Redwarmin This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

Harm NL Going on the knowlegde of the original story I was looking forward watching this. But what a disappointment. This might possible be one of the worst Dutch productions of the last years. No suspense, rushing plot line, bad acting, bad cinemography. The only highlight was seeing Hauer in action again.Especially in the middle part where there was opportunity for some suspense and story building, the movie seemed to speed up like crazy. Therefor the moment between ransom and captioning the bad guys was ridiculously fast paced.I struggled through the last hour to even finish it. 2 hours of my life I'm not getting back :)

peterdevries The producers of this movie stressed that this movie was not strictly based on the book by Peter R. de Vries, the crime reporter. This book is (claimed to be) an accurate account of what the planning, kidnapping and aftermath actually was like. One of the greatest features of that book is the planning stage, which was incredibly meticulous and exciting. The producers decided to go their own way, but made a critical error. They assume that people know the story, and subsequently leave out key parts of the narrative. This leaves the audience guessing at times what is actually happening. The planning stage is almost completely skipped with the kidnapping taking place in the first 10 minutes of the movie. A bit later there is a scene where the kidnappers are waiting for a ransom money transfer but this goes awry. The problem is that it is not explained that this is a ransom transfer attempt, and uninformed people that are not familiar with the actual kidnapping do not have a clue what is going on. So the producers decide to NOT base the movie on the book, but trust that the plot is explained by the knowledge people have of the book. It's easy to see that this will not work, and so it doesn't. Pacing is also a problem as scenes seem to drag on forever and overall atmosphere is very negative and pressing. It seems like there is a fire burning underneath the movie and pressure is building, but it is never released soon enough to be a pay off for the audience. Acting is quite good, but the script and wooden dialogue aren't doing the actors much favor. Hauer as Heineken is a good fit, as is the main character who is a dead ringer for Willem Holleeder. It was a mistake to make a movie about a topic so famous that (almost) everyone knows the complete story and subsequently twist the story in the extent that they did. I almost wish Peter R. de Vries will go through with a script more strictly based on his book.

bram van ham First of all, in Holland there was much controversy around this movie. Crime-journalist Peter R. de Vries - author of the book "De Heineken Ontvoering" - did not sell the rights of his non-fictive story to director Maarten Treurniet and was criticizing that the movie was too fictional. Also criminal Willem Holleeder (Rem Hubrechts in the movie) who is currently serving a nine year sentence for extortion and involvement in the murder of a Yugoslav drugs-dealer filed a law suit against Maarten Treurniet for portraying him as a "maniac" in the movie. The law suit he evidently lost.This served great as free promotion for the movie and the cinema was packed when I entered.I must say, I was not disappointed at all. The acting is really good - except for Heineken's wife played by Truus te Selle who was not convincing and overacted at times. The two standouts were Rutger Hauer (Heineken) and Reinout Scholten van Aschat (Rem Humbrechts / Holleeder). They both delivered stunning performances and doing so carried the movie.Not all positive though. Some scenes could have been much better, the "terror" caused by Humbrechts to Heineken was not well done.. Also it felt like it missed some scenes - the chauffeur of Heineken who was also held captive was hardly in the movie. And the way the police solved the kidnapping was not clear to me which is pretty crucial. Tracing down of the kidnappers felt a little bit rushed especially that of Jan Boelaard and Frans Meijer.Said all that.. The movie was really fun to watch, especially the acting performances and the mixture of typical "Amsterdamish" humor with some good action. I'd recommend it to anyone (above 14 y/o orso) and it continues the positive trend of dutch quality movies. I'd give it an overall rating of 7,2.

M P After reading some books and seeing a lot of TV docs about the kidnapping i went to the cinema with a high expectation about this movie. I thought i was in the wrong cinema room. Perhaps 10% of the movies contains facts about the kidnapping. The 90% left is like a cheap local TV show. When the main character imitates a piece of Tony Montana it was like he was acting his first time. Maybe the movie was worth a 6 for a Dutch low budget movie but because of the bad acting and by not telling the true story i only give it 3 out of 10.Dutch movies like De Dominee are much better!