Katie Tippel

I recorded this movie a few weeks ago from our local community television station Triangle's night broadcast. I was surprised to see this on their schedule, as it's usually the lowest rate affair. The situation was another example of a great work getting lost in another vast video copy collection.

I was excited to be seeing an early movie from a director I always admired. I'd only ever seen his Hollywood work, and was especially fond of his Sci-Fi classics growing up. As others recognize, Verhoeven unashamedly puts into his films, his honest impression of the societal constructs we humans consistently find ourselves in. That regular criticism of the complexities of human nature, beyond the norms of each film's particular genre, has always resonated with my world view.

I finally watched this film this morning. As it started it was obvious the image quality was very poor, not helped by early scenes being predominantly in the dark. Not surprisingly the character's voices were dubbed into English, but were often mismatched or exaggerated, unfitting for the film. It seems to be the UK version I saw, yet some accents were American. I always try to watch a film in it's original intended language, but it seems the foreign films on the local community station are only ever poorly dubbed video copies.

Despite the poor quality of the copy I saw (the video company's logo even popped up irregularly in the bottom corner of the image), this film really amazed me. Much of the reasons why have been detailed by the few other comments on this site. The biggest flaw of the story for me was that the film ended too suddenly. This seems a common element to films the further back in cinema history you go. I actually appreciate a well crafted credits sequence, easing the viewer out of the film's world, and allowing reflection. Even at nearly 2 hours long, I felt my interest would have been sustained for a little bit longer.

There is a DVD listed here with 5 of Verhoeven's films in their original Dutch form, with English subtitles. I'd like to see this one again, and the rest of his early creations, which others consider even better. Rutger Hauer is also a great, varied yet charismatic actor, and it seems his best work might be with Verhoeven.

This film is weighed down by its deeply inadequate ending which does not seem to want to connect itself with the themes of greed and hunger relayed throughout. Tonally, it's incomplete.

Whilst the record indicates that Rob Houwer is part of the problem as to why the ending is the way it is - it's frustrating to think that this can't be ranked alongside Verhoeven's more accomplished works like Starship Troopers, from what it could have been...

If you like Paul Verhoeven's later work (Robocop, Total Recall, Black Book), you should take the time to delve into his Dutch language work.

This is a serious work showing class differences in 19th Century Holland, and the total lack of concern for workers. The title character takes a slew of meaningless jobs after the family is forced to move to the city, eventually ending up as a prostitute to survive.

Hearing the typical "streets paved with gold" dreams that were typical of America at that time, we can totally relate to those driven from their farms.

Women were certainly toys for men, even doctors, to play with, and rape, if they chose.

It was interesting to see Rutgar Hauer in a role as a gentlemen, and the experience of Monique van de Ven was not to be missed.

I was recently given the Anchor Bay DVD release of this title as a present, and I have to say that while I am impressed with the usual European frankness about things that would never make it into American films, this is probably among the least of Paul Verhoeven's work. Not that this is bad from the get-go. I would far prefer to watch a bad film from Paul Verhoeven than what could be considered good among the stables of directors like Peter Jackson or Jerry Bruckheimer. They say that the key to artistic success is being honest with yourself, and Verhoeven is a big example of the principle. More on that in a moment.

The story of Keetje Tippel concerns itself with a young woman named Keetje, who migrates from one end of Holland to another during the nineteenth century. The name might be obvious from the title, but one thing that should have been made clearer is that Tippel is not her family name. Tippel actually refers to the profession she winds up taking in order to fuel her rise from the gutter.

At the beginning of the film, Keetje is an idealist with little, if any, idea of how the capitalist society she enters actually works. She starts out going from one crappy job to the next. The first of which makes it clear that worker health and safety was a very minor concern at best in this primitive era. We see Keetje and numerous other workers dipping textiles into lye, no gloves or any other kind of protection, and we see its effects at various stages in the film. From there, Keetje falls into working as a seamstress, and eventually, as a prostitute.

One touch of Dutch cinema that I've always liked since I have become acquainted with it through Verhoeven's work is that there isn't always a happy ending. In Keetje Tippel, our titular hero does nothing to help the poor that she was once a member of. In fact, one of the many things she winds up doing in the latter part of the film hurts them very badly. This can be understood when one looks at some attitudes to what people feel when they get out of a situation they cannot stand. For example, were I to leave Australia and live somewhere like England, the only way in which I would lift a finger to help others who are unhappy with the lot Australia has is by helping them leave. Like rats from a sinking ship, as it were. That's the attitude of the character, and it is even more understandable in the context of nineteenth century social conditions.

The thing that keeps Keetje Tippel from obtaining the unqualified ten out of ten rating I normally give Verhoeven's Dutch-language films is, ironically, the same thing that normally prompts this rating. For once, the brutal honesty and unflinching depiction of reality counts against the film. Rather than the stomach churning for a second before expressing amazement, I found myself asking if the depiction of bodily functions is really necessary. Those who have seen the uncut versions of Soldaat Van Oranje, Turks Fruit, or even De Vierde Man, will understand what I am talking about here.

During the audio commentary Anchor Bay had recorded for the DVD release, the difference between Verhoeven and many a Hollywood director becomes obvious in a big hurry. Where other directors will attempt to put a spin on every aspect of their films, or even try to congratulate themselves, Verhoeven is so frank and honest that his commentaries could be used in film-making schools. Unlike Peter Jackson and his vapid writing staff, you won't hear Verhoeven trying to justify his artistic decisions from a position of arrogance. It's not "how do you expect me to do this? do you think you can do better?", but rather "I did this this way because... and I am pleased/disappointed with the results, so I will do it again/try something else next time". If all directors in Hollywood were this brutally honest, American film would be much more palatable nowadays.

I gave Keetje Tippel an eight out of ten. Its realism earns it a ten out of ten for the most part, but there are times when it either goes too far, or lets its ambition exceed its ability enough, to deduct two points. Jan Wolkers, the author of the novel on which Turks Fruit is based, had similar feelings about Turks Fruit, so this is quite easily viewed as a case of a new director faltering a little as he learns his craft. Still, with early pieces like Keetje Tippel and Turks Fruit, it is not a surprise that Verhoeven would go on to such masterpieces as Total Recall or RoboCop. The DVD is well worth the Amazon asking price.

I came across this film under the title "Hot Sweat" at my local video store, and rented it out of curiosity; I had seen many movies by this director, and always thought his work was severely underated. The movie really surprised me with it's unsensationalistic style and well done cinematography. Although the female lead is very beautiful, and manages to get undressed frequently, there is always a tension to her sexuality...she is forced to rely on it only because the audience is clearly made aware that on the other side is the penniless abyss. Rutger Haur plays totally against type as a foppish young bank officer who adopts her as his mistress.

I think most people today think of Holland as a totally liberal and affluent country. This film goes a long way towards dispelling that stereotype, and I would recommend it to anyone looking for a (sometimes brutally) realistic picture of 19th century life among the underclass in Amsterdamn. I liked it.