O Amante de Kathy Tippel

This feels quite a bit like a spiritual sequel to one of my favorite movies of all time, which I also perceive as perhaps the most underrated movie I can think of, Paul Verhoeven's debut feature film, Turkish Delight. This is also directed by Verhoeven and has the same two leads, the iconic Rutger Hauer in some of his earliest roles, and the utterly beautiful and charismatic Monique van de Ven. I guess there's a bit of a swap as Hauer is the main character in the previous, while van de Ven is most certainly the main character in this.

I expected less from this hardly-referenced second offering from Verhoeven, considering it's never even spoken of, but the combination of van de Ven's electric allure with that of Verhoeven's provocative, fast-paced directing keep this film riveting through every sequence. On paper, you'd think it might be a slow-burner, but it hardly ever feels the part. In summary, it's quite a simple film - a poor girl who is the eldest child in her extremely impoverished family seeks more out of life, and slowly, through recognizing the power of her own allure, amongst other things, she begins connecting with people who are a little bit richer, or a little bit more powerful - and so she makes her sporadic journey into higher society rather suddenly. Of course, one can only "pretend" to be something for so long...

If you're watching for Hauer, you'll find much more within his performance in the other early gems of Verhoeven (Spetters is another great one...I've yet to watch Soldier of Orange - That's the last of Verhoeven's Dutch classics remaining for me), but this film is absolutely worth watching regardless. There are bundles of intriguing, stylish, innovative, and very memorable sequences scattered throughout it. Specifically, one featuring a giant vat of intimidating green liquid, and one where many people are being shot in a dark alley!

All of Verhoeven's Dutch classics are more than worth exploring. This is no different. Fully on par with Spetters and The 4th Man. I love Paul Verhoeven films - he's truly one of the best that cinema ever had.

This film is weighed down by its deeply inadequate ending which does not seem to want to connect itself with the themes of greed and hunger relayed throughout. Tonally, it's incomplete.

Whilst the record indicates that Rob Houwer is part of the problem as to why the ending is the way it is - it's frustrating to think that this can't be ranked alongside Verhoeven's more accomplished works like Starship Troopers, from what it could have been...

"Keetje Tippel" is one of Verhoeven's lesser known movies but it really deserves to be seen and better known, all over the world. Reason why it isn't known better is I think because of "Turks fruit" from 1973. After that movie people expected this movie to be a sort of "Turks fruit 2", also because it was once again directed by Verhoeven and had Monique van de Ven and Rutger Hauer as the two main leads. "Turks fruit" and "Keetje Tippel" (and in a way also Verhoeven's earlier movie "Wat zien ik") show some similarities in the way the story is told but it are in fact of course two totally different movies.

The movie provides a pretty good and insightful view of life in late 19th century Amsterdam. The atmosphere of the old Amsterdam is perfectly captured by Jan de Bont's cinematography and by the costume design and art direction.

What makes "Keetje Tippel" better than the average period drama is the directness of the story telling. This is of course thanks to Verhoeven's typical style of directing that always is very direct and straight to the point. Once more the movie features quite some nudity and confronting scene's. But it all works well because it serves a purpose in the movie and it's obviously not only put in it to simply shock the viewer in a cheap way. The movie however is quite short and it didn't feel that the movie covered the entire story and the ending is abrupt and not entirely satisfying because it still leaves a bunch of questions unanswered.

The acting isn't always top-class but this is more because of the simple dialog, rather than its the actors their fault. Rutger Hauer however deserves credit for his role and he plays his character in a very believable way. Monique van de Ven is good for about 70% of the time but her acting really pushes it at times and her character at times goes a bit too much over-the-top. The movie further more features a good supporting cast.

The story is always interesting and you never know what is going to happen next, thanks to the unpredictable and realistic characters that are being portrayed in this movie. The movie is based on the real life of Neel Doff, which gives the movie an even more realistic and confronting feeling.

Better than your average period drama's. See this movie if you get the chance.

8/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

This movie details the struggle of young Dutch women,Keetje Tippel (Monique Van De Ven) from the countryside who moves with her family to Amsterdam in search of a better life only to find themselves living among filth, vermin and squalor in a slum. She finds work in various jobs where conditions are horrible and she is subjected to constant sexual harassment and eventually rape.

Finally she becomes a prostitute which ends up being her gateway to the good life as she becomes mistress to the banker, Hugo (Rutger Hauer) and later the respected wife of Hugo's wealthy friend.

This is an expose of the Dutch class-system in the 19th century and has socialist and feminist overtones. It ranks among the best of 1970's Dutch cinema and is easily the highlight of Monique Van De Ven's career.

Warning! Although there is some nudity and sexuality it is not done in celebration of sensuality but rather explores the dark side of exploitation of sex. This is a very serious film and not for those looking for light entertainment.

From this movie, it is easy to see how the director made it out of Holland and landed in mainstream Hollywood. He takes a very serious subject, extreme poverty and how it leads to social uprising, and adds his personal light touches that almost make you forget the political subtext. The "finger shadow" scene before the rape was a touch of cinematic genius that I almost missed the first time around.

The ultimate lesson seems to me to be, of course, that we are all whores, it just depends on how much we can afford to spend on clothes.

One question, if she was so poor, how did she keep her roots died blonde?