IMDb > Turks fruit (1973) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
Turks fruit (1973) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 29 comments in total 

20 out of 30 people found the following comment useful :-
Voted the best Dutch film of the 20st century..., 12 April 2004
8/10
Author: Mark Hoogland (manicm@hotmail.com) from Alkmaar

In a survey committed in 2000, the Dutch people voted this groundbreaking movie to best the best national movie of the past century. I can do nothing but agree with that. Although the story is quite simple and maybe even a bit of a cliché (boy meets girl basically), the underlying themes, the perfect mix of comedy and drama, the dialogues and the portrayal of time and the stunningly beautiful music make this a masterpiece.

I can understand why people from out of the Netherlands might not like the movie. Subtitles would not do any justice to the sharp and funny dialogue, and the way the atmosphere of Amsterdam is shown in this movie is so natural and realistic, you can't help but feel nostalgic towards a decade in which you weren't even born yet! Besides that, you have to place this movie in it's time. There is a lot of graphic nudity and foul language in Turks Fruit, which really shocked the audiences three decades ago. If it wouldn't have been released until now, it wouldn't have had the social impact it did back then.

If you know the backgrounds of the movie and of the time in which it was first released, this revolutionary, emotional love-story won't let you down.

Was the above comment useful to you?

10 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :-
This is a delightful film that started out as an adult movie…, 26 September 2008
7/10
Author: ironside (robertfrangie@hotmail.com) from Mexico

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

The story is so good and the acting so superior that the second half becomes much more than just an exploitation film…

It begins with Eric, a sculptor and chronic woman-chaser, whose wife is dying of a brain tumor…

Eric is so successful with the ladies that he begins collecting their hair, attaching it into his scrapbook… He comes across a striking redhead named Olga, whom he brutally seduces in the car... Instead of cutting her hair, he falls in love with her and chases her all over Holland…

The treatment of sex is stimulating and humorous… It is not graphic, but the performers are quite active and the erotic encounters are exceptionally realistic…

It moves quickly from reality to sexual fantasies combined with daydreams of killing, blood, and vengeance… Despite these outrageous displays, the movie is so full of life and powerful acting that it is more fascinating than repelling…

Was the above comment useful to you?

19 out of 30 people found the following comment useful :-
Life and Love, As Interpreted by Paul Verhoeven, 29 August 2002
7/10
Author: jhclues from Salem, Oregon

There are many ways in which love and passion can be manifested in a relationship, but if it is to prevail, it is essential that both sides complement one another, physically, emotionally and psychologically; the feelings borne on the wings of romance must above all else be mutual and deeply instilled on both sides. When they are not, the end result must necessarily be estrangement; it is a law-- not of man, but of nature. In `Turkish Delight,' director Paul Verhoeven dissects a relationship born of passion, examines the ramifications of the attitudes and actions of the individuals involved-- as well as the couple they become-- and offers the results to his audience for consideration. Is it, though, a story of love and passion? Yes. But it comes via a route more analogous to the sensibilities of David Cronenberg than Ang Lee; it is decidedly more Craven than Capra. So don't come to this film expecting tender moments; instead, prepare yourself for an offering that is provocative, that is sexually explicit, and finally, graphic in it's more violent moments. This is a film for neither the fainthearted nor the modest, but for the discerning viewer only.

In the first few minutes of this film, we are introduced to Eric Vonk (Rutger Hauer), an artist with a passion for his work, but even more so for experiences that lean more toward the wanton and carnal in aspect. We instantly become voyeurs as he proceeds to overindulge in a series of lusty encounters, an extreme display of irresponsible debauchery that cannot but impel a most unpropitious and subjective first impression on behalf of the viewer, who is forced to bear witness to a man of obvious and insatiable appetites and a tentative moral code. Or so it would seem, initially.

As the story unfolds, however, we begin to understand Eric and what it is that compels him thus; and it begins with a photograph of a beautiful young woman named Olga (Monique van de Ven), the woman with whom Eric once shared his life, love, passion and, yes, his lust. It is obvious from the outset that she is no longer with him, which evokes the question that has to be asked: `Why?' And from that inauspicious beginning, a picture emerges that may not be pretty, and is, in fact, fairly disconcerting. By the end of the film, though, all questions pertaining to Eric Vonk and the mysterious Olga have been answered. The screen grows dark then; but the images to which the viewer has just been made privy are ones that are going to remain in the mind's eye for some time afterwards.

Working from a screenplay by Gerard Soeteman (adapted from the novel by Jan Wolkers), Verhoeven establishes himself as the antithesis of Nora Ephron, presenting his `love' story in terms that are decidedly raw and primitive. Though he does manage to establish the fact that Eric does have deep love for Olga, it is lust that seemingly dominates the picture, and though there is a dramatic twist to the story, it all comes across more like a twisted fairy tale than anything else. Verhoeven uses violence to express the same sentiments Ephron, for example, does through compassion and empathy. But that is his style. It's his prerogative; it's his turf; it's his film. And Verhoeven as much as says to his audience that if you don't like it, you can leave. It's not as if he doesn't have respect for his viewer, though; rather, it seems as if it's something he simply has not considered.

If you can get past the baggage with which Verhoeven inexplicably saddles his own film, there is an interesting, if not riveting, story to be found. But, like Cronenberg's affinity for slime and things that ooze, Verhoeven apparently cannot escape his affinity for violence, even when it works to his detriment. In the case of this film, it results in certain scenes that are too avant-garde to be effective within the context of the overall film. These are scenes in which Eric is hallucinating or day dreaming about particular aspects of his relationship with Olga. They are abrupt insertions into the narrative that simply do not mesh with the flow of the film. The seam left by the weave, as it were, is just too apparent. Beyond the shock value (which is minimum), it just doesn't work.

On the positive side, Verhoeven does extract worthy performances from his stars, Hauer and van de Ven. Hauer, in his feature film debut (and at this point some eight years away from his American film debut in `Nighthawks') displays a natural ability in front of the camera and seems comfortably uninhibited, which enables him to use his rugged good looks to the best advantage. Eric is a complex character of single minded intent, which Hauer conveys quite ably in his performance. Van de Ven also makes her motion picture debut here, and beyond her obvious beauty there is a definite indication of the talent that would soon bring her international acclaim (though her star has yet to rise above the American landscape). Her portrayal of Olga is convincing, and her myriad charms are neither misplaced nor misused by Verhoeven here. And commendably, she manages to transcend the mere use of her physical attributes and create a memorable character with a truly affecting performance.

The supporting cast includes Tonny Huurdeman (Moeder), Wim van den Brink (Vader) and Dolf de Vries (Paul). This film is definitely not for everyone; it fails as entertainment, but succeeds as an examination of the extremes to which we, as humans, are susceptible. `Turkish Delight,' then, will be received in any number of different ways. Some will be shocked and appalled by what they see on the screen; others will be offended. And still others will understand that what is depicted here is a very real reflection of things that go on in a very real world, as interpreted by Paul Verhoeven. 7/10.

Was the above comment useful to you?

15 out of 23 people found the following comment useful :-
Love and drama., 4 October 2005
10/10
Author: Boba_Fett1138 from Groningen, The Netherlands

"Turks fruit" has been voted best Dutch movie recently. I can see why, "Turks fruit" is a delicious treat and perfectly mixes an heavy love story with dramatic and realistic moments life is filled with.

"Turks fruit" is fine example of good storytelling. The movie is carried by the characters that are very realistically portrayed. Rutger Hauer, Monique van de Ven and Dolf de Vries really are some fine actors. Paul Verhoeven shows with this movie that he also is a great actor director. This movie marked the first real big movie-role breakthrough for both Hauer and van de Ven and also for Verhoeven himself.

The movie is filled with some typical and subtle Dutch humor which I really enjoyed in this movie. Some of the characters might seem a bit odd but I can assure you that all of the characters are very realistic and are nothing uncommon here in the Netherlands.

The movie is really daring, especially for its time and is not afraid to show some 'skin' and some explicit scene's. But all of it is done with lots of style so the movie never becomes offensive. The movie is also filled with what later become some typical trademark Verhoeven gore. But all of it serves a purpose in the movie, so it never feels forced like its deliberately put in the movie, to shock the viewers. Verhoeven is a master in this. This is the first Verhoeven movie were he uses the same style which he still puts in his movies these days. The first typically, recognizable Verhoeven movie you can say.

The nice little soundtrack is composed by Rogier van Otterloo who later also worked on "Soldaat van Oranje" and "Keetje Tippel", with Verhoeven again. The harmonica solo's are recognizably done by Toots Thielemans who might very well be the best harmonica player of all time. The cinematography is done by Jan de Bont and gives an at times nice and realistic view of the Netherlands in the '70's.

Not THE best Dutch movie of all time (in my opinion that still is "Soldaat van Oranje") but this movie absolutely, most certainly is a romantic/dramatic masterpiece with lots of symbolism and unforgettable and powerful moments in it, that perfectly shows the early talent of Verhoeven, Hauer and van de Ven.

10/10

Was the above comment useful to you?

4 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
A strong, vital Dutch lovestory, 12 January 2008
7/10
Author: Framescourer from London, UK

A relative of the earlier Lovestory (1970) - complete with sine qua non bittersweet denouement - Turkish Delight's dramatic device is a wrong-side-of-the-tracks match. Rutger Hauer's virile, semi-feral sculptor Erik falls for a similarly carefree Hippie in Monique van de Ven's Olga. Their unstoppable union has to negotiate the barely tacit disapproval of her bourgeois parents.

What's interesting here though is that Verhoeven takes great care to neither judge characters nor cast them as straightforward pro- or an-tagonists. The couple's raw youth is magnetic (there are a number of stunts patently performed without doubles) but their irreverence can occasionally be as awkward as it is entertaining. Similarly, the outwardly stuffy parents and their coterie have a (characteristically Dutch) tolerance for the brash, carefree couple. The heartrending close to the film comes not by cause of intractable opposition between the groups but as an example of their ultimate similarity despite it.

Verhoeven uses Speed director Jan de Bont as his DoP. Their collaboration is a feast of (meticulously framed) perpetual motion and zest, the very equal of Hauer's reeling id-boy. But it's not just a document of raucous youth getting it on. Verhoeven catches all the beauty and pathos of Dutch lovers caught in the post-60s cul-de-sac. 7/10

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
In twenty-five years, I will still love this film..., 23 February 2002
10/10
Author: mentalcritic from Southern Hemisphere

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Mainly because it portrays life with such a frank realism that Hollywood has never been able to achieve. In every frame of every second, it is apparent that its makers live in a society where such "big issues" that have America in an uproar like birth control, homosexuality, and sexuality in general, are no big deal. Of course, there are also some parts in this film that make me ask "what the *&@! is wrong with Dutch people?". I'll deal with those parts of the film first (this next section may ruin the film for those who have not seen it).

1) The scene with Rutger Hauer looking in the toilet before flushing it. Funnily referenced in Basic Instinct twenty years later, this was a truly revolting scene that made me really apprehensive about watching the rest of the film. Thankfully, it gets a little less revolting as time marches on.

2) The scene with Rutger Hauer vomiting on everyone present at the dinner party. This was truly disgusting to watch, but also damned funny, because the burgeois society people that Hauer is dining with are so repulsive that they really do make a man feel like throwing up. It is, however, quite repulsive how we are just shown vomit all over everyone.

The plusses for this film far outweigh the negatives, however. Seeing how the love between our main characters defies everything, from societal boundaries to mortality, makes this film a must-see. I just don't recommend attempting to eat anything while you're watching it.

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
The image of the multi-talented, 4 August 2006
9/10
Author: lesraine from Cyprus

Turkish delight is a book by the Dutch true artist Jan Wolkers: a painter, a sculptor, a writer. Symbol of sexual liberation in the 60's and 70's with a series of books about his youth, freeing himself of protestant chains and the general revolt against the bourgeoisie, Wolkers made himself big. But he became larger than life with his contribution to Dutch culture and the understanding of the Dutch mind. The movie itself is a delight with scenes shot in Amsterdam and the greater Amsterdam area: all that is fashionable passes by, not just sexual freedom and the confrontation with society. And the beauty of both Rutger Hauer and Monique van der Ven, is a well deserved extra.

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
"Love Story" told by Paul Verhoeven, 14 September 2006
8/10
Author: Galina from Virginia, USA

Few days ago, I watched the documentary Z Channel: A Magnificent Obsession (2004) about a channel that had brought the great and unavailable anywhere else films to its 100, 000 lucky subscribers in LA in 70s - 80s. While enjoying the clips from many Foreign and Independent movies that were the best part of documentary, I was able to recognize the movie that I saw many years ago in Moscow and still remember well, I could not only recall the title. I remember that the movie was Dutch, very erotic – in the raw, brutal, twisted yet beautiful and passionate way. Watching "Z Channel..." I was happy to instantly recognize "Turks fruit" (1973) aka "Turkish Delight" made by Paul Verhoeven in 1973. I checked with Netflix, the movie was available; I bumped it up in my queue and just finished watching it. My memory served me well - Verhoeven's early film is as naturalistic, earthy, brutal, erotic, humorous, poetic, poignant, and captivating as I remember it. Based on the novel by Jan Wolker, "Turkish Delight" stars young, hot, very sexy (and I mean it - VERY SEXY) Rutger Hauer as a bohemian free spirited and often cruel sculptor Eric and even younger Monique van de Van as his wife Olga, child-like yet as sensual as Eric was, "the light of his life, the fire of his loins". The film that describes their stormy relationship has become the most financially successful Holland's film that was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Language film and was proclaimed by Jan Wolker a "75% masterpiece".

There are not very many directors in the world that can create the atmosphere of raw sensuality as well as Verhoeven (of his Dutch period, especially). Verhoeven is known for uncompromising approach to his work, fiery temperament, and aggressive movie-making. Joe Ezsterhaus who worked with Verhoeven on two films said about him: "The guy is like his movies: brilliant, mercurial, very daring, perverse, a wonderful series of paradoxes and contradictions..." "The Turkish Delight" is all that and I love it but I can understand how its graphic sexuality, more than one disgusting and revolting scenes (but they had to be in the movie) and crude behavior may put off a lot of viewers. Be prepared, "Turkish Delight" is delightful but it is very intense and often not easy to watch.

8/10

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
A Truly Sincere Love Story (Spoilers), 4 December 2005
10/10
Author: missyamerica18 from Connecticut

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Turkish Delight is one of those films that is a rare gem. In my opinion, this is Paul Verhoven's finest piece of work. I can rarely say that a film deeply touches my life, but this is one of those cases. It's power just overwhelmed me.

Eric Vonk is a somewhat carefree and rebellious young artist that finds true and undying love in the arms of young Olga, an equally as free spirited young redhead. Though their relationship is very sexually dynamic, it is also filled with sincere tenderness and honest devotion. Unfortunately, Eric is left with the harsh reality of adulthood and heartbreak when Olga leaves him (for very questionable reasons). Eric learns that sometimes love is so strong that nothing can extinguish it.

The power of the film lies in its gritty realism. This isn't a film that tries to leave out the "gorey" details of life. As a matter of fact, Paul Verhoven is very in your face. He wants his audience to experience a range of emotions and even feel the need to turn away here and there. (One scene that immediately springs to mind involves a toilet...) However, in the end I could't help but be overwhelmed by the beauty of the love story. It is the most powerful film of its kind, in my opinion.

Unfortunately, the film is not that well know in the US. It was nominated for an Academy Award in 1974, but it seems to have somewhat disappeared after that. The film is ranked the best Dutch Film of the Century and certainly one of its most popular.

The novel, written by famed Dutch author Jan Wolkers, is read in many Dutch schools. It continues to sell many copies to this day. However, it went out of print in the US in 1983. While copies are available from used online book sources, the price tag is usually a bit steep.

Jan Wolkers' novel is truly a masterpiece. Like the film, it uses gritty and sometimes obscene language but it never fails to ooze with passion and love. The reader cannot help but feel Wolkers' love for the young redheaded creature.

A musical version of the story is opening in Amsterdam, however, I am not sure that anything can compete with the work of art that Verhoven created. The 1974 film will always be the one and only in my heart.

Was the above comment useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
Excellent, 17 June 2006
9/10
Author: haildevilman from Tokyo, Japan

Best Dutch film ever.

A pre action movie Rutger Hauer proves he can act.

The full romantic scrambles this film shows probably hit home for so many people. Hence it's success.

It continues to be successful. It recently played Tokyo again in a few art houses and people were lined up. Not just the Dutch expats either, EVERYBODY.

It well deserved its nomination. If the Genius Kurosawa hadn't been nominated, this would have won.

Rutger, we hardly knew ye. HAIL!

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user comments Your vote history