Qu'est ce que je vois?

The title says it all. 'Wat zien ik?' or 'What am I seeing?' was exactly the question I asked myself when I watched this film the other night. The film itself seems to be nothing more than an accumulation of 'strange' customers that a hooker in Amsterdam entertains and has a very sketch-like feel to it. Except that it isn't funny. For me it felt a bit like Monty Python's Meaning of life. Every customer was another short sketch that failed and everything in between was thinner than a piece of toilet paper. The reason I felt like that was because the characters, although the actors were OK, had no real depth and one just could not identify with any of them or with their actions. A bad effort from Verhoeven, which I guess nobody will enjoy much. Luckily he made better films later on.

4 out of 10

I'm not really sure what to think about this movie. I'm still trying to figure out what exactly 'the point' of this movie was. It seems like Paul Verhoeven himself also agrees with this; This movie should be forgotten.

For a comedy it simply is not funny enough and for a drama it ain't heavy enough. It's a incoherent mess of sometimes intended funny scene's and intended dramatic one's. Neither style really works out an 100% and the end result is an unpleasant movie to watch that's neither really funny or dramatic.

Also a bit of a problem is the story itself, it's not realistic and highly unlikely all. The actors are quite good, I mean there are some big Dutch names in here but none of the characters are really any good or likable enough.

I always used to think that it was a awesome thing that a distant relative of mine, Henk Molenberg played in a Verhoeven movie. He is even on the cover of the movie. But than I saw the role he played...ha-ha I'm almost embarrassed now, he plays the customer of Greet who loves to clean while wearing pumps and nothing much else and when he doesn't clean good enough he loves to get slapped with a carpet-beater. Yeah weird I know, there are several other weird 'sex-fantasy' scene's like this, with different costumers that are just too odd to find amusing.

The way Amsterdam is filmed is quite good actually and one of the few things that I enjoyed about this movie. The cinematography is from Jan de Bont and one of his assistants is Theo van de Sande, two well known Hollywood names now.

A movie not worth seeing, even not if you're a Verhoeven fan.

4/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

This movie is a historical document from The Netherlands in the 1970's and should be appreciated as such. It is a kind of 'TMO of Paul Verhoeven'.

Albert Mol was the writer of the book and he was one of the first gays who exposed himself to all the media. We call that now a 'rel-nicht'. That was very brave in those days.

Paul had more gay, lesbian and bi characters in his movies. His movie 'Spetters' got a lot of flack for homophobic content. I strongly disagree. Gay-bashing was going on in those days and Paul just showed it.

This movie is a rom com comedy with some kinky sex scenes. It's about Amsterdam, prostitutes and kinky sex. There is some violence from pimps and some nipples.

These treats are not uncommon in The Netherlands. Pim Fortuyn was a famous politician and got shot. He also was a 'rel-nicht' that made no secret about his doings in gay darkrooms. #Metoo is also picking up.

The title (Wat zien ik?! - What do I see?!) has an answer (Stof! - Dust!). It refers to a scene where the dominant female hooker disciplines a sub male client dressed as a housemaid.

Movie-wise this is not a great Paul Verhoeven movie. It is outdated and not up to standards anymore. But It gives you nice shots of red-light Amsterdam.

Paul Verhoeven thought of it as one of his worst movies. A 6 would be fine. I rated it a 7 because I enjoyed it again last week..

The man from Holland who made Sharon Stone famous in "Basic Instinct" was in the 70's a well known director from Dutch movies and "Wat zien ik?" is the man's debut. It's a well known fact that Paul doesn't want to be reminded of it, but it exists on celluloid so.... It's one of those typical early sexcomedys for which Holland was famous for but mind you 3 decades later it comes over as laughable.

In this movie we follow the adventures of two hookers who has to obey the weird wishes of their strange clients, but mind you there is absolutely, apart from some (ugly) naked breasts nothing to see so there is no reason to watch it. Perhaps for the humour then? Hmmm it's more embarrassing and an episode from Arnold is more funnier than that so in a short : a movie for the bin!

This is possibly the most accurate film made about the sex industry ever and I ought to know. If you've ever worked in the industry you'll laugh till you cry.