned before, make it a step above the usual Euro-low-budget fare of the '70s. It's a naturalness like fellow Dutchman Verhoven exhibited in "Turkish Delight" and "Keetje Tippel", but without his over-the-top shock values. My rating ** out of ****.
The intriguing element about this otherwise slow-moving affair is the realistic bent director Fons Rademakers brings to the proceedings. The gang rape which opens the film has an air of frank reality not seen in many films during the '70s. His technique doesn't excuse the horrifying nature of the moment by using quick-cut editing, or slashing guitars on the soundtrack, or wild lighting and intense close-ups, all of which would be the way most commercial-driven directors of today would handle this sickly scene. We are forced to watch, along with the victim's husband, as she is taken by five of the six members of the gang. The vision of her just watching her husband with disgust is a hard image to shake.
Rademakers introduces naturalistic elements like this throughout. An interrogation scene of the boys' girlfriends by Marshall (which includes the barely-on-screen presence of Sylvia Kristel) is handled with nuance usually reserved for Hollywood A-type dramas. The natural, everyday-life approach to dressing and undressing (Marshall is seen full frontal, as is his prostitute girlfriend, the entrancing Alexandra Stewart)is executed in a manner completely devoid of any awareness of the camera. A Harrison Ford or Ben Affleck will always take care to cover their privates in a "bedroom" scene with a sheet or a back turn just at the right moment, which immediately makes an audience remove themselves from the story, thinking, "oh, that's right, he's a star; he doesn't want his ding-a-ling to show." Here, it's not cinema verite, but it is just natural.
Even though Marshall's not shy about revealing his shortcomings, it can also be noted he isn't shy about showing much range in his acting abilities. Both he and the criminal lads display a woefully limited amount of acting chops. On the other hand, the women in this film emote a more believable and compelling performance.
Unfortunately, the music score is oftentimes obnoxiously introduced. It sounds like the same cue is dropped in at varying points of transition without any thought of its dramatic effect or variance in rhythm or pitch on the scenes. It's quite distracting from any drama being built up on the screen by Rademakers.
Overall, the mystery of the story, which centers around a cult-like devotion amongst the boys, doesn't lend any surprises nor any suspense-filled moments. It's fairly threadbare. But the naturalness of certain scenes mentioned before, make it a step above the usual Euro-low-budget fare of the '70s. It's a naturalness like fellow Dutchman Verhoven exhibited in "Turkish Delight" and "Keetje Tippel", but without his over-the-top shock values. My rating ** out of ****.
It looks like "A Clockwork Orange"(1971) made in Bloemendaal, North Holland, two years later. Of course it's different and it's not even close to Kubrick's masterpiece, although the scene of collective rape is very well done. I wanted to see it due to the presence of the beautiful Alexandra Stewart. And, I had the surprise to see also Sylvia Kristel in one of her first roles.
This film is now available in all its 98 minute glory on a Dutch (Region 2) DVD for a very reasonable price. The really good news is that the rape scene is nothing like as graphic or as protracted as other reviewers suggest. The five minutes are intercut with the police questioning of the victims. I'm at a loss to understand why four minutes were cut from the original British release as the rape scene itself lasts for no more than two minutes.
My title for this review has a question mark because it is very different from the treatment we have become used to in long-form dramas like "The Bridge". The film is very much of its time. It is certainly not as action-packed as modern American dramas which may be why some reviewers find it slow. I thought the portrayal of Van Der Valk was reasonably true to the novels save, of course, for the philandering with Feodora.
The film as a whole worked well aside from the hippy-trippy bit towards the end which really stamped it as being from the early 1970s, although I think that the basic plot idea or rich kids going bad is one of Freeling's less believable stories.
My title for this review has a question mark because it is very different from the treatment we have become used to in long-form dramas like "The Bridge". The film is very much of its time. It is certainly not as action-packed as modern American dramas which may be why some reviewers find it slow. I thought the portrayal of Van Der Valk was reasonably true to the novels save, of course, for the philandering with Feodora.
The film as a whole worked well aside from the hippy-trippy bit towards the end which really stamped it as being from the early 1970s, although I think that the basic plot idea or rich kids going bad is one of Freeling's less believable stories.
In an opening scene redolent of Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange (1971), six masked youths vandalise the property of a wealthy married couple; when the owners arrive home to discover the hoodlums still at work, the husband is forced to watch as his wife is stripped and gang-raped. Uncompromising Amsterdam detective Van der Valk (Bryan Marshall) investigates the case, and comes to suspect a group of privileged teenagers called The Ravens, whose search for kicks has led them to be exploited by a Charles Manson-style svengali.
Because Of The Cats is a little sluggish at times, but its gritty realism will most likely keep fans of Euro-crime films and '70s exploitation more than happy. The initial sexual assault is graphically depicted in all of its ugliness, there's a smidgen of violence, and, with this being a Dutch film, we also get full frontal nudity from both sexes. Eagle-eyed viewers might even recognise Sylvia Kristel of Emmanuelle fame as one of the 'Cats', the elite girls who associate with The Ravens, and who provide the film with its most memorable scene, a spot of night-time skinny dipping that turns to murder.
6.5 out of 10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb.
Because Of The Cats is a little sluggish at times, but its gritty realism will most likely keep fans of Euro-crime films and '70s exploitation more than happy. The initial sexual assault is graphically depicted in all of its ugliness, there's a smidgen of violence, and, with this being a Dutch film, we also get full frontal nudity from both sexes. Eagle-eyed viewers might even recognise Sylvia Kristel of Emmanuelle fame as one of the 'Cats', the elite girls who associate with The Ravens, and who provide the film with its most memorable scene, a spot of night-time skinny dipping that turns to murder.
6.5 out of 10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb.
A gang of six wealthy hoodlums break into a married couple's house and rape the wife while forcing the husband to watch. Thus begins a dogged investigation by a determined detective who quickly finds that their cult-like solidarity can be a serious obstacle to breaking them. Here's another little oddity that's been particularly hard to track down. This was originally released in the US with an X rating and was later re-edited for an R. All of the rips I have seen are 94 minutes, but the IMDb run-time for the film is 98 minutes. Thats a big discrepancy, even allowing for different frame rates. I will just have to keep looking for that illusive 98 minute cut.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesFilm debut of Sylvia Kristel.
- Versions alternativesOriginally released in the U.S. with an "X" rating from the MPAA, in 1974 the film was edited and this version received a rating of "R".
- ConnexionsFeatured in Underwater Nude Scenes (2016)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Because of the Cats?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 200 000 NLG (estimé)
- Durée
- 1h 38min(98 min)
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant