Soldier of Orange (1977) User Reviews

Paul Verhoeven's War Movie

[Alex-372 · 9/10 · 1 March 2003]

Soldaat van Oranje is Paul Verhoeven's war movie, one that already shows his early leaning towards grungy realism - graphic torture, debased human nature and plenty of bare boobies - which is why it had a pretty mixed reception when it came out here in Holland.

This story is told from the point of view of a number of well to do Leiden University students. For clarification, very few people before the war had the finances to go to university.

Highlighting some now internationally famous Dutch actors - Rutger Hauer, Derek de Lint, Jeroen Krabbé as well as locally known actors like Belinda Meuldijk, Rijk de Gooyer and this is also a showcase of acting talent during the seventies and early eighties. British seventies actors Susan Penhaligon and Edward Fox (A Bridge Too Far) also have interesting performances.

Based on the memoirs of Erik Hazelhoff Roelfzema (Erik Lanshof in the movie), this is a reasonably realistic and truthful recounting of war and resistance during world war two. Roelfzema, a genuine war hero, first joined the student resistance, then the SOE, then joined the RAF and finally became an adjudant (aide) to queen Wilhelmina. He is still spritely and alive, living in Hawaii with his English wife.

It is also pretty unique as it features what must be cinema's first and only drive-by-shooting from a bicycle. And one with wooden tires at that. And a great yarn too. It has heroism and cowardice, loyalty and betrayal, relativism, principles and pragmatism. Recommended.

Great story of courage and determination

[tyguy-2 · 9/10 · 13 August 2002]

True story of Erik Hazelhof, a young university lad who becomes involved in the Dutch resistance movement during WWII. We follow him and some of his close friends as they take different paths during the early occupation of Nederland by the Nazis. One of them becomes a nazi collaborator, another is Jewish and does his best to defy the occupational troops, the others join the resistance in varying degrees. The story gets complex in its telling and you get an in depth look at how some civilians did their best to stay alive and help the war effort. The story focuses mostly on a Hauer's character. I thought it was great that he was not a 'John Wayne-Rambo' type of character. Instead we find a chap who is a bit reluctant to do his part and is more concerned with surviving the war years. This movie works on several levels. I love espionage and this has plenty of it. You also can look at it as a human drama to see how the war affects the comradery of the lads. And for you gals out there, there are some love scenes. There are some great scenes that capture the spirit of the time. This movie can be added to the likes of Schindler's List, Das Boot, and Saving Private Ryan as great WWII movies.

Noble and exciting

[Andy44 · 9/10 · 10 February 2006]

I have enjoyed seeing this movie more than twice because:

It's true. It includes humor and absurdity along with fighting the good fight. It doesn't flinch from the ugly. Great music. Fine acting. Well crafted in creating the historic atmosphere. Dense with character. Entertaining pace.

The first time I saw it I was a little bothered by the way it seemed to just "walk along" -then he did this then they did that then this happened- like a diary. But I later came to like that style, maybe because war, like life, is "just one damned thing after another".

I'd love to read the memoir it's based on, but the last time I looked it hadn't been translated into English.

I wonder if Verhoeven ever looks back and wishes he could have/would have made more like this instead of Showgirls, Robocop, and such.

Excellent war drama

[FilmFlaneur · 5 September 2002]

Paul Verhoeven's Soldaat van Oranje (aka: Soldier Of Orange), the religious excesses of his Flesh + Blood (1985) not withstanding, is probably the closest the director has come to an epic. At the equivalent of $2.5 million, it was the most expensive Dutch feature film made at that time. It was also the film which brought him to the attention of Hollywood, exemplified by Spielberg's phone call to him after seeing the film: "What are you doing in Holland? Come to the USA, things are better there!"

During his childhood in The Hague, Verhoeven had been witness to the activities of the occupying Nazis, which made a great impression on him. He remembers vividly his father hiding in a cellar and seeing dead bodies in the street, for example. As one biographer has noted, Soldier Of Orange "was a theme he could taste, feel, and breathe," a film shot with of honesty and verisimilitude, if less of the director's characteristic excess, though still with his distinctive vision and style. There are some familiar faces in the large cast: Jeroen Krabbé (as Guus Le Jeune) who took the lead in De Vierde Man (aka: The Fourth Man) is a key protagonist, and the svelte and good-looking Rutger Hauer, as the central character Erik Lanshof. The blond Hauer, who had until now been utilised by Verhoeven as a working class hero in such films as Turks Fruit (aka: Turkish Delight, 1973), and afterwards in Spetters (1980) is here transformed into a prosperous war hero, modelled on Erik Roelfzema, the author of the original dramatic memoir. Much of the fraught virility usually associated with Hauer is suppressed here, although it briefly reappears during his dalliance with Susan (Susan Penhaligon).

That Erik/Hauer is the focus of the film is suggested by his first appearance, although the episodic nature of much that follows in the narrative sometimes sidelines his significance. He is inserted, Zelig-like, into opening newsreel footage, the 'single aide' at the post war return of Queen Wilhemina. Like so many of his Dutch contemporaries, Erik is comfortably well off, a man to whom (if only at first) the conflict seems just another grand adventure. Previously the middle class had been presented in Verhoeven's work as exploiters (as in Keetje Keeple, 1975) or as sexually ludicrous in Wat Zen Ik? (aka: Business Is Business, 1971). Such boisterous social irony is, in the present film, conspicuous by its absence, as if the contemplation of war forced a different responsibility upon the filmmakers. Erik and his class of 1939-40 may sometimes be made effete, but never risible. Made at a time when Netherlanders were starting to face the realities of their wartime existence, unpleasant facts about home collaboration and acquiescence to occupation, Verhoeven's film confronts these issues with a tale of student friends torn apart by war, having to face moral dilemmas and choices. Soldier Of Orange, complete with its stirring title music, is a title with a singular subject, implying a monolithic view of an individual at war. But the film actually focuses on a plurality of men, an ensemble of half a dozen privileged students, each of them responding to the conflict in a different way. Although Erik is the nominal hero, his actions are often ineffectual and have dubious results. His counterweight is Alex (Derek de Lint). Having served in the Dutch army, he sees his mother interned and decides to join the Waffen SS. The two meet only twice after: at a parade, where the Dutch civilians give flowers to the Germans, and at a dance where the two tango face to face, with obvious connotations of identity and mutual resemblance. Of the other friends, Robby (Eddie Habbema) betrays his colleagues to save his girlfriend, while another stays out of it entirely - one of only two surviving out of the initial group picture.

Soldier Of Orange begins, aptly enough, with an initiation ceremony. Cowed, humiliated, then celebratory, Erik and the others have to undergo rituals to be accepted into the student body. Of course the mocking cruelties they undergo echo the Nazi repression of later on: the fear, the anal torture and the firing squads. More immediately the process confirms for us the circle of friends, frozen in a group photograph, set to be tested further as what begins as a student's club ends as a man's struggle. This opening initiation is the coming conflict in microcosm. Soon it will be the flames of war, rather than the soup comically poured over Erik's head, that offer a definitive rite of passage. Verhoeven manages some exciting set pieces during the course of the film: the bombing attack on the barracks, the beach shootings scene, the initiation and the aborted seaplane rescue being standouts. There are also some quieter, poetic moments, such as the overhead and point-of-view shots of Jean's white shirted execution in the dunes. (A striking scene which makes one regret Verhoeven's recent descent into the special effects laden un-subtlety of the Hollow Man.) The episodic nature of the narrative is both a blessing and a curse: while the number of characters and subplots makes it possible to examine a society from a range of viewpoints, the lack of a single, strong momentum leads to occasional slacking of tension.

The abiding impression gained at the end of this long (167 minutes) film is that nothing in this war has been black and white, and Verhoeven has faithfully suggested the historical revisionism of the time. Out of these moral uncertainties, he has crafted an exciting and engrossing work, one that he now considers his best Dutch project. Although the ambiguities helped make Soldier of Orange's initial critical reception lukewarm, it was exceptionally well received by the Dutch public. Interestingly, for overseas release the film was renamed Survival Run - a change that suggests a work much less of a complex national portrait than it actually is.

An underrated classic

[mentalcritic · 10/10 · 23 February 2002]

Paul Verhoeven films are notorious for everything except what they should be known for: portraying reality in a frank, no-lies manner that few other filmmakers even dare to attempt. It's nice to know that, in this era of Hollywood churning out films that look more like video games or music videos, Verhoeven continues to make films that push envelopes and give the audience something to think about.

Soldaat van Oranje, like its American counterpart twenty years later, is a film about war that takes its subject by the horns and doesn't let go at any moment. As we are introduced to the group of Dutch students whose eyes we see World War II through, we see a reflection of one rarely acknowledged truth: that numerous ordinary, everyday people, ignorant of what was really going on in Nazi Germany, couldn't have cared less about what was going on. It was only when the reality of the war was brought to them, as the Germans invaded Holland, that these students sat up and took notice of what the war was doing to ordinary people. Indeed, early on in the film, Hauer's character even says that a spot of war would be "exciting".

Another reality that this film prefers to hit the viewer square in the face with is that while the war changed a lot of aspects of everyday life for everyone, there were some things that stayed the same regardless. In the scene where Hauer's character is attempting to board a boat bound for England, the German army's refusal to let the sailors on board prompts a quick "back to the pub" response from the working-class sailors. Business as usual in that respect.

Considering that this is a Paul Verhoeven film, it is actually quite surprising how little violence there is to be found here. Granted, it is not a family film, and some of the torture scenes will make your blood boil as well as make some sick people like myself chuckle, but unlike the film that Verhoeven made with numerous references to this one twenty years later, there is surprisingly little blood and gore. Indeed, unlike the sarcastic satire of Starship Troopers, Soldaat Van Oranje tells its story in a restrained, almost documentary-like manner that is surprising as well as creative.

All in all, I'd give Soldaat Van Oranje a qualified ten out of ten. It is not going to appeal to everyone, and some just won't get it at all, but it delivers a powerful story about the loss of innocence and freedom that should be required viewing in all schools, not just Dutch ones. Oh, and I cannot remember who said it, but they are right about one thing: the footage of the Queen returning to Dutch soil made me want to shout "Oranje boven!", and I am not even Dutch.

An exciting, true story

[Lee-65 · 10/10 · 15 January 1999]

This is the self-penned true story of the Dutch war hero Erik Hazelhoff Roelfzema, and his college friends from Leiden who endured the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands and, who eventually, lived to see the Liberation. Some of his friends were not so lucky. The best version of this picture to see is the original version, in Dutch, German and English, with literally-translated subtitles. The dubbed-English version, particularly the one released in the U.S., is HORRIBLE! The most-commonly available subtitled version is one that has only the script of the dubbed version as subtitles, some of which don't make any sense. Beware this version! This is a great film, with stellar performances, most notably those of Rutger Hauer and Jeroen Krabbe'. Derek de Lint (Alex) is also magnificent as the Dutch youth of German descent who joins the SS-volunteers. The scene where Erik and Alex meet by chance at the Scheveningen dance-hall after Alex's return from the Russian front (the tango scene) is wonderfully done! The most touching part is set in May, 1945 at the moment of the Liberation. The part where Queen Wilhelmina steps onto Dutch soil after a five-year absence is an extremely emotional one. Don't miss this film, for it is the best one told about the Dutch view of the war, and will make you shout "Oranje Boven!" even if you aren't Dutch! Highly recommended!!

Compelling War-drama about the underground movement and based on the true-life exploits of Dutch resistance

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 13 May 2013]

This is a true story based on historical events about Resistance against Nazis who violently invaded Holland, but some names of historic persons are changed . For example, Erik Lanshof is actually Erik Hazelhoff Roelfzema .This film depicts World War II through the eyes of six Dutch students (Rutger Hauer , Jeroen Krabbe , Derek De Lint , among others) . It follows them through the beginning of the war, the Nazi occupation whose lives forever changed by the WWII invasion of Holland by the Nazis . It begins in Univerity Leiden ,the Netherlands , 1938 , with various young Dutch Students just before the outbreak of World War 2 and finishes with the liberation . As soon as the war starts, many students join the resistance . Later on , Erik Lanshof (Rutger Hauer) is assigned by an exiled Queen Wilhelmina (Andrea Domburg who used cotton paddings in her cheeks to better resemble Queen) and his helper colonel Rafelli (Edward Fox) to carry out a dangerous mission during Nazi downfall.

This thrilling , cerebral WWII picture is plenty of suspense, emotion , action and is pretty entertaining . At the beginning there is an amusing introduction on students life in Leiden University and fraternity , in which we find the protagonists of this exciting story . The screenplay is full of plot twist and tension , the developing is kept everything moving fast and frantic to a climax guaranteed to make hearts pound. Based on actual events about Queen Wilhelmina and her real aide-de-camp, Erik Hazelhoff Roelfzema, the author of the book on which the film is screen-written ; even appearing in the opening scene, a genuine newsreel footage . Based on real happenings , though some names of historic persons are modified , one of the reasons for the change in names may be that, for clarity and simplicity, the number of characters from the original story were reduced, and as a consequence, some historic actions are ascribed to other people in the movie, so as to acknowledge this deviation from reality , some names may have been altered. It was shot entirely on real locations with the exception of the short sequence in the RAF bomber . Good acting by Rutger Hauer who made him an international star , he plays as a valiant official named Erik , though Director Paul Verhoeven originally wanted Derek De Lint to play Erik Lanshof, the title character . He had previously directed Rutger Hauer in the Dutch television series "Floris" (1969) and the film Turks fruits (1973) and did not think Hauer was right for the lead in this picture . He then decided to give Hauer a try and Hauer surprised Verhoeven by giving a very strong reading, with the result that Verhoeven cast him as Erik and De Lint as Alex . Rijk De Gooyer, who plays Gestapo collaborator Breitner, was part of the resistance in the Netherlands during World War II ; as a result, he harbored quite some anti-German sentiments towards his fellow actor Reinhard Kolldehoff, who plays Wehrmacht General Geisman . Carefully made and lavishly produced , as cost the equivalent of $2.5 million to produce, making it the most-expensive Dutch film made at the time. Nice special effects , as the explosions were provided not by technicians but by the Dutch Marines , as director Paul Verhoeven stated that the explosive charges were held in place with metal ; when one of the charges was set off, it blew the metal to bits , even one of the flying fragments nearly killed star Rutger Hauer . When the production ran out of budget, a British film company and a Dutch television company provided additional financial support, under the condition that the material was also adapted into a four part mini-series, which was retitled "For Queen and Fatherland¨.

Simply the best Dutch movie ever made

[rwhstigt · 10/10 · 31 May 2004]

Successful war movies almost always depend on tone. We've seen so many battle films, so many soldiers and so many tanks, so many landings and invasions and spies dropped behind the lines that the actual subject matter itself is no longer enough for us. Movies like A BRIDGE TOO FAR may cost untold millions and be years in the making, but for the most part we're just not moved. Good war movies don't necessarily need a message, but they need a feeling: We want to sense what the war experience was like for a specific group of people at a particular time. Thi movie creates that feeling as effectively, probably, as it can be created. It traces the stories of six Dutch soldiers through the years before and during World War II, and at the movie's end we feel we know these people and have learned from their experiences.

Although the film contains a great deal of suspense and a fair amount of violence, it's not a garish adventure movie, it's a human chronicle. And it involves us. That's all the more remarkable because this isn't a profoundly serious little film with a somber message, but a big, colorful, expensive war movie-the most costly production in Dutch film history. Expensive war movies tend to linger forever on their great special effects; they have a tendency to pose their heroes in front of collapsing buildings and expect us to be moved. SOLDIER OF ORANGE is big, but it's low-key. It's about how characters of ordinary human dimension might behave against the bewildering scale of a war.

The movie's based on the memoirs of Erik Hazelhoff, a Dutch war hero who escaped from Nazi-occupied Europe, landed in England, was attached to the then hopelessly disorganized and ineffectual Dutch government in exile, and spent the war on a series of espionage missions before finally joining up with the Royal Air Force and flying many missions. What's interesting is that the Hazelhoff character is shown doing all of these things, and yet he doesn't emerge as a superhero; he's just a capable, brave man doing the next right thing. The film mostly follows Hazelhoff, but it begins in the pre-war years with six friends-college students, playing tennis, hanging out together, doubting war will really come-and it follows all six through the war. Four of them die, one in a particularly horrible way in a concentration camp.

By following all six lives over a period of years, the film suggests the historical sweep of the war for many millions of lives; SOLDIER OF ORANGE isn't just episodes strung together (although it is episodic), but a suggestion of how long the war must have seemed, and how easily it must have seemed endless. The narrative structure is interesting. Instead of giving us a tightly knit plot, with characters assigned to particular roles and functions, it gives us a great many specific details. There are the scenes involving Queen Wilhelmina, for example. In exile in England, the dowager queen walks stiffly in her garden, gravely absorbs the advice of her ministers, receives delegations, and conveys a dignity upon the situation through her very bearing (for, of course, she had no real authority then at all). A subplot involving an underground Dutch radio operator is clothed in similar detail; we know enough of his character to know why he turns informer and his decision is not simply cowardly, but is almost understandable. Unforgivable, but understandable. The movie is filled with perceptions like that.

Incongruous Lack of Involvement

[jzappa · 7/10 · 1 January 2009]

Paul Verhoeven's signature ironic detachment from the graphic violence in his work has reasonably been attributed to his experiences as a young Dutch child during the Nazi Occupation. What I've always admired about him has been his use of sardonic indifference with films like RoboCop, Starship Troopers and Spetters, but with Soldier of Orange, there doesn't seem to be anything discerning his vision from that of other war film directors who've had less or no eyewitness or everyday experience with war. Though thankfully it is not without unabashed Dutchness---the Queen is anything but strict with her loyal underlings' sense of manners, sex and exhibitionist affection is in no way taboo in any presented dynamic, and Rutger Hauer's response to his sometime lover spitting beer in his face is "I love you"---its framework is, in a sense, American. It is a spy thriller that begins and ends like a coming-of-age film about a circle of aloof, airy friends, some of whom make it to the end and some of whom don't.

In some way, upon reflection, I can see how this early effort by Verhoeven, and his two regular pre-U.S. stars Hauer and Jeroen Krabbe, benefits from its incongruous lack of involvement. It is the story of people who don't understand the import of what is truly happening until it literally hits home and find that loyalty grows to be more and more of an illusion. Thus, it seems to aesthetically make a degree of sense for the story to unfold at arm's length, as if we can never quite know who will live, die or turn on us. But still, wouldn't this film be so much better if it did not keep its distance? Isn't it the point for us to feel betrayed and angered by the unraveling of events? In any case, I could still be wrong, as the cliché love triangles, token romantic interests and ignored moral dichotomies of seemingly incidental things certain characters do abound.

Perhaps Verhoeven was not yet ready to make the Dutch Resistance film he knew he should make. His filmography can often look like the work of someone who is cynically desensitized to violence and other sorts of cruelty, but it can also often look like the work of someone's defense mechanism against how it has affected him. It wasn't until 2006 when Black Book was released when we saw his true and personal vision of a story set during this time. We have authentic emotional reactions to everything that happens in that tremendous film, which as it turns out is surely Verhoeven's best work, as if his previous films had all been his way of wrestling with the feelings with which he had to come to terms in order to make it, just as the Dutch in this film seem to remain aloof, perhaps in quiet, ambiguous defense of what could happen to them at any moment.

Superb dramatization of a dark time in our history.

[james.rankin · 10/10 · 7 February 2001]

This is an excellent adaptation of a true story of university students reacting to World War II. The population of Holland lived a naive existence, believing that they were not involved. When the war came to them, they were horribly naive and unprepared. The only possibility was to work with the resistance. By wars end, only two of the original group (Erik and Jack) were still alive. The whole story is there: danger, how people were forced into collaborating, how others willingly collaborated, torture at the hands of the Gestapo, death the penalty for getting caught, how Erik survived.

The best Verhoeven movie readily available in the USA, what a contrast to the trash he turned out in the 1990s. Hauer is in top form as Erik. Krabbe is excellent as the fraternity president Guus, so in charge of the games at the beginning, so naive as to the reality of their situation at the end. Their friendship was at the core of this film. Their relationship with authority throughout was complex and compelling.

There are two subtitled versions, the original is far the best if you can find it. The other subtitled version available is a version of the dubbing script for the US version for those parochial people who have to have it in English because they can't be bothered to increase their cultural horizon and listen to a movie in its original language. Stay as far away from the dubbed in English version as you can.

Very weird comedic movie

[JurijFedorov · 6/10 · 3 February 2022]

It's a WW2 movie made in Holland with a huge budget. But it's sorta a comedic movie making fun of all these events a they happen. Basically a light version of Catch-22. The humor here is created via silliness in the situations. Nothing is taken seriously. The actors smile and do weird movements. The blood is not even fully red. The interactions are all silly and the puns and jokes are the center element here.

It's a spy story based on real events, I don't know how much of it is real. Rutger Hauer plays the stupid Hollander who suddenly decides to join the resistance with his friend. It's never explained why they do it. But there is not much tension to it as all scenes are played off as jokes. Still, it's fairly fun main plot because the sets are that great. The sets are 80% of what makes this movie interesting. The plot, acting, and everything else is just okay.

The weird things are for example many sex scenes where you of course only see boobs and not much else. We see excrement scenes, puking, weird sex in the open. It's all stuff that would happen, but it at times looks terrible on camera. Sex in the private setting is fine if the scene is properly made. But here you have 2 scenes where a couple is doing it without hiding. And on top of that the other sex scenes are weird plot wise too like a scene where Rutger Hauer just walks into the room of his friend and his friend's girlfriend after sex. Why is this here?

Then there is the plot centered around the protagonist that also doesn't work. He sleeps with 2 different girlfriends of his best friends. That's a bit much. This also does happen, but these traits in him make him less than sympathetic. One is even engaged to his friend. Then he's stupid and stumbles around here. He's not a superspy. Even his remarks reveals great ignorance and he doesn't seem to solve any problem. He for example tries to assassinate the top Hollander in England because the Germans tricked him. And he seems to be tricked and outplayed all the time. The whole Holland resistance movement is totally outmaneuvered by the Germans. You just see a bunch of spoiled men make mistake after mistake. And Rutger Hauer just luckily gets away with it because he is just not caught. It's never quite clear what he even did at any point. Seems like a pointless soldier. The queen escaped to England and then sends for the top men in Holland to be with her for some reason to "rebuild democracy" whatever it means. The Germans intercept the communication because there is a traitor in the resistance movement so they kill or capture the whole group. That plan was obviously pointless. We see Rutger Hauer chase the traitor to save the group, but he only finds them at the very end minutes before they are killed. This whole plan and mission that takes him like 40 minutes leads to nothing and it's the only thing he actually did as a spy. This is at the very end of the movie so the first hour and a half are just them stumbling around and making mistakes. Then this big spy mission appears and it leads to absolutely nothing. So what did he even achieve? What's the point of the movie? It's 149 minutes long and as we just jump from event to event you get confused about the point and plot. It's way too long for this story. They should have created some more plot focused story here to make it more interesting. And then removed the weird humor and nastiness. It could have been great as the setting and sets are great. I just wanted him to succeed at small missions. Even if they are not historically accurate they could have added stuff that is behind the scenes of sorts. Like him killing some spy in secret or giving documents to England, again in secret. Stuff that wouldn't appear in any history book, but could have happened. Just some success somewhere.

It's worth checking out if you like WW2 sets, which I do. But it's not really a movie that works overall even though it doesn't become overly dull. It dragged out and became boring, but I always wanted to finish watching it after some breaks. Zwartboek (2006) fixed most of these problems. The same director understood that the setting should be a bit more serious. The sets are not as amazing as it's a newer movie so it's harder to find these old houses and streets. But the story is spy focused and proactive. And the natural stuff like the sex scenes is done better as it's not done to confuse the viewer. I just wanted a spy story that lead somewhere concrete.

Realistic panoramic film

[BeneCumb · 8/10 · 20 April 2013]

Based on true events, the film provides a wide temporal overview of different destinies students of different ethnicities and background had to face during World War II. This big war ruined lots of relations and comprehensions, but unlike in Eastern-European countries, occupation and its consequences remained relatively short-time, and the confrontation was still on the so-called centre/right level. For example, fate of the Baltic nations was even more tragic and disruptive...

Anyway, the film in question is well written, directed and played; names like Paul Verhoeven, Rutger Hauer and Jeroen Krabbé are currently internationally known and appraised, before that they were active mostly in the local scene. Hauer and Krabbé are real character actors, having also distinctive appearance, not just cute face / gleaming smile so characteristic to many US counterparts. On the other hand, if necessary, they are also talented team players, merging well with background and co-performers; the latter are also strong and even, and the Brits and Germans are played by respective native-speakers.

A powerful film, recommended to all those fond of war dramas.

Early Verhoeven hit

[Leofwine_draca · 7/10 · 4 October 2015]

SOLDIER OF ORANGE is a nice, rarely known Paul Verhoeven movie, shot in his native Holland and starring his one-time favourite actor, Rutger Hauer. It's a story whose backdrop encompasses the Second World War, and the Nazi invasion of that country. Verhoeven is obviously fascinated by the whole era - he would later return to it with the similar, even better BLACK BOOK - and his fascination is ably transmitted to the viewer.

This is an engaging little movie that remains well-shot, well-directed, and well-written. The running time is lengthy and there's not a real deal of action - sometimes the lack of a proper budget is all too apparent - but it's also never boring and instead very watchable. Hauer and Jeroen Krabbe (THE FOURTH MAN) make for an excellent double act as the idealistic students who find themselves drawn into a war of resistance against the Nazis.

The sense of place in SOLDIER OF ORANGE is excellent, and the realistic portrayal of events - there's no gung-ho stuff here - makes it feel almost documentary-like at times. It's certainly a great little film, more mature and sensible than Verhoeven's later overblown Hollywood efforts, and is eclipsed only by BLACK BOOK, which was made some thirty years later and is even more thrilling and exciting.

"Aristocracy belongs to the past"

[Therealkathulu · 4/10 · 1 October 2023]

Out of all the lines, this one stood out to me the most with its glaring irony. History will forever repeat itself.

The eternally charismatic Rutger Hauer stars in this WWII epic by Paul Verhooven, playing his role as Erik Lanshof with youthful charm and vigour. And for me, that was one of the few true redeeming qualities about this film. Not to say that it's a bad film - more that it is just simply unremarkable. I wanted to get engrossed in it, but it was never able to pull me in fully.

The soundtrack was undoubtedly just lovely. The German crooners of the 1930s are a different breed of haunting nostalgia, and Rogier Van Otterloo's score is also quite impressive and lovely to the ear, even if a bit war-generic at times. In particular the track "Ester" is evoking the essense of what film scores are, bringing the movie back to what it's supposed to be, and "Englandvaarders Hebben Een Streepje Voor" is almost comically similar to the ever-famous "Jaws" theme, which would come out a year later - curious indeed!

Veerhoven's special effects for the horrors of war and torture are reminiscent of his other, later works, such as the ketchup-like horrific blood splatter and other more cerebral terrors for our imagination. Both explicit and implicit, the effects do not function completely as a suspension of disbelief but nevertheless, they do still turn your stomach and at their worst, hit you over the head with the violence.

The movie is undoubtedly important in the tapestry of cinema history, but will probably never be the first WWII adventurous tale that would jump to mind when the mood for a war movie strikes.

Certainly worth viewing

[MinneapolisJane · 22 September 2004]

This film hit a grand slam by successfully achieving all of the things I hope for in a movie: it entertained me, it educated me, it charmed me, and it provoked me. I have lived in the Netherlands and love the Dutch people, so I was happy to view this film and see many familiar sites and understand some of the Dutch dialogue. It provided me with a sense of deja vu. I also learned things about the Dutch World War II experience that I previously was unaware of. The vast majority of the world only has one thought when it comes to WWII and the Dutch: Anne Frank. It's heartening to watch a film that explores many other facets of the Dutch experience during occupation, and that doesn't promote an all-rosy view wherein everyone is heroic. It is a realistic film that showed the complications of war and occupation, the desire for self-survival, the limits of patriotism, the fragility of war-time romances, and the bravery and sacrifices that some, but not all, are willing to exhibit. My heart was in my throat many times as I wondered what would happen and, although the movie is almost two and a half hours, I was sorry to see it end.

OH-MY-GOD!!!!

[Exiled_Archangel · 10/10 · 6 February 2004]

I just watched Soldaat Van Oranje, and I'm absolutely fascinated. It's a typical war flick in many senses, but it's probably one of the best ever made if not THE ONE. My heartfelt thanks and congratulations go to the entire crew who made this masterpiece. For 156 minutes, I was a young Dutchman wanting my country to be saved from the Nazis! After some point, it was like watching a football game. "Come on boy, you'll score, smash the bloody Nazi b**tard!" sort of thing.. I was inside the scene! The acting, camera work, screenplay, all flawless. Especially Rutger Hauger shines starting with the first breath. Unless he actually experienced all this stuff and reincarnated afterwards to make this movie, his was the BEST ACTING I'VE EVER SEEN!!! The rest of the cast is also fabulous. I usually try to mention the slightest flaw in a movie when I write a comment on here, no matter how much I liked it. But this time, I won't be able to, because this movie simply has no flaw at all. It's perfect, marvellous, stunning, any other adjective that addresses perfection! Anyone with a heart will LOVE this movie! A well-deserved ***** from me.

Couldn't you have accidentally dropped a bomb...

[XweAponX · 10/10 · 15 May 2023]

"... on the palace for me?"

I had forgotten about this movie, I had wanted to see it ever since I heard the name Paul Verhoeven. I saw Spetters in 1980, I saw Blade Runner in 1982. And that was my first dose of Rutger Hauer, it should have been this movie. Even my mother had heard about Hauer, and she heard about this movie too, we used to spend many hours, watching all kinds of obscure or foreign movies.

Rutger Hauer is very young here, one of a group of about five students... A photograph is taken of them, and the only question is which ones will still be alive after the debacle of World War II?

Initially it seems that the Dutch resistance are bumbling, idiotic fools. They do not appear to have embraced the concept of covering their arses.

But Rutger Hauer as Eric and his good friend Guus kind of bumble their way, trying to help, sometimes, getting caught, mostly getting away by the skin of their clever teeth. Until they finally escape to Britain.

They had to develop a way of getting back into the Netherlands, and then back out again, using what looked like "PT boats", PT boat number 102. If it were PT boat number 109, that would have been JFK. I'm just wondering if that was an American PT boat or a British...

Verhoven had access to all kinds of World War II equipment, planes, tanks, personnel carriers, even some amazing cars. When you think about movies today, none of those physical vehicles exist anymore, and so, especially in the case of shows like band of Brothers, they had to actually build German, American, and British tanks. But in 1977, or possibly a year earlier when this film was being made, there were still old war surplus planes and vehicles available.

There are names given to Rutger Hauer's character, the name of an alleged spy for Germany, planted in Britain. But it is not what we, or he, think it is. But the effect is that it sends Eric up to London with a secret mission that only he knows about, but fortunately the target of this mission knew all about what Eric was going to try to do and so thankfully that mistake was never made. That might be giving away a little bit, but I'm not saying exactly what this was, watch it and find out.

It is very interesting to see how the Germans worked, contrary to the intelligence-inept Dutch, they were virtually experts at setting up every encounter. No information was let out that they didn't have complete control over.

And it takes Eric halfway through his war experience to figure this out, turn it around, and use it to his own advantage. And towards the end, he does get very good at this.

The first Verhoven film I actually saw was Spetters, "Spatterings of Grease", in 1980. At the time, a couple of friends mentioned this movie, but for some reason I neglected to see it because I thought Rutger Hauer was portraying a Nazi... I was very wrong with that assessment.

Almost 40 years later, Verhoeven made the bookend film "Zwartboek", aka Black Book, with Clarice "Red Lady" Houten, which showed yet another aspect of the Dutch underground.

And Verhoeven was qualified to write and to make these movies.

I mentioned earlier the Dutch resistance appear to be rather inept, there are a few scenes that were rather disturbing. Especially when Alex and Guus try to volunteer and the recruitment officer keeps telling them to come back in 10 days, come back in 10 days.

There is a reason why that officer appears to be caught in some temporal causality loop... I can't say any more, that scene is near the beginning of the film. Look for it. There is a rather gross and disturbing reason why that officer was acting that way.

And then, as we are shown vignettes from the beginning of the war, the Dutch army was responding to things like April fools practical jokes. And then they are just left on their own by their superiors, with no instruction as the general drives away, leaving them with nothing.

It was kind of as if these five students had to teach themselves how to become useful. Some of them did become useful like Alex and Guus. Others made mistakes like Ian, and the Germans found the exact knife to twist into Robby.

This is one of the best war movies of the 70s and there were not that many, most of the ones made during that time were exceptional: Apocalypse Now which came two years later. Catch 22, Two Mules for Sister Sara, Kelly's Heroes, M*A*SH, Patton, Rio Lobo, Johnny got his Gun, then we had religious-based, like The Hiding Place, Vross of Iron, A Bridge (way) Too Far. Force 10 from Navarone. And of course, the infamous "1941", followed by Hair, and then "More American Graffiti."

But most of those were American movies. Das Boot, the German movie, was made in 1981. Ironically, Soldier of Orange is not even listed in the IMDb topic "Top 50 war movies and TV shows of all Time"... Not a single word about it.

This film put Verhoeven on the map- his next film, Spetters, put him over the top. And then he did RoboCop, Total Recall, and Starship Troopers, which he takes elements from this film to make more effective.

Watching this movie it is hard to tell which direction Verhoven was going to jump, but he actually made excellent movies in every genre that he worked. It took me a long time to find a good release of this, and the aspect ratio is 1280 x 785, a very unusual resolution, and I haven't seen any other films made to that specification.

Ivanhoe in World War II

[Paul-Hesp · 6/10 · 24 January 2014]

Paul Verhoeven and Rutger Hauer first joined forces when making 'Floris', a Dutch TV series for kids inspired by ITV's 'Ivanhoe', in the late 1960s. While not remotely as well made as its British forerunner - a recent documentary shows that it was very much learning by doing - the episodes you can now watch on YouTube are quite amusing, given the right age and nationality.

'Soldaat van Oranje' (Soldier of Orange) is based on the eponymous memoirs of Erik Hazelhoff Roelfzema, who received the highest Dutch military decoration for his actions during WW II. The book is a ripping yarn, as promised by the title - Hauer, the lead in the film, has called it a 'boys' book'. The fact that it has been turned into a musical as well is another indication that it does not delve deeply into the grim history of the Netherlands during the war.

The film does a fairly good job in touching on many aspects of the occupation of the Netherlands, such as the range of attitudes to the Nazi occupation that existed, from resistance via keeping your head down to joining the SS. The Englandspiel , a deadly 'game' played by the Germans with captured Dutch secret agents sent over by the British Special Operations Executive, inspires much of the story. And judging by what we know about her from newsreels, etc., the exiled Queen Wilhelmina (of Orange-Nassau, formally the soldiers' commander-in-chief) with her odd mannerisms is convincingly played by Andrea Domburg.

However, those who are unfamiliar with Dutch history of these years will not get all the references; and as the tone of the whole film is Ivanhoe-ish, you wonder why so much effort was put into reconstructing reality. There are also scenes that take outright liberties with wartime reality for thrills, though they can be funny. My favourite is the mild bit of sexploitation in the scenes where a girl shows herself in full-length Eve's costume behind open windows in, respectively, Leiden and London (in both cases she stands on a bed placed, very conveniently, right under the window). There is a nice parallel: in Leiden a clearly amused Nazi collaborator looks up; in London the normally very puritanical Queen tries hard not be somewhat amused.

The film's merits are in my opinion greater than that of Verhoeven's much later Black Book. But ripping yarns lose some of their appeal when you know something about the horrors of war (for that reason one of the book's real-life characters actually stayed away from the Hollywood-style gala opening performance of the film in Amsterdam).

I keep wondering whether the starting point of the film could not also have been a starting point for a war film that digs deeper. The type of student fraternity initiation rite shown in the film was common until the 1960s, and this species of adolescent sadism has never gone away completely. Maybe because it does lead to bonding (as I know from experience); but you might be excused for seeing uncomfortable parallels between the pandemonium and the shaven heads of the new students and what happened in Nazi camps: an Amsterdam student fraternity actually had 'Dachautje spelen' ('playing little Dachau') on its initiation programme, during which people are known to have fainted. Later in the film Dutch WA-men (uniformed Nazis) dump a Jewish peddler's handcart in a canal. Is there no link between their playful sadism and 'Dachautje spelen'? Camps similar to Dachau were the peddler's destination. Why do people take things out on those who are weaker, where does the contempt for other human beings come from (which resulted in the murder of over 100,000 Dutch Jews)? But a film exploring those questions might not be a box office success.

Watching it back when it was released, who would have ever guessed that Paul Verhoeven would later make "Robocop"?

[lee_eisenberg · 10/10 · 17 August 2006]

In "Soldaat van Oranje" (called "Soldier of Orange" in English), Paul Verhoeven brilliantly tells the story of several Dutch students resisting the Nazi occupation. One of the really interesting aspects is life before the war. We see the college cafeteria, where the students abuse Erik Lanshof (Rutger Hauer). But after the invasion, everyone sees their duty to defend the Netherlands.

All in all, I think that most people would have to agree that Paul Verhoeven's movies in his native Holland were just better (he's made some good ones here, but they have all been popcorn movies). This is certainly one to see. Also starring Jeroen Krabbe and Derek de Lint.

For the record, I've heard that for many years after WWII, it was considered rude to speak German in the Netherlands. I don't doubt it.

A Captivating Dutch Classic, Earns a Respectable 7/10

[Zooha-47207 · 7/10 · 16 February 2024]

Soldaat van Oranje is a film that stands as a classic in Dutch cinema, deserving a solid 7/10 for its compelling portrayal of World War II from a Dutch perspective. The movie brilliantly captures the essence of the era, highlighting the complexities and challenges faced during this tumultuous time.

The film's strength lies in its authentic representation of the Dutch experience during World War II. It does an excellent job of weaving personal stories with historical events, creating a narrative that is both engaging and educational. The portrayal of the characters is nuanced, allowing viewers to connect with their struggles and triumphs.

A particularly memorable aspect of Soldaat van Oranje is the iconic 'Scheveningen' scene. This moment not only showcases the film's attention to detail but also adds a layer of cultural significance. It's these small yet impactful moments that elevate the film, making it not just a historical piece but a reflection of Dutch identity and resilience.

The cinematography and direction contribute to the film's immersive experience. They capture the wartime atmosphere effectively, transporting viewers back in time. The acting is solid, with performances that bring depth and authenticity to the characters.

Brilliant performance of Rutger Hauer

[pvanoranje · 10/10 · 28 December 2001]

One of Paul Verhoeve's best performances. I personally believe there haven't been such succesfull movies in Holland afterwards. Both Rutger and Jeroen act very natural, an appealing story, well mastered by Paul and I like the different languages used in the movie making it more realistic. It is unfortunate that the movie hasn't had a sequal, although it is hard to find the same level of Dutch actors these days.

Before the starship troopers, there was the soldier of Orange

[gizmomogwai · 8/10 · 16 November 2013]

Yes, Paul Verhoeven, before making Hollywood science fiction schlock (albeit entertaining) movies like Starship Troopers and Hollow Man, once made what are considered some of the Netherlands' classic films. Why he would give that up seems obvious as well as sad. (What sells more tickets?) This is his first Dutch movie I've seen.

Soldier of Orange is a story of university students caught in the wake of the Nazi invasion during World War II. Once friends, some join the resistance or attempt to sneak out Jews, others join forces with the Germans. Soldier of Orange is a panoramic, epic kind of movie that attempts to address history in a gritty, realistic way. It doesn't shy away from what's real- nudity and sexuality, graphic violence or bodily functions (a Dutch traitor is using an outhouse when a boy throws a grenade in). Themes of friendship, betrayal and sacrifice are apparent.

This is a movie of solid production values and competent storytelling, which is never boring. Conversely, although two and a half hours long, it feels like it skips over or speeds through some of the history- we see the end of the war, but not much of the liberation process, and we've gone from 1944 to 1945 before you know it. Still, for an interesting perspective on World War II in the Netherlands (besides that of the foreign liberators or Anne Frank), this is a film definitely worth a look.

An excellent film but with some situations improbable

[jvdesuit1 · 5/10 · 13 June 2014]

Paul Verhoeven has made an excellent movie, the script is interesting and the actors are very good.

The main reproach I'll do to this production is in the first place to fall in the actual pit of thinking that the more you put realistic and gore shots in a movie, the better it is. We all know what the Gestapo's murderers and torturers were capable of doing to their victims. Is it necessary to see those acts of pure sadistic behavior? Absolutely not. They bring nothing to action. The same applies to the first scene with students dinner.

The second reproach is that some situations which I'm absolutely sure could not occur in the relations between Erik Lanshof and Susan as well as his friend Guus.I doubt that in real situation Susan as a secretary of a high ranking officer like Colonel Rafelli, would have intimate relationships with his subordinates. Her familiarity in the presence of her superior is quite impossible. Moreover in the 40s women in these jobs were very cautious and rather prudish. I doubt also that those guys would have such disrespectful conducts before the Queen of Holland, with crude language etc. Many scenes could have been suppressed which would have shortened the movie which is much too long(2h35 minutes); this would have given a more dynamic movie.

A look inside the wartime OSS

[LONESOLO · 15 May 2004]

SOLDIER OF ORANGE is a film about a group of friends who encounter the occupation of Holland by the Germans in different ways. The film splits up it's time dealing with the stories of the friends and that of one of them who becomes a high ranking member of the OSS and close political ally to the queen of Holland. The film, set during WW2, is even handed in it's approach. SOLDIER OF ORANGE is a unusual film and was made with a high degree of quality. The film goes for a sense of realism not often seen in cinema, the film,made in Holland is in dutch yet in the sequences in england it is in English. I recommend this film to WW2 buffs and fans of art-house cinema alike. Both groups will be pleased as will foreign film fans who can be assured of finding something worthwhile.

Real life beats heroism

[deVos · 9/10 · 4 May 2005]

OK, i am sooo prejudiced being from Holland. And maybe that's the point. This movie is all about reinventing your prejudices. It tells the story how, at first sight, almost identical lives take different turns under intense circumstances, without it being really (in most cases) clear what drives one person one way and another the other way. This is not really a war story, but a story about evolving personalities. People become heroes or traitors almost by circumstance. The Second World War is merely a catalyst for this evolution.

Please go see it (on DVD, out in sort notice) and prove me right or wrong. PS. one of the best music scores of all time from the late Rogier van Otterloo.