IMDb RATING
6.7/10
6.2K
YOUR RATING
Several Dutch teenagers realize the cruel difference between dreams and reality.Several Dutch teenagers realize the cruel difference between dreams and reality.Several Dutch teenagers realize the cruel difference between dreams and reality.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Saskia van Basten-Batenburg
- Truus
- (as Saskia Ten Batenburg)
Ab Abspoel
- Rien's vader
- (as Albert Abspoel)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
'Spetters' begins like one of the countless American teen coming of age "romps" we had to endure in the 1980s (....shudder...), but being a Paul Verhoeven movie things quickly become darker and more subversive. Verhoeven's most recent Hollywood effort 'Hollow Man' was a stinkeroo, but this shouldn't detract from his past achievements. Especially his brilliant output in the 1980s, a decade where mainstream movie making hit a new low (since surpassed I'm sad to say). Verhoeven didn't direct a bad movie in the 80s, which is something very few American directors can say truthfully. Even David Lynch gave us 'Dune' during this period. 'Spetters' is much tougher and confronting than you'd expect from scanning the basic plot line - three young horny guys pursue their dreams which centre around motorcross. That's what makes this movie so surprising and memorable. Verhoeven regulars Rutger Hauer and Jeroen Krabbe pop up in quite good cameos, but the movie is carried by the three young unknown (to international audiences) male leads. All are well cast and impressive. As is the foxy Renee Soutendijk, who would go on to play a major part in Verhoeven's next movie, the brilliant erotic thriller 'The Fourth Man'. 'Spetters' is raw and unpolished compared to many of Verhoeven's subsequent movies, but is definitely worth watching. Another winner from this often maligned director who I'm certain will one day get the attention and praise he deserves.
Yesterday I saw Spetters again after a long long time, and it still does it for me. It's even become a trip down memory-land back to the good old eighties when I was a teenager myself.
It's a story that could have happened in real life. It shows the conservativeness of the heavily reformed Christians in the Netherlands in an excellent way and it still goes like that nowadays. The Netherlands are well known for it's liberality, but be aware, there is a other side to the Netherlands to that isn't liberal at all and it's shows in this movie. The way Eef's father is raising him and the way Eef is resisting his father is something i've seen a lot in real life.
One slight downfall from the movie is the way Eef found out he was gay. As he didn't actually seem to have any problems with the ladies, it's hard to buy that he suddenly became gay after he was raped. There were not any signals before. As for the homophobic humor, well, we all like to think we have the biggest one and the way it was handled is typical dutch. We are liberal about sex and like to joke about it. You feel for the characters and it's got heart. And that's always a hell of a achievement.
Furthermore i was surprised to see so many high raids by people outside the Netherlands. It's a typical liberal dutch story, so i'm surprised to see that people outside the Netherlands seem to understand the movie better then the people that commented the movie from the Netherlands.
It's a story that could have happened in real life. It shows the conservativeness of the heavily reformed Christians in the Netherlands in an excellent way and it still goes like that nowadays. The Netherlands are well known for it's liberality, but be aware, there is a other side to the Netherlands to that isn't liberal at all and it's shows in this movie. The way Eef's father is raising him and the way Eef is resisting his father is something i've seen a lot in real life.
One slight downfall from the movie is the way Eef found out he was gay. As he didn't actually seem to have any problems with the ladies, it's hard to buy that he suddenly became gay after he was raped. There were not any signals before. As for the homophobic humor, well, we all like to think we have the biggest one and the way it was handled is typical dutch. We are liberal about sex and like to joke about it. You feel for the characters and it's got heart. And that's always a hell of a achievement.
Furthermore i was surprised to see so many high raids by people outside the Netherlands. It's a typical liberal dutch story, so i'm surprised to see that people outside the Netherlands seem to understand the movie better then the people that commented the movie from the Netherlands.
I just saw this film last night and was really amazed by it. Unlike the Verhoeven films that most American audiences are familiar with (Robocop, Total Recall etc) it was a compelling coming of age piece set in Holland. Like most of his early Dutch films, you can feel many of the hallmarks of his style coming together and it's a testament to his skill as a director that he can make a small character-driven film about ordinary people like SPETTERS every bit as compelling as a gigantic special effects driven spectacle like ROBOCOP.
This is an 80's disco motocross movie that has very little disco and very little motocross. What it has are many strong characters, all of them navigating life transitions and trying to figure out their place in the world.
As for the "shocking" scenes that a lot of people are referring to in the posts, there is a fair amount of sex and nudity (male especially) in this film but to call it "shocking" is misleading. The reason the film's frank treatment of sexuality is so eye opening is the way Verhoeven handles it as no big deal. Two men sneak into a subway for a tryst, and you actually see one of the guys go down on the other guy. Two pairs of teenagers sneak into an abandoned building to have sex and you see it. Or when a man and a woman lay in bed talking after having sex, you see the guy totally naked as well as the girl. What happens happens and it's presented as is.
Verhoeven doesn't cut away from nudity, but at the same time doesn't artificially sexualize it by zooming in it, laying in sexy background music etc etc. Like the co-ed shower scene in STARSHIP TROOPERS, it's presented in a completely matter of fact way. Verhoeven doesn't allude to anything in these scenes, and it gives the film a power and honesty and that wouldn't be there otherwise.
Overall I would HIGHLY RECOMMEND this movie to anyone.
Bart Blackstone * Film Club Hollywood, CA
This is an 80's disco motocross movie that has very little disco and very little motocross. What it has are many strong characters, all of them navigating life transitions and trying to figure out their place in the world.
As for the "shocking" scenes that a lot of people are referring to in the posts, there is a fair amount of sex and nudity (male especially) in this film but to call it "shocking" is misleading. The reason the film's frank treatment of sexuality is so eye opening is the way Verhoeven handles it as no big deal. Two men sneak into a subway for a tryst, and you actually see one of the guys go down on the other guy. Two pairs of teenagers sneak into an abandoned building to have sex and you see it. Or when a man and a woman lay in bed talking after having sex, you see the guy totally naked as well as the girl. What happens happens and it's presented as is.
Verhoeven doesn't cut away from nudity, but at the same time doesn't artificially sexualize it by zooming in it, laying in sexy background music etc etc. Like the co-ed shower scene in STARSHIP TROOPERS, it's presented in a completely matter of fact way. Verhoeven doesn't allude to anything in these scenes, and it gives the film a power and honesty and that wouldn't be there otherwise.
Overall I would HIGHLY RECOMMEND this movie to anyone.
Bart Blackstone * Film Club Hollywood, CA
While I wouldn't call this film anything great, it did manage to consistently keep me entertained and interested, and that usually isn't an easy task. The music stood out as a particularly effective part of the movie, as I often found it to be chilling. There were also a number of fascinating scenes in this movie, many of which would probably not be for all tastes. In fact, much like most Verhoeven films, this movie probably isn't for everybody, since it does get somewhat graphic at times. However, if you are a person who can handle the occasional disturbing image, then I would say that you should give this film a look.
Watching Spetters I felt like going full speed in a roller coaster. But not like in action films where the action often starts to feel monotonous. No, this roller coaster is full of life, emotions, all kind of things. The pacing is somehow well done, so that there are a lot of scenes with a lot of going on all the time, but also slower moments to even it out. The drama is very good, there is a lot of comedy, and what makes this a Verhoeven movie, there's a lot of nudity. I've never seen as many male private parts in an actual movie than here. But somehow I was more at home in this movie than in Verhoeven's "Turkish Delight" which I wached a while ago. I found that one somehow more difficult to stand, but this one was all-around an enjoyable ride.
Oh, and great, great music. Being a huge music fan I always get more kicks out of a movie if the music fits the movie.
Rough, passionate, uncomproised film-making. I might have to raise my rating later on because I felt like stumbling upon something unique, the kind of movie that makes an impression and you have to come back to it eventually.
Oh, and great, great music. Being a huge music fan I always get more kicks out of a movie if the music fits the movie.
Rough, passionate, uncomproised film-making. I might have to raise my rating later on because I felt like stumbling upon something unique, the kind of movie that makes an impression and you have to come back to it eventually.
Did you know
- TriviaSpetters was heavily criticized in the Netherlands. Many critics accused the movie of being anti-women, anti-gay, anti-invalid, and anti-Christian. They also called it devoid of morals and needlessly decadent. This criticism was one of the contributing factors in director Paul Verhoeven's decision to begin making movies in America rather than his native land. In fact, on the movie's commentary track, Verhoeven has stated that the reason he was not fazed by the negative criticism of Showgirls (1995) was because he'd already been through it with Spetters (1980). He also pointed out that he also moved to America because it grew difficult to get funding. "All Dutch movies were fifty to sixty percent subsidized by the government. I was denied government funding because my movies were considered to be decadent, perverted, and antigovernment. That's when I had to leave. The problem was the leftists -- they are so fucking dogmatic. At that time in Holland, they were often more fascistic than the right."
- GoofsDuring the first bike race which Hans (Maarten Spanjer) loses because his bike breaks down, he gets splattered with dirt/mud all over his white jersey. But when he is at the trailer getting food moments later, his jersey is free of mud and dirt.
- Alternate versionsWas released uncut in the UK before the video recordings act, on a laserdisc by Embassy Video
- ConnectionsFeatured in Allemaal film: De magie van het witte doek (2007)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Spetters - Knallhart und romantisch
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content