User Reviews (35)

Add a Review

  • 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
  • "Turks Fruit",based on the novel written by the legendary Dutch writer Jan Wolkers,is a true Dutch classic. That doesn't mean that much since my country isn't a major player in World cinema.Yet this film is very good and very famous.

    It was voted the best Dutch film ever a few years ago when a national poll was held in Holland.It's tough to agree with that,since I haven't seen all the classics but it's right up there,that much is true.

    The sex and dirty images of poo are not for everyone to see,yet it is essential to the free culture of Amsterdam in the 1970's.

    Amsterdam was the center of the world in the 70's,so my mother told me. That was probably the reason why she left France (she is French) and came to Amsterdam."Turks Fruit" shows a very poignant picture of the city at that time and the sexual liberation of them days.

    The directing by the,at that time,young Paul Verhoeven is splendid and it's no mystery why he left Holland to go to Hollywood.His talents are clear but another reason was that he was misunderstood in Holland so he said himself.

    The camera work is great,but that's no surprise since it's done by one of the greatest cameramen Jan de Bont (who became famous in the 90's with his action classics "Speed" and "Twister",especially "Speed" show the superb talents of de Bont when it comes to camera work).

    The film also launched the careers of Rutger Hauer and Monique van de Ven. Van de Ven stayed in Holland,playing in some of the best Dutch films and Hauer went to Hollywood and gained cult fame when he starred in "Blade Runner",a terrific performance by Hauer.

    Verhoeven and Hauer would team up again 4 years later to make the Dutch war classic "Soldaat van Oranje".

    "Turks Fruit" is truly the epitome of 70's Dutch cinema with it's liberated sex approach that would echo in several other Dutch films in the 70's and 80's.

    Very important for Holland but maybe too much for the rest of the world,especially for the rather prudish Hollywood.

    Essential viewing though for everyone who wants to know something about the Dutch cinema. 8/10
  • Warning: 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
  • 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.
  • Boba_Fett11384 October 2005
    "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

    http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
  • The first successful film from Dutch provocateur Paul Verhoeven, famous for of course Robocop and Basic Instinct (and infamous for Showgirls) is a small scale, human relationship drama that not only established the careers of Verhoeven and start Rutget Hauer but signalled the new wave for the Dutch film industry. However Turks Fruit is nothing more than the Dutch Love Story, as moody artist Eric (Hauer) falls in love with Olga (Monique van de Ven) after the young lady pick him up from the side of a motorway. The film is littered with so much bawdy humour I'm sure Benny Hill was kicking himself somewhere for not thinking of it, in one particular cringe inducing scene Eric gets himself caught in the zip of his pants, the couple then has to drive around franticly to find a set of pliers. I'm sure this kind of schoolboy theatrics played well to the Dutch polo-neck brigade, but as the film shifts into more serious territory the humour only deflates any building melodrama that Verhoeven was probably shooting for.

    Another problem with the film is Hauer's character Eric; he's too much of a chauvinist and bully, not only towards Olga, but even more so to the numerous women he sleeps with after she has left (You're fat is just one example of his pillow talk). We never feel anything for him, not that Hauer isn't good in the role he plays it very well, but playing butch carefree characters has never been too much of a stretch for him. Van de Ven is impressive as the liberated Olga, and she would go on to give another fine performance in Keetje Tippel, but she is used too much like an object and never really becomes likable enough. Definitely a product of its time, the sexual revolution was noticeably in full swing, as Eric goes from woman to woman without a seconds though about the consequences. It's this dating that also detracts from the film. Whatever Verhoeven was trying to say about relationships, and the constant power play between men and women, he just doesn't get the balance right. All in all, Turks Fruit is an impressive early feature that tries to belie it's exploitation roots and to become series storytelling just a little too late in the game. 6/10
  • haildevilman17 June 2006
    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!
  • This is a very intense movie about love, hate, life and death with a lot of symbolism and realism at the same time. The plot is located in the early 70ies in Amsterdam and features Monique van de Ven and Rutger Hauer who give a really great performance. The supporting actors are also very well chosen and there are no lengthy parts in the story that can make you laugh and cry at the same time.

    There are few movies that are able to create an atmosphere that intense. But be warned - this movie polarizes - either you love it or you hate it.

    I'll rate it a 9 out of 10.
  • jboothmillard10 February 2013
    Warning: Spoilers
    From director Paul Verhoeven (The Fourth Man, Total Recall, Basic Instinct), before he directed the atrocious Showgirls, which was chock-a-block with sex and nudity, in his home country of the Netherlands he made this film with similar high content, but of course this is much better, and was featured in the book 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die. Basically Eric Vonk (Rutger Hauer) is a highly talented sculptor, and he has a habit for picking up random women from the streets and having sex with them at his studio, but it is clear that he is only doing this to try and get over the breakup from Olga Stapels (Monique Van De Ven), and through flashback we see him recall his relationship with her. Eric was trying to hitch a ride, and Olga picked him up as a hitchhiker, and immediately they connect sexually and spiritually, and after somewhat of a short time they start living together and marry, this relationship is strongly disapproved by Olga's mother (Tonny Huurdeman) because she does not like his sculpting bringing in only occasional commission. The couple still get married despite these opinions, and he is accepting by her family, but after having many adventures together she is starting to act strangely, and she is seen at a family party with a businessman flirting, so the couple have strong argument until he slaps her and she leaves him. Eric in anger trashes his studio, ruining anything that reminds him of Olga, and this is when the film comes out of flashback to present day, he still obsesses about his wife but they do occasionally see each other, each time with her acting more and more outrageously, often hanging around with other men, and the family are not allowing him to visit her until he will agree to end the marriage and divorce her. Eventually he does confirm the divorce, and she quickly marries an American businessman, but this relationship does not last that long as it fast goes wrong, and he returns to Holland, and she is once again becoming flamboyant with her dress sense, but she is losing logic. Eric meets her, they talk a little and she collapses and is taken to hospital, she is diagnosed with a brain tumour which means that she is to go into surgery, but unfortunately not all of the intervention could remove the fatal problem, so she will definitely die. All Eric can do for Olga is spend whatever time they have left together caring for her, and having refused for some time to eat he one day brings her some Turkish delight, this becomes the only thing she will eat as she worries her teeth will be broken by harder food, and in the end she does indeed tragically die. Also starring Wim Van Den Brink as Olga's father, Hans Boskamp as Winkelchef, Dolf De Vries as Paul and Manfred De Graaf as Henny. Hauer, before becoming well known for dark and villainous roles, proves a good choice as the man with an obsession for sex and his art, and Van De Ven is also suitable as the beautiful who shares a passionate connection on and off with him, the film does mostly consist of the voyeuristic nudity and sensual sex scenes, in many situations, including bizarre and shocking moments during, but unlike Showgirls they work as part of the love story and are very interesting to watch unfold, it adds up to a marvellously inventive erotic drama. It was nominated the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film. Very good!
  • Warning: 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.
  • Slightly before the "frizzling" Frenchmen started their famous Emmanuelle-series, the tardy Dutch had Turkish Delight already available and attracted millions of viewers... Well, they are not directly comparable, but movements and changes in views that began to form in the 1960ies enable to realise such creations for "ordinary" people as well. The film in question is pleasantly moody, showing various angles of love-sex-relationship, and courageous character actors (particularly Monique van de Ven as Olga Stapels, Rutger Hauer as Eric Vonk), skillful directing (Paul Verhoeven) and cinematography (Jan de Bont) provide this not-so-extraordinary script additional values and undertones.

    At the same time, I have doubts that Turkish Delight is a timeless film, that it approaches and influences future and current people as well, as many attitudes have changed, and many would consider depicted fashion and hairiness as odd (mildly speaking). And those accustomed to Internet have seen much "bolder" stuff...
  • 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.
  • Have been an avid film buff over 60 years. Had seen and enjoyed many of Paul's works, ranking Total Recall among all-time favorite SciFi. So I was cautiously optimistic about T/D. Wow. I actually could not watch more than 10 to 15 minutes without stopping and continuing later; forcing myself through the film. I can handle obnoxious, obscene, gross, and even idiotic. But it's really helpful to have a Purpose behind it all. Or at least something redeeming that I can look to, in order to make the viewing more watchable. It's tough when off the bat I had no care at all for the lead.... Rutger, who I have loved in so many pictures. And it is not my 'American sensibility' that causes me to miss the point of this Dutch mess. I've seen 100s of European films; if this is, according to one source, the 'Best Film ever made in Netherlands', then I give up on watching any others! It is, as also described: earthy, naturalistic, erotic, and even occasionally humorous. But it's also overtly unpleasant, needlessly callous, and it's seemingly ONE point of poignancy is over-wrought and takes Far too long to reach. Ugh; unless one wishes to say they've seen EVERY Verhoeven title, I'd advise taking a pass.
  • Warning: 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.
  • Paul Verhoeven is known as provocative filmmaker who likes to create daring visual images. He's mostly known by his Hollywood films with unsteady quality. 'Turkish Delight' was Verhoevens first hit in Netherlands and was voted as best Dutch film of the century. With the very first minutes Verhoeven manages to disturb the viewer and unsuspecting viewer can even start to think - what I just got myself into? Very bold depiction of sex and sexuality doesn't seem forced and even the small bursts of intense violence don't stand out from the rest of the film as some bright (or dark) spots.

    'Turkish Delight' is heartwarming and heartbreaking love story between free spirited Olga (Monique van de Ven) and care free sculptor Eric (Rutger Hauer). Both main stars have such a chemistry between them that nothing seems to forced. Their relationship seems as natural as sunshine in Florida (or rain in London).

    Very few directors are capable of making such warm films with provocative aplomb and Verhoeven is master at this game.
  • lambiepie-220 April 2008
    Warning: Spoilers
    While many consider this Paul Verhooven's "best", I consider it 'among his best' because there are others he did in his native country that moved me more than this one. BUt this one was good. Perhaps is because in the 1970's, every star crossed lovers in TV and film had very tragic endings to their relationships - and while this is another one, I liked the telling much better.

    Turks Fruit isn't as antiseptic as the American "Love Story" - this story is filmed as honestly as possible, showing you everything and anything that happened to this young couple of the early 70's and how the generation gap of the parent (not parents mind you!) really got in the way. This is more adult and you do follow the story of a gifted artist and his wanton lover - in the early 70's.

    I too had to laugh at the vomit scene - you'd never see that in American Cinema back then for such a love tale, and how 'bohemian' the female was - not the male. This was liberating for women during the women's liberation movement kinda thing. Rutger Hauer played his character of a gifted struggling 70's artist well - knowing what he wanted and how uncompromising he was to his art - but on the other hand would do what it took to support he and his wife.

    I had to find this film to remember it - it was shown on the Los Angeles based Z channel, but I didn't remember seeing it. It took sometime to find an old dubbed version and I think it was cut - but I still enjoyed this, even today. The two things that bothered me was at the end, where was Olga's mom? What really happened to her in America? (There's a scene with Olga getting examined and she says something like: "He hurt me" and the technician replies, "I know". Makes me think there was more to this - or was Olga just responding to the exam?) Funny thing though - I never knew the name of the candy I loved so much as a child -- until this movie, and so this did have quite an emotional impact for me as tragedy struck these two. And more tragic yet, the empty life that had to be lived after such a love and tragedy.
  • This movie is fun, wild and yet sad. It's entertaining and interesting the whole way through, but somehow you know that something is going to happen to spoil it all. I guess it's moral is that life is precious, so Enjoy it while you can.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Anybody who thinks that Paul Verhoeven used to make "serious" films before he came to the States should be in for a rude awakening. This is nothing but a pleasantly daft exploitation movie, in which beefy sculptor Rutger and his lady love hare around the Netherlands having a lot of sex and generally being wild, young and free. About two thirds of the way through, somebody realises that it ought to have a story, so the girl inexplicably leaves him and then contracts a mysterious illness. Rutger goes to a dinner party, at which he throws up in not one but two different people's faces. Then there's a fair amount of sobbing to get through before it all shudders to a halt. All good fun, but for these eyes, Verhoeven had to hit America to produce the nihilistic majesty that is Robocop and Starship Troopers.
  • How can you review one of your personal favorites and still give a neutral view? Then again movie reviews are seldom a neutral piece of literature.

    That aside i have to acknowledge that 'Turks Fruit/Turkish Delight' is a masterpiece of Dutch cinema and one of the greatest movies by Hollands most notorious directors Paul Verhoeven.

    Why? Because it's a well balanced mix of Verhoeven's typical filmy realism as a pure cinematic device with a love story. The power of this movie lies in this realism, it's Paul Verhoeven throwing sh*t in your face, not afraid of any subject, it's if there is no taboo in Verhoeven's head. This was probably the reason why Turks Fruit was such a success at it's time.

    Turks fruit is a roller coaster movie about two people that live by the opportunistic way that characterizes Verhoeven's films and there characters. They are free, don't care about the rules and are one of my all time favorite couples on screen.

    To conclude: I'm still amazed at who unknown this film actually is compared to it's genius. So, one big advice, see it now, and if it's good tell everyone you know.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Regarded as the most successful Dutch film, "Turks Fruit" (Turkish Delight) is a melodramatic romantic-tragedy directed by Paul Verhoeven.

    Verhoeven is renowned for his frank and extreme depictions of sex and violence, and "Turks Fruit" is no different. Violence, feces, vomit and many other scenes that western audiences are sure to find challenging, are on frequent display, presented by Verhoeven in a very matter-of-fact style.

    But it never feels exploitative. If anything, it's funny to see Verhoeven sticking his camera wherever he pleases. His framing here is also different to his other films, the director adopting a highly free-form style of shooting, lots of hand-held camera work, no storyboarding, little rehearsal and a preference for early takes, all in an attempt to captures raw and spontaneous natural performances.

    The film's plot is really insignificant. It's the tale of an artist (Rutger Hauer) who has trouble dealing with his wife's (Monique van de Ven) selfish mother. This friction leads to an intense courting and marital relationship. Eventually husband and wife grow apart, only to be brought back together by the realisation that Monique has cancer. When his wife dies, Rutger Hauer walks sadly off into the sunset. It's an R rated take on Arthur Hiller's "Love Story".

    It's a trite story, but Verhoeven inserts some simple visual metaphors to elevate things. Artwork is compared to the passion of romance, whilst decay and maggots crop up again and again to highlight the cancerous way the couple's relationship gradually collapses. The film is constantly switching between two aesthetics: a colourful, pleasing palette (good times) and a really nasty griminess (bad times).

    7.9/10- Worth watching once for its style, bombastic pace, catchy musical score, and some beautiful Dutch women. Rutger Hauer comes across as a sex starved brute, until the final act in which Verhoeven lingers on his sculptors and artwork, all of which feature pregnant women and babies. Poor Rutger only wanted a family.
  • movieguy8100721 April 2006
    I am a Rutger Hauer fan. In this movie Rutger Hauer is very young. This is one of Paul Verhoeven's early films. It seems very dated but it still a good movie. This movie got nominated for Best Foreign Language Film. It should have one. It is similar to Basic Instinct for sexuality. This film is similar to Katie Tippel another Paul Verhoeven film. The first time I saw Rutger Hauer is was Batty from Blade Runner. Then I saw him in Split Second and just recently in Flesh + Blood. Flesh + Blood is Rutger Hauer's best film. I do not want to forget his other Dutch films Soldier of Orange and Spetters. Rutger Hauer never got nominated for an Oscar and I am surprised by that.
  • No need to tell this is the best Verhoeven work in my opinion, and one of the best European films I've ever seen. Funny, realistic and psychedelic, this film is so catchy that you don't even notice the time passing by. Rutger Hauer is in one of his first roles here, and appears in the nude almost all the time. Many will enjoy...
  • I have a tough time with these loose, no structure, no plot movies of the 70's.

    But Verhoeven and Hauer are mesmerizing. Despite that, this movie will test your patience. Hard to turn off, though. So... I don't know...
  • I was given the video of the film a few years ago for Christmas and i had never heard of it,that's probably because my copy of the film is called "WILD INTENT" I strongly recomend any one of the appropriate age (it's raited as an eighteen for a reason!} To give it at leased one viewing. Allthough it's not one of Rutger Hauer's most spectacularely voilent films, nor does it have vibrant special effects,it has everything els in it, sex, humour and romance with a twist! It has it's own formular of Rutger's magic charm, he is in top form in this film, as it might have been embarrasing for some to act the part but Rutger does it with ease.If you are looking for it in england and can't find it i sugest you try the "WILD INTENT" title.As a Rutger Hauer fan i give this film a raiting of 9 out of 10.
  • Although known as The Sensualist, this erotic push the envelope type drama (remember it's Verhoeven here) sees Hauer as a bold playboy/gifted sculptor who strikes up a friendship, with a hottie, who sadly later, catches Cancer. Filmed in 1973 this very well made and explicit film forecasts a a true star in the making, long curly haired Hauer. He's so likable and funny (one dining room scene that has him nearly about to eat a horse's eye, where he stands up and complains is memorably funny) as sex driven and independent Eric, who likes to use woman's pubic hair as moustache's, (part of his art) or who isn't afraid to jump in the back of beautiful chick's convertibles while at traffic lights. Although this film will offend some, none more than the penis stuck in zipper/blood on pliers scene, The Sensualist is very entertaining, and is more than just a sex film, with some underlined hidden messages. For Rutger and Verhoeven fans, definitely. Great movie soundtrack.
An error has occured. Please try again.