This film is about the flooding of the south west part of The Netherlands in 1953. After the dikes broke away, Julia, mother of an illegitimate child, tries to escape from the rising water with her family and child. When she loses her child in the chaos, she tries to find him back. Along with Aldo, who saved her from drowning, she wanders through the flooded village to find her child. Although the visual effects are pretty impressive, the story is simply not good enough. The flooding and its disastrous consequences are completely subordinate to the lengthy (and sometimes annoying) search of a mother for her missing child. A missed opportunity for a Titanic-like Dutch disaster film.
16 Reviews
A huge event turned into a truly disappointing movie
billwolters-120 September 2009
56 years after the devastating 'big flood' of 1953 the tragedy finally makes it to to the big screen. After a wait this long it's even more a shame that such a big event in Dutch history turned out to be such a disappointing movie. Where other movies, like for instance Titanic, successfully use a personal drama as a metaphor for the bigger picture, 'De Storm' gets lost in a totally unrealistic and very one dimensional story about a woman losing her baby. The movie ends up almost ignoring the tragedy all those other thousands of people where facing during this flood. The characters in this movie aren't properly introduced so as a spectator you feel no connection at all with the leading roles. The dialogs are very poor and the acting, especially from leading lady Sylvia Hoeks, is a disgrace!!!
Just do yourself a favor and avoid this movie
Just do yourself a favor and avoid this movie
The Storm
jsrobinson13226 May 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I am from Australia and had never heard of the great flood of 1953 in Zeeland so this was not only a movie I enjoyed for the content but also made me aware for the first time of such a tragic event for so many people. As a mother and grandmother, the storyline was very heartfelt as I think losing a baby, no matter in what circumstances, would be something you would never recover from fully. Even though several reviews are critical of the movie and its title, I can see where the director and writer were coming from. Not only was it about the infamous storm of 1953, the main character also lived through her own personal storm whilst searching for her baby. This storyline took the viewer inside one story out of thousands from that period and personalised it by showing the event itself, a mother's maternal instinct to protect and do everything to find her baby, as well as the culture and moral expectations of the 1950s which were maintained even through such a catastrophe. I enjoyed the movie - as much as you can enjoy watching such a tragedy - and as the version I saw used sub-titles the dialogue and out-of-sync moments didn't affect my viewing of it.
Good movie, not great
coendeurloo17 September 2009
I've seen this movie yesterday, also during the Film by the Sea festival in Vlissingen.
I really liked how the movie started, lots of tension building up and the special effects are very well done. If you want to learn more about the 1953 flood though, then this movie might not be the best choice. I was hoping for a more in depth movie about this subject, but the movie focuses more on a personal story that happens during (and partly because of) the flood.
The overall acting was mediocre, and only Sylvia Hoeks as our main character seems to be displaying some genuine emotions. The first thing I noticed was that the actors use almost no local dialect ('Zeeuws'). Even though it's not very realistic and probably done to appeal for a larger (Dutch) audience, I liked the choice.
I really liked how the movie started, lots of tension building up and the special effects are very well done. If you want to learn more about the 1953 flood though, then this movie might not be the best choice. I was hoping for a more in depth movie about this subject, but the movie focuses more on a personal story that happens during (and partly because of) the flood.
The overall acting was mediocre, and only Sylvia Hoeks as our main character seems to be displaying some genuine emotions. The first thing I noticed was that the actors use almost no local dialect ('Zeeuws'). Even though it's not very realistic and probably done to appeal for a larger (Dutch) audience, I liked the choice.
Not good.
belleherder1 February 2012
I looked forward to this movie, because of the true story of the Storm in 1953. I was very disappointed. The flood came immediately in the beginning, you didn't even know the characters yet. The flooding itself was good to see. However, the main character Julia was very unlikeable and the acting was terrible. There was no emotion in her acting, even though her sisters and mother were dead and here baby was missing. The same look for the hole movie. The storyline was really unbelievable and the end.. well, you should see it to believe how terrible it is. The characters were in the water for a long time, that would not have been possible because of the temperature of the water. Maybe it was because I had too high expectations, but as i said, I was really disappointed.
Horribly bad
marianne-nobel28 January 2013
Really, just read the book. I cannot even begin to compare it to this film. Bad acting, bad lines, wrong accents, and a thousand things missing in (and different to) the storyline.
The book catches the feelings and circumstances of main character Julia so well, you'll actually start feeling the same way she does and will want to pursue her goal of finding her baby even beyond the very end. The true tragedy and injustice of her situation will still hold you in it's grasp for a long time after finishing the book.
By the by, also there is more attention to the flooding and it's consequences to the people living there.
(Book is called '1953' by Rik Launspach)
The book catches the feelings and circumstances of main character Julia so well, you'll actually start feeling the same way she does and will want to pursue her goal of finding her baby even beyond the very end. The true tragedy and injustice of her situation will still hold you in it's grasp for a long time after finishing the book.
By the by, also there is more attention to the flooding and it's consequences to the people living there.
(Book is called '1953' by Rik Launspach)
good movie from start to end , very realistic .
evk31023 September 2009
Warning: Spoilers
i also saw this movie yesterday , i was impressed , i think it was a great movie ,
the big action in the beginning of the movie , didn't make you fall asleep.
instead of a boring talking start of the movie , it shows you immediately the big bang , how the water destroyed the helpless people by surprise. it shows very realistic how this all did happen. now finally we all can see and understand what the people had been through in 1953.
BUT the movie is not ABOUT the storm , . if people see this movie , they might expect to see a movie about the storm like a disaster movie. there is lots of disaster to see but the storm was not the big subject here .
the real story here is about a mother looking for her disappeared baby. the storm disaster itself here is just a part of the movie to show in what time this story did happen.
for this reason i think they could have called the movie a different name ,
because this movie was all about the young mother , they could have called the movie , The Zeeuws Girl , just an example
( Zeeuws because that is the name from the area where she lives) that would have been a more honest name for this movie. because the movie is about HER and her baby . and then when people see the movie they find out it all happened during the storm .
Just like in MASTERPIECE The Pianist . they didn't call the movie THE WAR ! because that movie was not ABOUT that war but about that pianist , than watching the movie you find out it happened during that war . a very cool way and honest way for a movie to profile itself. that movie would probably confuse when Polanski would call that movie THE WAR , and then people would see a movie about a pianist , so 10 points for Polanski by the way ... so no confusion creating by wrong chosen name for a movie
i understand why they want to call this movie THE STORM , because they want to attract people with this name , but too bad it gives confusion when people will see a film about a mother and her baby . still a great movie . and still a must see .
i liked everything about it. would actually be better if her son in the end was meeting his never met younger sister or brother . where are the new kids from the mother ? did she never get new kids again with her new boyfriend ? that would be a nice happy end . maybe i should be a filmmaker ?
lucky in this movie they didn't speak in Zeeuws dialect , nobody would probably understand that dialect , except of course the people who speak that dialect in that area.
go see the movie and be ready to wipe your tears.
the big action in the beginning of the movie , didn't make you fall asleep.
instead of a boring talking start of the movie , it shows you immediately the big bang , how the water destroyed the helpless people by surprise. it shows very realistic how this all did happen. now finally we all can see and understand what the people had been through in 1953.
BUT the movie is not ABOUT the storm , . if people see this movie , they might expect to see a movie about the storm like a disaster movie. there is lots of disaster to see but the storm was not the big subject here .
the real story here is about a mother looking for her disappeared baby. the storm disaster itself here is just a part of the movie to show in what time this story did happen.
for this reason i think they could have called the movie a different name ,
because this movie was all about the young mother , they could have called the movie , The Zeeuws Girl , just an example
( Zeeuws because that is the name from the area where she lives) that would have been a more honest name for this movie. because the movie is about HER and her baby . and then when people see the movie they find out it all happened during the storm .
Just like in MASTERPIECE The Pianist . they didn't call the movie THE WAR ! because that movie was not ABOUT that war but about that pianist , than watching the movie you find out it happened during that war . a very cool way and honest way for a movie to profile itself. that movie would probably confuse when Polanski would call that movie THE WAR , and then people would see a movie about a pianist , so 10 points for Polanski by the way ... so no confusion creating by wrong chosen name for a movie
i understand why they want to call this movie THE STORM , because they want to attract people with this name , but too bad it gives confusion when people will see a film about a mother and her baby . still a great movie . and still a must see .
i liked everything about it. would actually be better if her son in the end was meeting his never met younger sister or brother . where are the new kids from the mother ? did she never get new kids again with her new boyfriend ? that would be a nice happy end . maybe i should be a filmmaker ?
lucky in this movie they didn't speak in Zeeuws dialect , nobody would probably understand that dialect , except of course the people who speak that dialect in that area.
go see the movie and be ready to wipe your tears.
Not a good movie (may contain spoilers !)
iebee27 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I've seen this movie on video, and was not impressed at all. The 1953 flood was an unbelievable disaster, 1800 people died in that night. That does not come out at all in the movie. A lot of water, but no drama. Why does Julia not look in the basket when she recognized the crying of the baby ? Why doesn't she even try to pull out her mother or sister ? When she goes under herself in the beginning, you see strands of hair floating as if she is wearing a wig. Her hair is dry when she arrives at the party in the beginning of the movie, although she has been going to the party on a bicycle in a heavy rainstorm, with only a fabric scarf.
Sadly, some copies of the film survived...
TheDragonTrader11 June 2022
A real-world tragedy deserves a respectful recounting of events. But this movie opted to reïmagine the dramatic Christmas flood of 1953 in an absurd fictional storyline where the plot and the characters are so shallow you start wondering what the problem is. De Storm fails as a historical film, fails as a drama and fails as a thriller.
The film promotes the dated idea that "a woman needs a man no matter how strong she is". Additionally, it praises idiotic actions of stupidity as "heroic rescue attempts". None of the actors managed to deliver their lines with any level of truth. And I would not have been able to muster the two stars I rated it if the special effects hadn't been this decent.
De Storm, in essence, is an insult to the victims of the flood and a disgrace to Dutch filmmaking. Tedious, disastrously dated and offending.
The film promotes the dated idea that "a woman needs a man no matter how strong she is". Additionally, it praises idiotic actions of stupidity as "heroic rescue attempts". None of the actors managed to deliver their lines with any level of truth. And I would not have been able to muster the two stars I rated it if the special effects hadn't been this decent.
De Storm, in essence, is an insult to the victims of the flood and a disgrace to Dutch filmmaking. Tedious, disastrously dated and offending.
Such a bad film!
pprovoost13 October 2009
I hate this film. It's really awful in all his aspects. The acting sucks, the story sucks, the script sucks, the end sucks, it is a really bad bad movie! Alsot he title doesn't make any sense: De Storm. The first ten minutes of the film is about the actual storm, then the film tells a story about a mother (who acted the worst!) in search of her baby and that for 86 minutes long. Call the movie then: The Search or The Baby. I've never seen a good film produced by Johan Nijenhuis, and I really hate him. He thinks the audience is deff, dumb and blinde and writes and produces bad films and series. I think Nijenhuis is the baddest thing ever happened to Holland. So I say: Nijenhuis, you can do better, or get the hell out of showbusiness! Amen.
True Story
celticore14 September 2009
I might be a bit prejudiced, because I am from The Netherlands, where this all happened. I've seen this movie this weekend, I was overwhelmed by its reality. I didn't see it all happen, but some folks in the theater did, and they were crying about all memories coming back. This means, in my humble opinion, that the movie is very realistic, even with a budget so low, game-studios can't make a decent game with this amount of money. I guess that the people in New Orleans also need to see this movie, so they know why the Dutch are now helping with their struggle against water. Watch this movie, it might be an Oscar-winner! Also keep checking out Dutch movies, some of them are real gems. Try to watch movies like TBS, Van God Los and Lek. These are some of the best Dutch movies. And of course, Zwartboek, Blackbook(by Paul Verhoeven!)!
Onedimensional story and far fetched ending
polleke-128 September 2009
Warning: Spoilers
It is a shame! Barry Atsma shines in the short movie "Ooit" and is a promising a actor. He shouldn't lend himself for an Moloch like this. Well the acting is alright, the cheap-ass visual effects are so so but the story is paper thin..
One girls story, kicking in open doors like the perception of the locals that the 1953 disasters was the wrath of God, and other small minded opinions that did not apply at that time and only came to being in the sixties and seventies.
The plot is unbelievable. Wonderful research people!. The accent claims to be zeeuws-vlaams and Julia visits the opening of one of the Deltawerken at the Haringvliet.. Yeah Right!
One girls story, kicking in open doors like the perception of the locals that the 1953 disasters was the wrath of God, and other small minded opinions that did not apply at that time and only came to being in the sixties and seventies.
The plot is unbelievable. Wonderful research people!. The accent claims to be zeeuws-vlaams and Julia visits the opening of one of the Deltawerken at the Haringvliet.. Yeah Right!
Don't watch it if you red the book!
biancaroseanna20 July 2021
If you had red the book, you do not want to watch this film. It is a huge disappointment in comparing to the detailed description of the book. I doesn't come close to the (much better) storylines and the feeling they want to bring over. Overall bad acting, no emotions noticeable, very very fast told, unbelievable how they made such a good book to such a horrible movie.
World Premiere in Vlissingen
moviemaster7113 September 2009
We had the privilege to see this movie on his World Premiere in Vlissingen. The actual area where this took place.
It was also the start of the "Film by the Sea" film festival and the whole Dutch film world was invited.
It is a beautiful film, well done with special effects which you don't see actually and a gripping story. All the performances are believable and if you like "De Tweeling" and "Bride Fligt" from the same director then you have to see this movie ! After the screening there was a huge party and we met a lot of famous actors from the Netherlands. We had a great night ! So for me this is a 8 out of 10.
Enjoy the movie, we did !
Michel van Dam The Netherlands.
It was also the start of the "Film by the Sea" film festival and the whole Dutch film world was invited.
It is a beautiful film, well done with special effects which you don't see actually and a gripping story. All the performances are believable and if you like "De Tweeling" and "Bride Fligt" from the same director then you have to see this movie ! After the screening there was a huge party and we met a lot of famous actors from the Netherlands. We had a great night ! So for me this is a 8 out of 10.
Enjoy the movie, we did !
Michel van Dam The Netherlands.
Realistic but not without necessary drama
plrijkers20 September 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this movie yesterday. I was pleasantly surprised for the theatre was completely sold out. Which does not happen often when a Dutch movie is released. Maybe it has to do with the history which the dutch have with the water. For non-dutchmen: The dutch have a long history in the fight against water. In fact: half of the country is below sealevel and can only exist because of the so called Deltaplan, a construction of dikes and other measures to prevent a disaster like what happened in the night of 2/3 february 1953. This disaster is the background of the story told in De storm .
The story is about a girl who has just become a mother 5 weeks ago. In the complete madness of what happens after the dikes break and the water is in the peoples houses she gets separated from her child. The rest of the movie she is looking for her kid. In doing so we follow her and we see the full picture of what impact the disaster has (dead cows in the water, families ripped apart, people praying to God, others saying its Gods will, etc.)
I would say the acting is done very well. The story is good. Only thing is: if you expect to see a disastermovie like towering inferno, day after tomorrow etc. this is not the wright movie for you. It is realism with a big touch of drama.
Was the movie any good. I would say so. Story is good, acting OK, special effect are great (you actually see the water flooding towards the houses), a true accomplishment considering the low budget. For me the main reason to call this movie a good movie is the reaction of the people in the theatre. People were at the edge of their seat the whole time and I actually heard some people say "Basterd!" to someone who didn't want to help the main character. They were completely 'in the movie'.
Maybe not an Oscar, but certainly worth a nomination.
The story is about a girl who has just become a mother 5 weeks ago. In the complete madness of what happens after the dikes break and the water is in the peoples houses she gets separated from her child. The rest of the movie she is looking for her kid. In doing so we follow her and we see the full picture of what impact the disaster has (dead cows in the water, families ripped apart, people praying to God, others saying its Gods will, etc.)
I would say the acting is done very well. The story is good. Only thing is: if you expect to see a disastermovie like towering inferno, day after tomorrow etc. this is not the wright movie for you. It is realism with a big touch of drama.
Was the movie any good. I would say so. Story is good, acting OK, special effect are great (you actually see the water flooding towards the houses), a true accomplishment considering the low budget. For me the main reason to call this movie a good movie is the reaction of the people in the theatre. People were at the edge of their seat the whole time and I actually heard some people say "Basterd!" to someone who didn't want to help the main character. They were completely 'in the movie'.
Maybe not an Oscar, but certainly worth a nomination.
Excellent Film
jromanbaker2 October 2021
It is good to refresh yourself on this century's Dutch cinema, and this beautifully and well constructed film on the flood disaster of 1953 is well worth watching. To be honest I was expecting more of a disaster spectacle, but instead I saw a film about grief and the search for a missing child. The flood itself is expertly filmed, using I think original footage and as the Dutch are masters of documentary the film did not fail on this level. Sylvia Hoeks gives a perfect performance as the mother searching the follow day among the wreckage for the infant she lost. Zeeland is or was a very pious part of Holland and prejudices against anyone who went or go against the ' norm ', based mainly on religion, are considered outcasts, even in their families, and this mother has an illegitimate child. In her search for the child she is joined up by the errant father's brother, and the love story that ensues is deeply moving. No spoilers but to mention the last part of the film left me feeling desolate., and rightly so. The tone of the film catches every nuance of loss and the tragedy of loss and as I said the grief element is in my opinion at the heart of the film. This should not put any viewer off from watching this superbly crafted piece of cinema, and the catharsis that I felt after it was over was well worth experiencing. I did not find fault with the dedicated acting, nor the direction and Sylvia Hoeks gives, and I repeat, a performance above criticism, and every shift of emotion or sudden happiness shows on her beautiful face. I am not sure if this masterful work has been seen elsewhere, and if not, why not ? As the subject matter is timeless, encapsulating a terrible moment in 20th C. History it will always be relevant especially in this era of brutal weather changes. I urge viewers to hunt this film down, and there is English subtitles on the Dutch DVD release. Is it a great film ? I think so, and will watch it many times, as it gives so much to humanity and what it should be at its best.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
