Hell is different. Verhoeven grew up during World War II. And the theme of punishing the Nazis after the war found in his work a bizarre little form of television film. A modest budget and unsightly staging opportunities. Then he was finishing his work in Europe and preparing for new challenges. This is a paradox.
Several adults vowed to avenge a friend during the war. 30 years have passed and an opportunity has arisen. But it so happens that many began to refuse. And the viewer is asked to think what is the matter?
Maybe it's all about revenge, which is foreign to Europeans? Or have they become more humane? Tolerance and respect for a bloody criminal?
Could it be the consumerism that has taken hold of these humble people?
However, it seemed to me that Verhoeven twisted even more powerfully. Then, in the 40s, being in the Resistance, these people represented the elite of their country, defended its interests. What have they become now?
You have to give the master credit. He will also give us such an unexpected ending in its contradiction that it will be difficult to forget the tape. There is a great deal of injustice in the fact that this picture seems to have been deleted from film directories.
Verhoeven should be credited for his choice of style. Filming a modern psychological drama about the attitude of then Europe to Nazism, he uses the aesthetics of the Western. And an attentive viewer can easily notice the swastika on one of the buildings, which is strangely overlooked by the main characters.
7 out of 10