6/10
Respectable film wounded by incautious screenplay
7 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Initially, we should consider that any serious psychological approach on WW2 is fated to slow and deep scenes. Those who watched this film expecting hollywoodian action certainly got frustrated. This, however, doesn't free the film from critics of people used to melodrama. Some reviewers have pointed the film's realism, while others have found some inaccuracies that essentially ruin this Dutch piece. I won't try to sound clever than anyone else by establishing a midterm; I'll just explore the opinions from my perspective, helping later spectators to identify what failed and what succeeded in "Oorlogswinter".

1. Actors: the cast is fairly the film's stronghold. No one can put in doubt Martijn and Yorick's competence. Their performance is outstanding and mostly suitable. Their expressions dismiss dialogues, reveal situations in which the viewer can dive in and securely assume a position. Actually, we can live Michiel's reality, we can comprehend his actions, his fears, his words and thoughts. Let me exemplify (big spoiler ahead): you surely understood what was going through the protagonist's mind when he pointed, for the second time, a gun at his uncle. He was stuck between childish bonds and wartime manhood. And you also noticed Ben's confidence on his nephew's hesitation; you knew he would denounce Jack if Michiel spared him. The razor's scene is very symbolic too. Some criticize the British pilot, his age and actions; but we should remember he was perturbed as well. He was experiencing something new and uncertain, he probably had passed his last months doing missions in the sky or training in quarters. This helps to understand his affection for Erica, since she was the very first lady he talked to after a long time. The minor characters are decent, though not perfect. Michiel's mother showed a genuine reaction to her husband's arrest, but her anguish apparently disappeared when she stepped home. Theo's actions didn't seem natural, but I mainly blame his embarrassing "rotating toy" (that thing even managed to make Martijn look stupid in the last scene).

2. Plot: "Oorlogswinter" has a good story; it may seem cliché at a first glance, but it explores a new perspective on late western front. The resistance cause, the betrayals and the crashed airplane create an interesting background to the Netherlandish daily life in mid 40's. However, the screenwriters were too careless to make that plot worthy of the actors. I noticed they got the protagonists in problems not knowing how to free them exactly. The actions scenes seemed nice initially, but the outcome was always implausible, incoherent. I remember very well the bikes scene, in which Jack and Michiel were cycling through a road when they faced German soldiers on sidecar motorcycles. The two stopped and ran to the trees; Michiel came back alone, took his bike again and calmly passed near the soldiers -who had just noticed him running! What to say about the carriage and the ferry scene then? Well, they don't deserve an elaborated comment. Jack's rodeo ability (and don't forget he was wounded), the unlikely chasers' collision with trees, the lengthy yet succeeded escape, Jack's incredible instinct, German's bad aiming, the unexplainable end of every chase scene, and the absence of any consequence after the encounter with the ferry controller (who saw Michiel and Jack's faces and, under pressure, probably denounced them, enabling a big search for the two young men) are just enough... And, of course, there is the bridge scene that unrealistically challenges the pilot's wound, and the unsuspected back and forth of a boy in a lonely forest. After all, we should admit one or other point that escaped from the screenwriters' insanity. The film managed to avoid the flat characterization of Nazis, as we noticed from two scenes in which Germans helped our protagonist. The Dutch rural movement and famine are well described.

What can we conclude? This film has a realistic background and provides a convincing immersion. But crucial scenes are bad elaborated and reveal poor effort from producers. You may be missing details on space and costumes, but I don't have enough knowledge about these issues to touch them; while watching, I was just indifferent to the anachronistic houses some mentioned. This way, I give my final judgment: 6/10. And, after writing this review, I'm glad to realize I didn't lost my time watching this.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed