De storm

Really, just read the book. I cannot even begin to compare it to this film. Bad acting, bad lines, wrong accents, and a thousand things missing in (and different to) the storyline.

The book catches the feelings and circumstances of main character Julia so well, you'll actually start feeling the same way she does and will want to pursue her goal of finding her baby even beyond the very end. The true tragedy and injustice of her situation will still hold you in it's grasp for a long time after finishing the book.

By the by, also there is more attention to the flooding and it's consequences to the people living there.

(Book is called '1953' by Rik Launspach)

A real-world tragedy deserves a respectful recounting of events. But this movie opted to reïmagine the dramatic Christmas flood of 1953 in an absurd fictional storyline where the plot and the characters are so shallow you start wondering what the problem is. De Storm fails as a historical film, fails as a drama and fails as a thriller.

The film promotes the dated idea that "a woman needs a man no matter how strong she is". Additionally, it praises idiotic actions of stupidity as "heroic rescue attempts". None of the actors managed to deliver their lines with any level of truth. And I would not have been able to muster the two stars I rated it if the special effects hadn't been this decent.

De Storm, in essence, is an insult to the victims of the flood and a disgrace to Dutch filmmaking. Tedious, disastrously dated and offending.

56 years after the devastating 'big flood' of 1953 the tragedy finally makes it to to the big screen. After a wait this long it's even more a shame that such a big event in Dutch history turned out to be such a disappointing movie. Where other movies, like for instance Titanic, successfully use a personal drama as a metaphor for the bigger picture, 'De Storm' gets lost in a totally unrealistic and very one dimensional story about a woman losing her baby. The movie ends up almost ignoring the tragedy all those other thousands of people where facing during this flood. The characters in this movie aren't properly introduced so as a spectator you feel no connection at all with the leading roles. The dialogs are very poor and the acting, especially from leading lady Sylvia Hoeks, is a disgrace!!!

Just do yourself a favor and avoid this movie

I looked forward to this movie, because of the true story of the Storm in 1953. I was very disappointed. The flood came immediately in the beginning, you didn't even know the characters yet. The flooding itself was good to see. However, the main character Julia was very unlikeable and the acting was terrible. There was no emotion in her acting, even though her sisters and mother were dead and here baby was missing. The same look for the hole movie. The storyline was really unbelievable and the end.. well, you should see it to believe how terrible it is. The characters were in the water for a long time, that would not have been possible because of the temperature of the water. Maybe it was because I had too high expectations, but as i said, I was really disappointed.

I've seen this movie yesterday, also during the Film by the Sea festival in Vlissingen.

I really liked how the movie started, lots of tension building up and the special effects are very well done. If you want to learn more about the 1953 flood though, then this movie might not be the best choice. I was hoping for a more in depth movie about this subject, but the movie focuses more on a personal story that happens during (and partly because of) the flood.

The overall acting was mediocre, and only Sylvia Hoeks as our main character seems to be displaying some genuine emotions. The first thing I noticed was that the actors use almost no local dialect ('Zeeuws'). Even though it's not very realistic and probably done to appeal for a larger (Dutch) audience, I liked the choice.