Skip to main content

DVD: Black Book (Zwartboek)

I confess, I am a Paul Verhoeven fan. Even when he stumbles, I'm still entertained. All right, I've never seen Showgirls, so it's possible, even probable, that he's made at least one totally irredeemable film. That said, I'm still a fan.

I discovered this wholly by accident. I saw Robocop, was surprised how much I enjoyed it, and saw that Verhoeven not only directed Robo but had also directed one of my favorite war films, A Soldier of Orange. I hadn't paid attention to who directed Soldier, and so this all came as a pleasant surprise. From then on, I kept a watchful eye for the next Verhoeven film, carefully avoiding Showgirls (which may or may not suck, though I am given to believe that it sucks pretty damn hard, pun possibly intended). And so I got a little depressed when he left the US in search of his cinematic roots. I heard about his next big thing, but until the DVD I wasn't able to at last catch up with Black Book (Dutch title, Zwartboek).

Black Book tells the tale of Rachel Stein (Carice van Houten), a Jewish woman hiding in occupied Holland during World War II. Everyone is on pins and needles in anticipation of the coming Allied liberation. Our heroine is no different; she's riding out the last days of the war hiding in a barn. (Her protectors, btw, are Christian. Their brief moments together are quietly touching.)

All of this comes to an end, though, when an Allied B-17 bomber rumbles overhead, pursued by a German fighter. To shed weight and climb to safety, the bomber is dumping its bombs, and one kills Rachel's benefactors and destroys her hiding place. Lucky for her, she'd just started flirting with a man who now takes her to his place to hide. From there she is lured to a boat that is ferrying Jews out of the country. This goes horribly wrong and she winds up with the Dutch resistance. Yes, it happens just about that fast and easy.

But that's all right because now the story really begins. Black Book is a story of betrayal, and not just a single betrayal but a succession of them. The film proceeds in straight, linear fashion, the twists and turns of the plot revealed to the audience as Rachel experiences them. There's very little that happens that we're allowed to see that she isn't. As a result, Verhoeven forces the audience to go through the same travails as our heroine.

She's not particularly admirable. For the most part, she just wants to stay alive. As a result, she's buffeted by demands on all sides, yielding to those which have the best chance of seeing her survive the day. This slowly becomes not enough and the plot evolves from survival to discovering who is the genuine traitor in their midst.

It's all great fun, in that in-your-face-brutal way that Verhoeven has. Verhoeven has never shied from violence, yet I've never found his films exploitive. Black Book is no exception. There is a particularly brutal and nauseating sequence involving Rachel, as degrading as it can be. What Verhoeven does with such material is present it in a direct, matter-of-fact fashion. He doesn't let his camera linger and he avoid slow motion like the plague that it is. The result is that's he's second only to Michael Mann in realistically depicting violence on the big screen.

That said, Black Book is not Verhoeven at his best, but it is certainly a return to form. It's an intense experience and one fans will applaud. Newcomers might be a little put off, but I think they'll find the experience worthwhile. I was happy to see him present a straight story, and never mind the half-baked allegories or analogies that weaken so many of his films. (For instance, did you know that Starship Troopers was satire? Didn't think so.)

I have a few complaints. First, the film opens in 1956 Israel, with Rachel living in a kibbutz. From there the film is a long flashback. I dislike this film technique in general because it shows a lack of faith in a film's actual opening act, and here it destroys any suspense that should have been growing from Rachel's worsening predicament. We already know she survives, so why should we worry when she's caught, tortured, etc.?

Second, Rachel seems a little too willing to go from one step to the next. Hide? Sure. Hide here? Sure. Jump on that boat? Sure. Join the resistance? Hey, it's the thing to do! Seduce and sleep with a Nazi? Oh, heck yes! On and on. Eventually you come to understand that this is her character, but at first it just seems oh ho-hum and convenient. You actually cheer when she finally says, "Hey, enough!"

Last, Verhoeven very deliberately has the Nazis refer to members of the Dutch resistance as "terrorists". This is in stark contrast to history and reality. It's a less than subtle way of making the inane and insane statement that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". It's stupid, morally bankrupt, mentally lazy, and condescending. Every time a Nazi said, "Terrorist!" I was jarred straight out of the film.

I managed to make it through the film by mentally substituting "member of the resistance" whenever a Nazi said "terrorist". By ignoring the backhanded slap at the United States, I enjoyed Black Book as Verhoeven returning to form and style. If he can avoid silly political commentary, which was just as unsubtle as his films usually are, Black Book may mark the return of a great director.


Popular posts from this blog

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home.Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes. In Batman Begins, I blamed Katie Holmes. Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal, who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film, at almost two and a half hours, might be a shade long. Having said t…

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

With its release on home video, we come to the unsurprising and yet still bitter disappointment that is Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. Unsurprising, because of a lousy director. Disappointing, because it should have been great. To explain further will involve light spoilers; I will avoid larger giveaways. In a galaxy far, far away, the Empire continues to consolidate its power after the fall of the Republic (see Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith). Toward that end, they are assembling a giant battle station, the Death Star. The Rebel Alliance plots a way of finding out what’s going on and perhaps, in the process, save their collective butts. Rebellious galivanting ensues. All of the elements necessary to craft a good story are here, yet none of them work. The blame lies almost exclusively at the feet of director Gareth Edwards. This is his third film (after Monsters and Godzilla) and his failings as a director stand out in each. The major problems with each film involve the peopl…

Conspiracy (2001)

The Holocaust remains an unfathomable atrocity, the unholy benchmark by which all such are measured. Stalin and Mao both make Hitler look like an amateur when it came to sheer body count, yet the Holocaust remains unique. It seems to boil down to two reasons. First, the Nazis were terrifying in their systematic approach to the slaughter of Jews, driven by their ideological belief that they were acting for the greater good of all mankind. And second, they hunted Jews in any land they conquered; the goal wasn't merely to "purify" Germany, but the world. Few films have captured these points as well as HBO's 2001 film, Conspiracy. On January 20, 1942, a group of senior officials of Nazi Germany met at a lovely house in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee. The purpose of their meeting was to determine the "final solution" for the Jews. The Wannsee Conference developed what is referred to as the Wannsee Protocol. A single copy of the document remains. Conspiracy, drawi…