In 17th Century Amsterdam, an orphaned girl Sophia (Alicia Vikander) is forcibly married to a rich and powerful merchant Cornelis Sandvoort (Christoph Waltz) - an unhappy "arrangement" that saves her from poverty. After her husband commissions a portrait, she begins a passionate affair with the painter Jan Van Loos (Dane DeHaan), a struggling young artist. Seeking to escape the merchant's ever-reaching grasp, the lovers risk everything and enter the frenzied tulip bulb market, with the hope that the right bulb will make a fortune and buy their freedom.Written by
Before you were born, Amsterdam was captivated by a flower: the tulip. They came from far away in the East and were so rare and beautiful that people lost their senses in wanting to own them. Rich and poor were spending and borrowing money to join the trade in bulbs, which were going up in price all the time. None more so than the rare striped tulips that were called breakers. A new breaker came from nowhere like an act of God, and it changed people's lives. A white ...
See more »
Not only is the set very obviously there and visible there is very little of it. The rooms depicted are historically quite incorrect as is the outside depicting what looks like the back streets of London at the time not the sort of place you would find a wealthy trader in Amsterdam living at. But all that would be just a blemish on a otherwise average movie. The main problem I have with the movie is that a very important and by the clothing and position obviously wealthy man is depicted as a man of color. Please bear in mind we are talking about 1636 - 1637 mainland Europe... There certainly where man of color but most certainly not in positions like that this is before the slave trade had well and truly started and +200 years before it ended. If you are making a historical movie make it historically accurate. Just imagine the outrage if a movie about the rise and fall of the Zulu nation was made and a person of influence and power within the tribe would be played by a white man...
The ridiculous distortion of history in this movie is what earns it its low score, the movie itself is not very engaging and would not have scored higher than 6 stars.
55 of 103 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this