Oesters van Nam Kee

There are so many flaws in this film, watching its premiere was an almost painful experience. I fear it will be a local (Dutch) hit though, for the simple reason that Katja Schuurman gets naked in it. But even her wonderful exterior is severely tainted by the lack of any plausible plot, the unbearable flatness of ALL the characters, the often stupendous and completely unconvincing dialogue, the overdose of superfluous shots, the dragging scenes, and the whole b*lshit of it all. Words fail me. In Dutch filmhistory (already far from flawless), this is an alltime low. It should be deleted and forgotten.

Well Katja looks nice ,great body thats all if you ask me a typical dutch movie sex in it obvious ,well and a bit of a story thats all if you ask me i felt almost at sleep but some people may like it anyway judge your self ,but be warned it is a dutch movie so more sex and stuff like that than a story...to bad .

I can't say much for the movie on its own, as I prepared for seeing it (and seeing Katja... hmmm) by reading the book first.

The book on its own is done quite well; the novel of an adolescence, his dual life, his frustration with love and the way he tries to struggle through life isn't all that bad. When watching the movie, though, it became apparent to me that almost all of those motives/themes are lost.

The casting is done well - both main characters (Katja Schuurman - I only know her acting from a Dutch theatre-play, and Egbert Jan Weeber, whom I only know from "Van God Los") are especially fit for the role they play.

The movie by itself (without knowledge of the book) must be confusing to most or seem like scenes loosely put together. It might have been maimed in the editing, or perhaps the screenwriter has a different view on how to construct a movie then I do. They tried hard to show the all-consuming character of the relationship by putting in a few very steamy sex-scenes, but ended up doing what just every other dutch movie does: profiling itself just because of those sex-scenes (which is what other comments point out quite clearly). Which is a shame, since the original story behind it is quite a bit more. Well, not Tolstoi, but OK :-)

I've read the book first. Oesters is a fine novel, where the main character tell about the love of his life. Bit by bit you learn about the terrible things that he did. Bit by bit you got to know who he victim is. The sequences in prison. The last page where he stares out of the prison-window. They left it all out of the movie. Why? Now is it just another coming of age movie like Mad Love, Ik ook van Jou, Betty Blue etc. And not a good one aswell. 7/10, because the cast was very good, pity they had not a better script.

OYSTERS AT NAM KEE'S (Pollo de Pimentel - Netherlands 2002).

Based on the novel "De Oesters van Nam Kee" by Kees van Beijnum, who also took credit for the screenplay, the film handles the love story between 18-year old schoolboy Berry (Egbert-Jan Weeber) and the older nightclub dancer and femme-fatale Thera (Katja Schuurman). Berry leads a double-life; for his petty criminal friends he hides the fact that he is from the only upper-class street in the neighborhood, but he trusts Thera and tells her everything (why shouldn't he?). When their love reaches its apogee with the consumption of oysters at the Zeedijk restaurant "De Oesters van Nam Kee", Thera suddenly disappears from Berry's life. Desperate, he seeks the company of his old friends again and things go from bad to worse.

The film got an unprecedented publicity campaign at the time, because the film's female lead Katja Schuurman was gonna shed her clothes, and - at the same time - posed naked in Playboy Magazine as Thera (!), the name of her character in the film. After a pre-screening of the film many people apparently objected against the explicit nudity (reputedly mostly Muslim girls)and the makers immediately caved in and cut a number of scenes. Is it the morally conservative climate that seemed to have taken hold over Dutch society? I'm not sure. Probably a carefully planned publicity stunt, a painful example of self-censorship, or just an exercise in bad taste.

Too bad the whole affair was all for naught, because there's nothing of interest in the entire film. Badly scripted with some awful dialog, and some textbook examples of what NOT to do in a screenplay; for instance, when Berry's inner thoughts in the book are transferred as dialog in the film, with - off course - disastrous and sometimes hilarious results. I'd rather have some gratuitous exploitation flick with Katja Schuurman than this mess. It's a shame really, because she has an undeniable screen presence and is primarily a physical actress. Every movement she makes seems so effortlessly erotic. In this film it becomes tiresome because of the lousy story, but that's not really hers to blame. There must be plenty of roles for her, if you know how to use her talents. Hollywood is full of screen sirens, who are not trained or particularly gifted actresses, but Katja Schuurman is over thirty now, and nobody seems to know how to use her talents.

Kees van Beijnum also wrote the screenplay, but seems to have learned from his mistakes one year later with his work on DE PASSIEVRUCHT (2004) by Karel Glastra van Loon, which turned out to be a very decent film, but with "Oesters" nobody seemed to have the slightest idea what they were doing. I don't want to see his film again.

Camera Obscura --- 2/10