Oesters van Nam Kee (2002) User Reviews

Hmmm, that's it?

[frankiepankie · 5/10 · 31 August 2002]

I was one of the happy few to catch the first 35mm screening of Oesters. With recent Dutch "blockbusters" like Costa! and Ik ook van jou, expectations are very high. Recent rumours that some explicit sex scenes were deleted gave it the extra attention it needed. Yes needed cause the movie of its own isn't all that. I can't tell u to much cause the story is so thin i might give away everything and we wouldn't want that would we. In short, boy meets girl, they hit it of, girl wants to end it, boy gets obsessed with girl and does some very stupid things.....that's it really. I didn't like it too much but if you want to see Katja naked it's the movie for u.

5 out of 10

Oesters van Nam Kee: triest

[skuijpers · 6/10 · 22 July 2009]

Unlike stated earlier it is not true that nightclubdancer Thera OD's. She has been epileptic since childhood, and she is convinced Berry will leave her because of that, so to prevent that she leaves him before he can hurt her. Also their lifestyle with a lot of drinking and dancing is bringing out the epilepsia, so Thera's mother is also pushing Berry away, and after a while he is unable to contact her. Thera decides what's best for him, and he is unable to understand and goes crazy.

The acting in this movie is great, especially Thera (Katja Schuurman) and Berry (Egbert-Jan Weeber). It is no surprise that in real life they started a (short) romance after filming 'de oesters van Nam Kee', it shows in the movie that something real is going on between them.

Although the fine acting Thera and Berry can't save this movie. The script is not convincing and some of the things happening are so surprising that they become too made up.

And it left me with a sad feeling afterwards. That is one thing where the movie succeeds. To loose your first big and true love is traumatic.

Not as bad as i expected

[mart van genugten · 6/10 · 26 September 2002]

the critiques for this film were terrible. having read the book (which I personally think is terrible too) i was surprised. The film is not terrible. Although this 'feature film' looks a bit too much like a tv-series and the script and dialogues and acting are not good at all, in general i found the film to be entertaining and not boring or annoying as everyone said. There is even one really great thing about this film: The soundtrack by Arling & Cameron.

Booty-call for Katja

[Camera-Obscura · 31 October 2006]

OYSTERS AT NAM KEE'S (Pollo de Pimentel - Netherlands 2002).

Based on the novel "De Oesters van Nam Kee" by Kees van Beijnum, who also took credit for the screenplay, the film handles the love story between 18-year old schoolboy Berry (Egbert-Jan Weeber) and the older nightclub dancer and femme-fatale Thera (Katja Schuurman). Berry leads a double-life; for his petty criminal friends he hides the fact that he is from the only upper-class street in the neighborhood, but he trusts Thera and tells her everything (why shouldn't he?). When their love reaches its apogee with the consumption of oysters at the Zeedijk restaurant "De Oesters van Nam Kee", Thera suddenly disappears from Berry's life. Desperate, he seeks the company of his old friends again and things go from bad to worse.

The film got an unprecedented publicity campaign at the time, because the film's female lead Katja Schuurman was gonna shed her clothes, and - at the same time - posed naked in Playboy Magazine as Thera (!), the name of her character in the film. After a pre-screening of the film many people apparently objected against the explicit nudity (reputedly mostly Muslim girls)and the makers immediately caved in and cut a number of scenes. Is it the morally conservative climate that seemed to have taken hold over Dutch society? I'm not sure. Probably a carefully planned publicity stunt, a painful example of self-censorship, or just an exercise in bad taste.

Too bad the whole affair was all for naught, because there's nothing of interest in the entire film. Badly scripted with some awful dialog, and some textbook examples of what NOT to do in a screenplay; for instance, when Berry's inner thoughts in the book are transferred as dialog in the film, with - off course - disastrous and sometimes hilarious results. I'd rather have some gratuitous exploitation flick with Katja Schuurman than this mess. It's a shame really, because she has an undeniable screen presence and is primarily a physical actress. Every movement she makes seems so effortlessly erotic. In this film it becomes tiresome because of the lousy story, but that's not really hers to blame. There must be plenty of roles for her, if you know how to use her talents. Hollywood is full of screen sirens, who are not trained or particularly gifted actresses, but Katja Schuurman is over thirty now, and nobody seems to know how to use her talents.

Kees van Beijnum also wrote the screenplay, but seems to have learned from his mistakes one year later with his work on DE PASSIEVRUCHT (2004) by Karel Glastra van Loon, which turned out to be a very decent film, but with "Oesters" nobody seemed to have the slightest idea what they were doing. I don't want to see his film again.

Camera Obscura --- 2/10

An absolute waste of your time

[diederikmassive · 1/10 · 3 September 2002]

There are so many flaws in this film, watching its premiere was an almost painful experience. I fear it will be a local (Dutch) hit though, for the simple reason that Katja Schuurman gets naked in it. But even her wonderful exterior is severely tainted by the lack of any plausible plot, the unbearable flatness of ALL the characters, the often stupendous and completely unconvincing dialogue, the overdose of superfluous shots, the dragging scenes, and the whole b*lshit of it all. Words fail me. In Dutch filmhistory (already far from flawless), this is an alltime low. It should be deleted and forgotten.

The good parts of the book are not in the film

[Sunny-22 · 7/10 · 7 September 2002]

I've read the book first. Oesters is a fine novel, where the main character tell about the love of his life. Bit by bit you learn about the terrible things that he did. Bit by bit you got to know who he victim is. The sequences in prison. The last page where he stares out of the prison-window. They left it all out of the movie. Why? Now is it just another coming of age movie like Mad Love, Ik ook van Jou, Betty Blue etc. And not a good one aswell. 7/10, because the cast was very good, pity they had not a better script.

Waste of 110 minutes

[Roszalief · 1/10 · 17 September 2002]

I think this movie fits in my top 10 of worst movies. Couldn't discover a storyline, which is deadly for a movie. We we're just watching a naked Katja (gets pretty boring after a while) and a naked Egbert (not interesting). Conclusion... Even the sexscenes couldn't rescue the movie...

Well...

[kras25 · 7/10 · 9 September 2002]

Well Katja looks nice ,great body thats all if you ask me a typical dutch movie sex in it obvious ,well and a bit of a story thats all if you ask me i felt almost at sleep but some people may like it anyway judge your self ,but be warned it is a dutch movie so more sex and stuff like that than a story...to bad .

Worth it, if you've read the book

[Garrempi · 8/10 · 14 September 2003]

I can't say much for the movie on its own, as I prepared for seeing it (and seeing Katja... hmmm) by reading the book first.

The book on its own is done quite well; the novel of an adolescence, his dual life, his frustration with love and the way he tries to struggle through life isn't all that bad. When watching the movie, though, it became apparent to me that almost all of those motives/themes are lost.

The casting is done well - both main characters (Katja Schuurman - I only know her acting from a Dutch theatre-play, and Egbert Jan Weeber, whom I only know from "Van God Los") are especially fit for the role they play.

The movie by itself (without knowledge of the book) must be confusing to most or seem like scenes loosely put together. It might have been maimed in the editing, or perhaps the screenwriter has a different view on how to construct a movie then I do. They tried hard to show the all-consuming character of the relationship by putting in a few very steamy sex-scenes, but ended up doing what just every other dutch movie does: profiling itself just because of those sex-scenes (which is what other comments point out quite clearly). Which is a shame, since the original story behind it is quite a bit more. Well, not Tolstoi, but OK :-)

Cut to pieces

[richy29 · 22 January 2004]

I think this film has been cut to pieces. Having seen the deleted scenes (which contained most of its psychological development) I think the director chose speed over credibility. It seriously damages the movie. Sometimes you just don't have a clue why these characters do what they do. The storyline between Berry and his dad is amputated. The love story lacks development. In a commentary the director says that an uncut version (including even less revealing sex scenes) would've added up to almost three hours. On a DVD I might give that a try.

Although it probably wouldn't make up for the acting. I loved to watch both Katja and Egbert, but they just weren't convincing enough. Except maybe for the bed scenes. But hey, it's a known fact that they were having these both on and off set.

Not a good movie. But I liked looking at it anyway, in a silly Dutch way.

Very nice, very saucy

[fnauta · 8/10 · 20 January 2006]

Movie based on the book "Oysters at Nam Kee", giving a look inside the dynamics of the youth in multi-cultural suburbs and done very well.

Good acting, good music, nice shots of Amsterdam.

Story of a 17-year old that goes to college (Gymnasium) but living in an environment of immigrant youth with a much less bright outlook on the future. He runs into a girl who turns out to be a club-dancer. But he falls in love, and so does she.

It's just wonderful, and it should always be this way. But well, most of us are afraid of getting what we really dream of. So are these two young people.

# 30 : Katja Schuurman

[lamegabyte · 10/10 · 28 September 2014]

Well, this muse is easy to remember in spite of being among the oldest. I discovered Katja when she was a VJ on MTV show « So 9o's » starting 1997. Sure, she is cute but it was clear that she is also totally cool, always smiling, not sophisticated. In addition, she is dutch and she was speaking English and for my french ear, i could easily follow what she said ! At first, she was on air every week day, then only on Sundays and then she disappeared without notice ! I understood she was involved in a car crash ! Next, i could watch her movie « Costa » and follow her career with internet !

I know this « Oesters van Nam Kee » a long time before I watched it because it was the source for a lot of nude caps as Katja plays a stripper with a big heart! It's also funny to notice that the movie features her real Playboy shoot as well ! Actually, the movie is rather interesting : it happens in Amsterdam and for me, i can see that it's modern, luminous, spacious capital. Katja and her boyfriend (actually, a real one in the past) was convincing even being young ! The story is interesting because it analyzes the jobless young adults and in opposition to what politics say, jobless isn't vacation. Sure you can meet your friends when you want but in the long run it breaks you !