Change Your Image
jarne-van-vooren
Reviews
In Vlaamse Velden (2014)
A huge disappointment
When I first watched "In Vlaamse Velden", I was a bit curious what the creators would do. It has been 100 years since WW1 and naturally, it would be time to commemorate it. The channel "één" wanted to make a series about WW1 in Belgium, since it had a major role in the war. What I wanted to see in this show, was if they could do that particular piece of history justice and that this would become a good show. But since the first episode, everything after that became more and more disappointing.
The series focuses on the Boesman Family. Phillipe Boesman, the pater familias, is a Flemish gynecologist. He has a wife, Virginie, two sons, Guillaume and Vincent and one daughter, Marie. When the war breaks out, his sons are summoned to their duty and have to go the front. The series focuses on these five characters, everyone on a different field of the war.
One of the major problems was that every episode feels dense. There happened a lot in one episode and I had the feeling that I watched a recap episode. It is clear that the makers had a lot of material, but did not get enough episodes to spread it out. Which is unfortunate, as the characters, the setting and the history don't get time enough to develop enough since it wants to do every aspect of the war (the trenches, the deserters, the situation in the cities,...). Everything feels rushed. It loses any impact if a side character dies, because we don't get time to know them better.
For example, a sub-plot became victim to this problem. In this scene, Marie was running away from the Germans and stayed at a farm in the Netherlands. The scene begins when she discovers she's pregnant and doesn't want to keep the baby. Later in the episode, she uses a primitive form of abortion with a red-hot piece of iron wire. This subplot wasn't spread out over a couple episodes, but was over in the span of 20 or 30 minutes. It was a very heavy scene but nobody mentions it anymore in the series nor does it have any impact on the show or the character. It was quickly discarded and was never spoken of.
Even the famous parts of WWI fall victim. I was looking forward to the Christmas-bit, where the soldiers celebrate Christmas with the enemy. The scene started, but ended in five minutes after that and isn't mentioned again, which is a real shame. Sometimes it is laughable how quickly it goes. Shell shock is not shown but it and its symptoms are read out by Phillipe in an article he's reading. Again, a real shame, because that was one of the interesting parts of the war that they should have shown.
Another problem is if the show doesn't know if it wants to be a family drama, set in WWI or a historical fiction. Sometimes it feels like we are given a history lesson due to the fact that the major characters encounter famous historic landmarks from the war like the opening of the sluices in order to flood the land so that the Germans are halted from marching further. But some of the historic parts aren't given any context like why the trenches were build or why the sluices where opened, or why the war started in the first place. On a side note, the scene with the sluices felt like the land was flooded in one day, while it took a couple of days in real life.
However, it was not all disappointment galore. The setting was accurately represented, the clothing felt right and sometimes the director managed to shoot something really well. The aforementioned Christmas-scene, short as it was, was perhaps the best shot scene of the series. The soldiers peeping over the trenches, cautiously going to the enemy while walking over ice where dead soldiers were underneath it with their faces frozen in horror,... it was beautifully shot and was unfortunately over in five minutes. Another example is where Phillipe is walking in a corridor of a university when he is appointed as a teacher. He walks proudly next to a row of busts of scientists while he is rehearsing his college. This scene shows where his ambitions lay, using only the visuals.
Overall, I'd say that if there were more episodes, the creators could have had enough time to flesh things out, it would have been a great show. But as it is, situations come and go and don't have that many impact. A pity it's a missed opportunity.
Suske en Wiske: De Texas rakkers (2009)
If you're American, please read this before you let your kids watch this movie.
Okay, the title sounds weird. But apparently, this Belgian animation movie made it in the US. But what I've read from reviews from American customers, they weren't happy with the swearing in this movie. Let me start from the beginning.
The movie is based on a Belgian comic book series called "Suske en Wiske" and it's about a boy and a girl who live with their aunt and have a lot of crazy adventures. They are accompanied by their friends, a not so very bright man, a super strong caveman from the past and a professor who has invented a time machine. The series started in 1945 and is still going (although I prefer it if they stop, it is too commercial these days). It started as a newspaper comic and used topical subjects as a large base for its humor. The old comics are very loved and written in such a way that the current books in the series cannot match them. Ever! So it is understandable that there would be some related products. There was an animated series, a couple of shows and a live-action movie which I thought was entertaining as a film. Of course (and unfortunately), there would be a animation movie. This one.
This one is based on "De Texasrakkers". The author of the books sometimes used existing plots as inspiration, in this case "The Tales of the Texasrangers". The movie uses the general plot points of the book. A shrunken man, locked up in a whiskey bottle, arrives at the house of Lambik. The man tells them that he's a Texasranger and was captured by Jim Parasite who terrorizes Dark City. Suske, Wiske and their friends decide to go to Texas to stop the evil Parasite.
I have not seen the American dub, but I've read comments about it. Apparently, one of the characters says the word "damn it" a couple of times. I am not an American but all I can say is that we are a bit looser in Belgium. You can say that it is a culture shock for America because we do not mind it that much (at least nowadays) that our kids hear profanity on TV. That does not mean we encourage it though. (FYI, the original version had them saying s***.) If you don't want your kids to hear such words, don't play this movie. Swearing aside, does that mean that the rest of the film is good? No.
First of all, I liked the animation. I know it doesn't look like Pixar or Dreamworks, but Belgian movies are not that well funded. It's budget was 8,9 million. However, its charm wears thin through the course of the movie and you start to see its flaws. A shadow of a dog, for example, wasn't in sync with its movements.
Speaking of thin, let's talk about the story. Like I said, it is based on a comic book. While the topical humor was aimed at adults, children could enjoy the comics just as much as adults. "Suske en Wiske" have mostly fantastical adventures which lend itself perfectly for a kids audience. The movie, on the other hand, was made with a kids audience in mind while counting out the adults. With a series running for more than 60 years, you'd think that the directors would have more respect for its source material. (Although if you look at Hollywood these days...) I understand they had to get their budget back (This is one of Flanders most expensive movies) but more effort regarding the story would be nice.
The other problem with the story is the villain's reveal. One of the characters' suspicious behavior was emphasized too much that you instantly knew she only served as a red herring. The villain's plan is stupid in itself. In the comic, it was not mentioned what his goals were. You could assume that he liked to terrorize the neighborhood for fun and shrunk the rangers so they wouldn't thwart him. In the movie, he has a height complex and want to shrink everybody on earth with a shrinking powder, launched via a rocket. The film changes from a Western parody (?) into a James Bond parody (The comic series had also a James Bond themed book, but it wasn't this one, guys).
Then there are the references. Nowadays, the humor in animation has to have it from pop culture references. No exception here. One of "Terminator", one of "The Matrix" (the bullet-dodging scene), and "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" which I don't consider a reference as it was more like ripping off the dance scene of Jessica Rabbit. Some of the movements came exactly from the aforementioned movie. But my favorite has to be the worlds worst product placement (Establishing shot of a house, empty street, no cars or pedestrians, suddenly one truck drives by with the name of a toy shop. Very subtle, guys).
Last but not least, there's Manuel. He is the most annoying character I have ever seen in a movie. He's a stupid Mexican racial stereotype and he has a serious doll complex. Throughout the movie, he is useless, does nothing of consequence regarding the plot and is only there for the kids to laugh at because he's so silly (from their POV).
In hindsight, when making a movie based on a comic book series that runs for more than 65 years and that helped to shape the Flemish comic book culture, you'd better give it more thought. The books are clever, funny and well-written. This movie is not. It can work for a fun time with your kid (in Belgium, at least), but if you are a fan of the original source material, don't have high hopes for this one.
Hotel op stelten (2008)
Ruined Nostalgia
When I was a kid, I loved the Samson & Gert series. Sure, the stories weren't great, but it was for kids and it really entertained me. When I heard they were making a movie out of it, I thought that it'll go wrong. And sadly, I was right.
It begins with Samson & Gert (obviously) in their childhood and from the look of it, and I apologize in advance because I don't know that much about fashion, the end of the fifties and the beginning of the sixties. They are at the hotel of Gert's girlfriend, Marlene. At that moment, two thieves who've stolen a diamond run from the cops into Gert. The two thugs put their diamond in Gert's ball and get caught. The ball stays in the basement of the hotel. Many years later, the hotel is closed and it's going for demolition. Marlene doesn't want that and calls up Gert to help her. Gert and his friends decide to build the hotel up again. But the crooks are escaped after 20 years (and barely aged) and want their diamond back.
With such a premise, you'll expect something simple targeted at younger kids. You are right. But the problem is that this is an adaptation of a popular kids show. So I'm speaking for the nostalgic fan crowd. The biggest problem is that they didn't put any effort into making this movie. The fact that this is a kid movie is not an excuse. There are great kid movies out there, but this is not one of them. It is only made to make money with its brand.
The story is cobbled from other stories. The plot where the crooks put the diamond in the ball is ripped of from the Belgian comic "De Jacht op een Voetbal" from 1959. In it, a butler puts a will in a boy's soccer ball ("coincidentally", the ball in the movie looks the same as the one from the comic). I'm not going into detail, but after a while, the boy has to protect the ball from other crooks who are hunting the ball with the will. It practically is the same plot, and in the second half, they rip off the traps from "Home Alone". The crooks fall comically and get beaten by a man and his talking dog.
The jokes are not funny. Sure, you may laugh at them first, but when you apply logic to them, they fail miserably. an example is a scene where the barber, Albert (Alberto), had to dye old ladies hair. Yet he dyed them green, because he was hungry. How does being hungry make you colorblind or apply the wrong color in general?
The prime cast have not aged well. In the original show, they played adults acting like kids, this being a kid show. Due to the actors age, they come across as pathetic. And at points, acting like douche bags. The other actors... well... They are completely chewing the scenery. The crooks are not funny, not smart and barely a threat (except if you are one of Samson and Gert's friends). Plus one of them has weird dentures. I can't describe it well, but it made me think of Jaws from the James Bond movies. It is never addressed however why he got these dentures and it is very distracting.
In short, is this movie good. For your kid, yes. For an adult, no. It has too many problems and it won't satisfy your inner nostalgia.
The Secret of Monkey Island (1990)
Best Game ever played... yet.
When I was a kid, I played games like Freddi Fish, Payama Sam and all the other games but never a game of LucasArts. I have never heard of their range of point-and-click games, at least not till I was 16. I did some research into it and found some interesting titles. When I've heard Telltale Games would release "Tales of Monkey Island", I was excited. Shortly after, I've discovered that a special edition of this game was coming out and I was thrilled. I've bought the game on Steam and played it several times.
The new graphics look great, although Guybrush's head looks a bit creepy. It makes you a bit unconfortable if he stares at you. The voice acting is top notch and the jokes still work. You get the original version of the game with it, which is a nice bonus for the fans, although it is a bit too quiet for me. There also is a hint system, which can be helpful for people not used to this kind of puzzle solving. One negative point is the controlers. In the original, you had a box with commands in the left bottom corner and your belongings in the right bottom corner. In the new version, you have to press a button to make them appear and disappear, which can be quite annoying, especially for one puzzle. I always go the original part of the game, just because it is easier.
Final verdict: a good game, even after years. The new graphics and voice acting makes it playable for a new generation to enjoy.