User reviews

In the Netherlands the movie The East was met with a lot of controversy before it was released on Amazon Prime. The story is about Indonesia's claim for independence from the Netherlands straight after World War 2, when the country was still called the Dutch East Indies. It follows a young Dutch soldier who travels with the army to the East to restore order and to stop the rebellion. Later in the film he discovers that "this was not what he signed for".

This historical event in itself of course was controversial. The Dutch have done terrible things in Indonesia during this time (in the film led by Raymond Westerling aka The Turk), but the rebels, the Indonesian Nationalists, were even more cruel. In fact, my (Indonesian) mother (who was a teenager on Java at the time) told me that the rebels were even more feared than the Dutch. The Nationalists did terrible things to their own people to the point that she and her family were even moved to special camps where former Japanese soldiers (!) protected them.

The first trailer of The East immediately raised a lot of questions.

How would the movie portray the Dutch KNIL soldiers? Were they the bad guys and the rebels the good guys? Would the film even mention that the KNIL-soldiers - like the American Vietnam veterans - were victims too? Would the Rebels be shown as heroes or as foes? And what about the controversial Raymond Westerling? Would he be shown as a hero or a cruel mad man?

Okay, let's first concentrate on The East as a fictional movie.

Man, the film really is the Dutch "Platoon". The East looks stunning (for Dutch standards) and can compete with any American big budget production. The performances are very good too. The way our protagonist, Johan de Vries, not only struggles with the way his mission is developing but also with the things from his past is well done. Intertwined with the scenes in Indonesia are flash forwards from Johan's life back in the Netherlands, struggling to pick up his old life and in the end completely losing it.

At first Johan feels bored by the lack of action in Indonesia. One day he meets the strong captain Westerling and things change. Westerling becomes his hero and he doesn't hesitate to join his Special Troops Corps to destroy the rebellion. But when they travel to South Sulawesi Johan is shocked by Westerling's methods and wants to get out. This results in an unrealistic, but exciting finale.

One of the controversies of The East was about the look of Westerling (the real one didn't have a "Hitler" moustache) and the almost Nazi look of the uniforms of his Special Troops Corps. Comparing the Dutch to Nazis is almost sacrilege, because the (Jewish) people suffered a lot during their regime during WW2. But in this case I understand the filmmaker's decision to do so. Westerling does have a moustache, but to say that it resembles Hitler's that's a far stretch. I think it was done to show the audience that this character is based on a true historical figure, but it doesn't follow his true life. In fact, the ultimate fate of Westerling in this film can't be further from the truth and is completely fictional.

And about the "Nazi" uniforms: well, I don't see them as particular Nazi clothing. They are much darker than the normal ones (which makes no sense in the heat) but I think they were there to show that this was a particular group and to protect the "normal" KNIL soldiers. Most KNIL soldiers were normal boys who had nothing to do with the atrocities that were done. And even the ones that have done bad things: you can understand that it was hard to say no to a charismatic leader like Westerling. Especially under those circumstances it's difficult to distinguish wrong from right.

The fear that the Nationalists would be shown as heroes or victims is also not grounded. There's one scene in the movie that shows their incredible cruelty and that works very well. No, the rebels are not shown as good people. Maybe their cruelty should have been more prominent in the film (like the Dutch ones) but as a filmmaker you have to make choices. In the end it's the story about an innocent and idealistic boy who goes to a (possibly unjust) war and about the impact it has in his remaining life.

Although I am no expert on this era of history I think I can say that The East is an incredible movie. It totally delivers as a fictional film that was made for entertainment. It has great storytelling although I must say that the end was a little bit too much.

From a historical point of view I'm happy that a lot of important things were mentioned. You can understand why former KNIL soldiers had a hard time to even talk about their experiences in Indonesia. The Dutch have done bad things, but the Nationalists were just as bad or even worse. Westerling has done good things, but the methods he used when he was commanding his Special Troops Corps were just plain wrong. In that way he's much like Kurtz in Apocalypse Now: he thinks he's right and maybe started out as a good guy, but in the end he lost his way.

Historically a lot of things may not be correct in The East. But maybe the film will cause a healthy discussion on this subject, or at least way more understanding for the KNIL soldiers who went to the East to fight for their land because they believed in what they were fighting for.

I just hope that viewers realize that The East is a movie and not a documentary. Even the makers don't claim that they show the whole truth, but I think it's a great attempt to do so.

8/10.

This film dares to appear discussing a point of view that many people don't want to explore. About the Dutch in the colonial era of Indonesia. About the colonizing party. And this film presents it with a neutral pov. There is no agenda for glorification or self-defense. This film purely shows the human side experienced by the parties involved. As a war film, however, it follows the formula well. We can say cliche, but still unique thanks to the pov. As an Indonesian, this film is well done.

The movie starts off great. Not many historical flaws and a very balanced execution between the different perspectives. Sadly, the second part of the movie takes a Tarantino-esq turn in tone and story (like Inglorious Basterds) and this almost ruined the movie for me. Either commit to one style or the other. Furthermore, the second half is extremele unbalanced and depict the Dutch Special Forces troops as coldblooded murders basically the whole time. If you look at the actual historical facts about Westerling, you'd see that alot of nuance is left off the table. The ending is also very strange and basically pure fiction. This wouldn't be a bad thing because Tarantino did this with Inglorious Basterds aswell and that worked out great. However, Tarantino maintained his tone and story throughout the whole movie. This movie does not. Which makes it feel very disjointed.

Speaking of acting, visuals, story and music: The acting is great (for Dutch standards) and the visuals and music are also very good. The story is very well done (for the first half) but then descends into fiction for a big part. Without spoiling it, yes there were alot of war crimes being committed at that time and place, but a whole lot of other stuff was left out. The second half felt like a montage of war crimes by the Dutch special forces without any actual story being told.

All in all, the movie is still good. The first half especially is very much worth the watch. I would still recommend it, just be warned about historical inaccuracies and lack of nuance.

Story from the colonial territory of dutch indonesia post-ww2, and the ''ethnical'' cleansing of terror cells threatening queen Wilhelminas land and people.

Its a utterly shaking story about a desperate dutch soldier ,who due to his fathers collaboration with the nazis, makes living in holland inhumanely impossible, and with no possible opportunities to get a job or make a living due to traitor blood running through his veins. So he joins the dutch forces of the far east, an edition of an army like the french legionaires, where you are noody and nobody cares what youve done to flee from home.

Its a jungle war movie, its pretty graphic and shocking, and the final scene i didnt see coming. Acting are among the superior that you may find in the pay bass, reminds me of some of the norwegian resistance war movies made in the 2 millenium. Its is slow in periods and splashes the surface , but takes some abrupt deep dives into the matter now and then. There are lots of blood and temporal fragmental eruptions due to summary executions en masse.

Productionwise, it shows that the helmsmen do have experience in the silverscreen craftmanship, the locations are shot in a more palmatic environment than holland can offer. So its not a low budget flick you are in for. Good camera lead, very realistic special effects, and as mentioned a great cast.

On the nether end is the lack of a good timeline, cause there are flashback that makes a grumpy old man confused about where and when. Its also drawn abit long on playtime, but summasummarum, you will be taught and you will be entertained, and you will feel, especially if pure blood dutch, the urge to make some revisions to your own domestic and extraterritorial history curicullum, and it may give some peace on mind to all colonial immigrants of the dutch empire, and may explain some social issues connected to terrorist attakcs done on dutch homeground especially in the 1970's.

A good movie, and ill beg for more revelating movies in the future. Dutch and belgian war movies do get good marks in my movie inventory. A recommend.

Going into this movie fully aware of all the drama surrounding it. My tip is don't go into it expecting historical accuracy. We didn't expect accuracy for apocalypse now or 1917. It's a setting for a war movie. And a anti war piece just like the previously named films

That being said, as far as a war movie its okay. Its mostly the usual story of the innocent fng that seems more pure then his compatriots from day one. His degradation as he gets hit with the horrors of war taken to the conclusion of the story.

The sets are beautiful as it is all shot on location and the kit and gear are all amazing. The actors are mostly good, the Turk being a pretty decent Kurtz rip-off. Mostly i am happy, this is a Dutch film made about a subject most people could learn more about, with great production value and some nice use of lights and camera work. The last act is definitely the weakest, but the beginning. Is pretty decent.

I would say: Watch with managed expectations.

In my opinion this movie missed an opportunity to teach the average viewer about a part of Dutch history which unfortunately is not very well known (and still is debated). The movie is well made, but it left me a bit disappointed. I am of Indonesian decent and was very much excited to see the movie because I'd love to see this topic getting more attention. But it is really a fictional story loosely based on factual characters and events. The central weight of the story lies with the conflicted protagonist and his relation to the antagonist which is only set to a backdrop of Indonesia and their fight for independence. It lightly touches some of the context and background but it has no weight in the movie. It may have caused some viewers to believe that this movie only wishes to show the Dutch were there blatantly killing innocent villagers. Although the Indonesians are almost portrait as Vietcong (yet you won't see any of them shooting even one bullet though). In fact, because the movie only shows violence coming from the Dutch the movie feels very unbalanced if you are knowledgeable about the actual history. I know this movie is not meant to be a documentary but as they have done a good job with visual accuracy I perhaps expected a Schindler's list kind of gripping movie in terms of accuracy.

Based on the stories my father told me is this mostly based on reality. It was an awful time he had for four years. As an MP he followed this man closely and saw the story unfold. It took him 40 years to tell this to me what happened. Thanks Jim and all the actors.

Today watched this controversial movie. The story line is good and the movie contains all subjects of a good war movie. That the movie is by some not considered fully accurate is correct. However if I have to give this movie a rating it is definitly one of the best Dutch movies released in recent years and shows what war can do with mans mind.

Most reviews are exemplary for society today: people choosing position at extreme ends based on the subject with no space for nuance or really talking about the actual matter at hand. Very high marks, or very low. Yes, it's an important subject, but the movie isn't good or bad because the subject is important.

The visuals are good and above par for Dutch movies. The narrative transcends Dutch standards of treating it's educated audience like children with baroque and derivative clichés in storytelling (i.e. Lobotomized Love Actually clones etc.). It's just that the movie is too long, or perhaps should have been longer but not as a movie but as a series, which would have allowed for different dynamics to have been explored more in depth. There are a lot of interesting things there to dig into, but due to the film format and limited time that means it can a little too feel superficial. That sense of superficiality to certain elements (or rather the desire to dig deeper) combined with the long length feel at odds with each other. The movie also seems not to be able to make up it's mind to be either a social commentary or war movie, which gives a sense of falling just shy of the mark in both categories. Still a valiant effort with strong casting, acting, directing and art direction and in any case important to raise a difficult subject of relatively recent history. Other than most reviews, the film can be commended for choosing nuance and showing there can be well intended albeit misguided reasoning (rooting out perceived evil) behind atrocious acts, and by doing so manages to steer clear of cheap morality.

The fact that it is reported some Dutch war veterans are uncomfortable with this movie being released is a testament to the filmmaker portraying the part of Dutch history many would rather not face .

This movie is about a young man who volunteers to fight in the Indonesian liberation war , mainly because of his family's unfortunate choices during the nazi occupation the main character feels obligated to demonstrate his commitment to his country by throwing his all into the counter insurgency war in the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia).

TThey say war's first casualty is innocence and that is the case here, he tries to learn Indonesian, relate to the local communities and basically is thinking he is there to help.

Serendipity happens and his path goes astray as he teams with a commander who has integrated with the Indonesians who believes his way of fighting the insurgents is the right way.

This movie shows an unknown, mostly unreported war and the terrible situations many young Dutch men were thrown into on the whim of a post war government desperate to cling to colonial power whatever the cost.

The battle contact scenes are realistic , no Hollywood massive explosions here, more an unseen enemy taking shots from afar, over retaliation and soul searching from soldiers unsure if they are liberators or war criminals.

I think this could be up for the Oscar nomination for best international film in 2022.

Highly recommended.

A hard to rate movie.

I have to rely on stories my granddad told me serviing in theDutch Indies during that time. I have digged into the history, but i have to admit: Dutch eduction failed in the time I went to school about this subject.

The movie started with a coming home trip of the soldiers. I doubt that scene was close to history accuracy. Didnt fit the period of time. Looked more like the 80's or the 2020's the way people acted. But ok, I see why the scene was added.

The first part of the storyline was actually pretty good. I did vividly see my granddad up there. The boys getting klapper for the soldiers (klapper = coconut in the Indies). And yes the soldiers were just walking around to "protect Dutch property". Please notice the quote marks. In the second half the story goes beserk. I doubt there was a team doing the things shown in the movie. This said, I have no doubts whatsoever, the Dutch stepped way across the line of what we call , hmmzz good. Lots of innocent civilians were simply murdered.

But it was clearly were the director gots his inspiration of: not history books (well, there arent many history books describing these dark pages of Dutch history), but movies like Platoon, Rambo, Deerhunter, Once upon in America (yes, too clear to not notice) and series like Tour of Duty.

But I still gave this movie a 7. Why? Well it is good someone tried to make a movie of this part of history. Besides that, the acting was overall pretty good and the camera work was above Dutch quality. The storyline, being historical accurate or not, was also good, and by being not chronological (did I already mention you can compare it to Once upon a time in America) it got even better.

Also the thin line between good and bad was a good thing. The director, despite of his background didnt pick really picked sides and gave the viewer enough space to make his or hers own opinion.

So I was surprised of the end result and I have to say, this might be one of the best Dutch movies I have ever seen, with actors not that well known in the Netherlands.

De Oost/The East is another proof that more and more good war movies are made in Europe and beat most of modern war blockbusters of Hollywood. The East tells a rather unknown story of colonial activities in post WWII by the government of the Netherlands. It is also very thought provoking - soldiers of the Netherlands who fought the Germans are switching their role and are now in the role of the suppressors who commit crimes of war. Good acting and production and some nice cinematography make The East an entertaining and interesting watch. Maybe not a masterpiece but good.

History is not without its dark patches. With territorial expansion and a worldwide trade that turned the Dutch 17th century into a Golden Age (a term that is already becoming controversial in itself), there also came slavery, colonial subjugation and bloody struggles for independence. Making these topics debatable in history lessons and political arenas is essentialy a good thing: the Germans seem to have no problem with tackling the sins of the past in their art, judging by great movies like Der Untergang (The Downfall), Das Leben Der Anderen (The Lives of Others) and Werk Ohne Autor (Never Look Away). Acknowledging a dark past is a cathartic experience, and the more we embrace our mistakes, the less likely we are to repeat them.

Still, the euphemistically called 'politional actions' in colonial Indonesia have remained an underexposed area for years. Director Jim Taihuttu righteously noticed the dozens of war movies full of brave Dutch resistance fighters, but a near-complete lack of movies about the role of the Netherlands in the Indonesian Revolution. The fact that controversy arose before and after this movie was released already underscores how painful this topic still is. So the big question is: can the first movie about it do both justice to the sensitivity of the subject, as well as the complexity of the situation?

In the best tradition of movies based on historic events, we follow a fictional character who draws the audience into an unknown world. In this case, Johan, a young man burdened by the recently ended war and his father's part in it as a German collaborator. Hoping to wipe the slate clean, he volunteers to go to the East Indies and get control back from nationalist terrorist groups. His regiment is full of ideas of colonial superiority, and determined to bring back civilization to this backward country, but they soon find out that they are stuck in a routine of guard duties, long marches and preparing for battles against enemies they rarely get to see.

The first half of the movie has a pleasantly authentic feeling to it. The soldiers are a diverse group of young men from all over the Netherlands, and not just Amsterdam, Rotterdam or The Hague. Taihuttu doesn't pull his punches when he depicts them realistically to the point of being wildly racist, and when they battle their boredom with alcohol, frequenting prostitutes and starting fights in local bars. The mood is almost the same as the one we know from many Vietnam movies, including the horrible plight of the locals who are forced to pick a side, and then have to be prepared for the retaliation of the other , and how traumatized Dutch soldiers were not exactly welcomed back as heroes. However, this part of the movie starts to meander a bit without a real conflict, so a welcome bit of drama is injected when Raymond Westerling, or "the Turk" (Marwan Kenzari) makes his entrance.

In contrast to the ofther officers who show very little motivation to take actions that could actually amount to anything, the Turk has a hands-on approach to deal with hostiles that may be in a morally grey area, but it actually produces results. Johan follows this man with great zeal, until he gets to a point where the Turk's actions get harder and harder to defend. It was a good idea to cast Martijn Lakemeier as Johan, as he is best known for playing a young fledgling WW2 freedom fighter in Oorlogswinter (Winter in Wartime) where he has to make some tough choices. We can totally see him to the same in Indonesia, and get into an inner conflict when the things he does there are not too different from what the Nazis did in the Netherlands.

However, the role of the Turk is the movie's greatest blessing as well as its biggest curse. The story is clearly moving towards presenting a moral dilemma for both Johan and the viewer, but because we see the Turk's platoon use harsh methods (almost to the point of getting repetitious) that are still branded "war crimes" by many to this day, it is not really a dilemma. Critics have indeed argued that Indonesian guerilla groups also did many horrible things that sometimes surpassed the cruelty of the Dutch army, and many locals were happy that the Dutch responded in kind. However, the makers seem to want to keep the sympathy primarily with the Indonesians (perhaps a condition for being allowed to film there?). In the first half, we ocassionally see some of the atrocities done by the terrorists, but the crimes of the "belandas" (Dutch people) get much more exposure, especially towards the end. I really don't mind seeing Dutch people as "the bad guys"; it is disturbingly easy to get dragged into that kind of group behavior. However, I also think that moral ambiguity works much better if there is more balance in how the two warring factions are depicted.

What also starts to work against the movie is the framing story, where Johan is back in the Netherlands and finds it difficult to adapt to normal life. These scenes are interspersed with the main events of 1946, and in an ideal back-and-forth structure, the two storylines reinforce each other, but here, we don't really see the point of the framing story until the very end. Granted, the last scene is shockingly effective, but the impact is somewhat diminished by the Tarantino-esque choice of music during the final shot.

There are still enough moments were the movie works. There is little to none of the cheesiness that often plagues Dutch movies that try to tackle serious subject matter; the performances are good throughout, as are the production values (due to filming on location in Indonesia). There is one great scene in particular where Johan asks a fellow soldier, an Indonesian, why he is fighting against his countrymen. The answer is that he is not: Indonesia is a country full of different peoples at odds with each other, and the Dutch simply treat it as one country. I wished there were more of these scenes where the complex situation is captured so beautifully in a single conversation.

One critic called this movie a 3/5 star film, but he gave it 4 out of 5 stars, just for sheer boldness of finally committing this sordid history on film. I partially agree with that statement, yet I believe that making an 'important movie' does not discharge the makers from telling a balanced story. This was a more than adequate film, but I keep wondering if it would have worked better as a mini-series that had more time to explore both sides of the conflict. But other films like Soldaat van Oranje, Riphagen and De Tweeling were also eventually re-edited as mini-series, so who knows?

DOZENS OF DUTCH MOVIES have been made about World War 2 against Nazi Germany. Dozens! And rightfully so, it is an important chapter in Dutch history and should never be forgotten! (plus the Nazi Germans were the bad guys).

NOT ONE DUTCH MOVIE had been made IN 70+ YEARS TIME about another WAR that was happening far away in the former Dutch colony Indonesia, yet it is an equally important chapter in Dutch history!

So what's going on here? How come this war has never before gotten the attention it deserves in the Dutch education system, schools and history books? Almost nobody knows what really happened there!

This movie, THE EAST (DE OOST) finally changes that and shows in a partial historically accurate way what happened over there during the BERSIAP PERIOD after the capitulation of Japan. We see this through the eyes of a rookie Dutch soldier, really bad things happen (on both sides!) and we gradually get to see his struggle with it all.

The fact that this movie is the first cinematic Dutch movie that sheds some light on this controversial and difficult period in Dutch history deserves praise + it gets extra points for showing courage for making this movie!

It's a fantastic movie, great acting, beautiful scenery, raw sense of reality - but please also understand that it's a MOVIE, not a documentary!

Rating: 10/10.

"De Oost" is a lesson in history. As the Second World War draws to an end, the Netherlands sends more troops to Indonesia, hoping to regain their colony as the Japanese occupation is ending. A quick fact check and you will know that this story is 90% accurate. I only seem to have the impression that the movie tries to twist the story to favour of the Dutch. The acting of Martijn Lakemeier (Johan de Vries), Marwan Kenzari (Raymond "The Turk" Westerling) and Jonas Smulders (Matthias) is worth mentioning. One of the best acting performances I have seen in a Dutch movie. The scenes from Johan his life both during and after the war is the part that downgraded this movie. Johan´s life back in The Netherlands spoiled the twist. Overall an awesome movie with superb acting performances and if you like war movies and/or history movies, this one is for you.

As far as Dutch films are concerned, De Oost does a decent job. I'm from The Netherlands myself, so I have seen my share of Dutch films, and I have to be honest, the majority is not great. We do not have many actors, which, unfortunately, also entails that we do not have many solid actors. Dutch actors are especially terrible at dialogue, trying way too hard to make it sound convincing and realistic, and it almost always ends up having the opposite effect.

De Oost actually manages to avoid this flaw, and it also passes as a decent film, which came as a surprise. The cinematography, costume design, editing, and pacing are fantastic, especially in the first half. This might have influenced my verdict of the film, because I could not help but feel proud of the Dutch for being able to make something of this quality. Unfortunately, there are some flaws to it as well, and it's the second half. The second half takes way too long and does way too little to let it mean anything. The ending is very insignificant and empty, and the plot becomes chaotic and choppy.

That being said, it will probably not meet certain viewers' standards, but it does stand proudly as one of the better Dutch films.

Excellent brew of historical facts, recycled diary entries of veterans, good acting and beautiful shots of (computerized and real) landscapes.

Do not expect an exact replica of (some of the horrific) acts the Royal Dutch Army. To me it's a story of a Vietnam avant la lettre, a Western country determines to exercise power over a country far away and soldiers and civilians who are paying the price... Good stuff!

Started off good but Jim Taihuttu began to miss in conflicted plot and character depths. Authentic sets and cinematography weren't matched by historically accurate events especially from Indonesian perspective. Still had few subtle moments in war film cliche though.

This is a good war movie. What makes it more interesting for me is that it covers a darker part of my country's history. This is probably why it caused a bit of controversy in the Netherlands. Specifically, some critics say it paints a rather one-sided picture of the situation in the former Dutch East Indies. However, historical movies never are 100% accurate, and it is just a movie. I am not sure what some people expect from movies like this.

A good movie for dutch standards, a okay movie for general standards.

A well shot movie riddled with cliché´s.