Boba_Fett1138 This movie features all kinds of controversial subjects, such as homosexual themed elements, euthanasia, soft drugs and basically everything in between. The movie feels like a random slice of life however and it doesn't try to preach with its controversial themes or be a clear tearjerker. It's a very humane and realistic made movie and that is what makes "Simon" such an effective and great one.All sequences within the movie are actually quite short and you often have the feeling that some, if not all of the sequences could had been twice as long since there is so much to tell, also since the movie features so many characters, perspectives and and small subplots. Any other movie would had been twice as long, since it also would had been more consistent with the usual style of film-making and storytelling but "Simon" picks an approach of its own. I really liked this movie its approach from director/writer Eddy Terstall. It doesn't stick to a time-line that moves from A to Z but instead it often more skips a few letters and also jumps back a few from time to time. It isn't a movie that explains everything and things just happen as they do within this movie, just like in real life.For a movie about such heavy and serious subjects, "Simon" is for sure a movie that picks a surprisingly light approach of it all. It's a movie that is not without its comedy and humor and this is foremost the reason why "Simon" is such a great movie to watch and helps to make it an effective one as well.The movie of course is also being made great and realistic by its natural acting performances. Cees Geel plays a great, strong and unique character with slowly declining health. He's getting more and more sick as the movie progresses and it is done in a very realistic looking way. Most of the actors also seem to be improvising a lot during filming I don't no whether or not this was the case but it all feels very natural. I especially like the way Rifka Lodeizen handles this. Also Marcel Hensema in a big and important role (perhaps he can be seen just as much as the movie its main character as Cees Geel can) is really good in the movie.Even though the movie handles delicate and tough subjects you don't ever have the feeling you're watching a tough and heavy movie. The movie features homosexuals, a sick person and many anti-social characters but yet you don't feel as if it are purely homosexuals, a sick person and anti-social characters you are watching. They foremost feel like real persons, with real emotions and other strong characteristics of their own. Because of this this, no matter how you think and feel about homosexuals and/or euthanasia, you will be grabbed and touched by this movie.8/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Tom Schreuder This is one of those movies that combines the best of two genres: comedy and drama. It starts as a hilarious story when an Amsterdam coffeeshop owner (Simon) runs over a homosexual student (Camiel). It turns out to be the start of a long, unusual and moving friendship.The comedy element is mostly coming from Simon. Not only because of his jokes about Camiel's homosexuality, but also because he has such a typical personality.Both Cees Geel and Marcel Hensema give great performances in their leading roles. But besides the actors performances, the story and especially the dialog are great.It's also a movie that couldn't have come from any other country but The Netherlands, and because it is such a typical Dutch and therefor recognizable film, it's maybe the best one ever made here! Go watch it!

Diand Simon (Cees Geel) and Camiel (Marcel Hensema) are two opposing characters becoming friends. Marcel is gay, well-educated and polite; Simon hates gays, seems to have little education and is rude. In the beginning they meet at the height of Simon's life, as Simon has several thriving coffeehouses (where weed is on the menu) and beach cafés, Marcel is still a poor student wanting to become a dentist. 14 years onward they meet again and the roles of luck have somewhat reversed: Marcel is a working dentist now living with a male friend; Simon has gotten ill with cancer, has lost his girlfriend and by now only manages his businesses via others.It touches several themes where The Netherlands has become renowned for: A liberal attitude towards sex in general and gays in particular, with gay marriage possible (but still limited adoption possibilities and an increasing hostility towards gays by a portion of second-generation immigrant youth). A liberal policy on soft drugs, where selling and buying (small) quantities of soft drugs is formally forbidden but allowed, but where production is out of the question. And also a front runner in euthanasia, the main theme of this movie. All these themes define Dutch national identity to an extent, and therefore they are fiercely stood up for by most political parties except the more orthodox ones.Simon uses some slang used by original inhabitants of Amsterdam (By the way, who is an original inhabitant in a city that has welcomed people from all over the world for centuries?). It will however be impossible to translate, as much of the black humor and crudeness together with the dialect will not survive the translation. By the way, the director claims to portray real Amsterdam here. This is bit of a travesty, as the city is luckily more diverse with the many immigrants, artists, current stream of English and Americans and the well-off living there.There are several problems this movie has. The first one is the writing, as most of the dialog is rather stupid and infantile. For me, Simon was not just a funny rude guy, but an irritating character letting every dumb joke follow by his own laughter. And the liking of the movie stands or falls with the liking or disliking of the basically good-hearted Simon. And another side note: With the rise of AIDS in the eighties, why is that not a subject here, as several characters end up in bed with each other, among them the risk group of gays.The second one is the acting, which is traditionally bad in Dutch movies and is unfortunately up to previous standards. Nadja Hüpscher as Simon's daughter Joy for example follows the highest possible secondary education for her age group, but behaves almost like a retard and is certainly too old for the role.The lack of a movie culture in The Netherlands means there is no passing on of talent to newcomers. The Golden Ages in art are long gone. So the last problem is the director Eddy Terstall. Lacking any visual talent he comes up with a movie with almost no interesting visuals to be fond of. Take the clumsy ending for example: Simon jumps from a rock in Thailand, a poor man's visualization for death. And he is unable to structure the story in an interesting way, with the not-too-interesting flashback structure as the best on offer. The whole movie feels like a sixties flower power director's fantasy. He is however able to tell a compelling story and the final drama part of the story is the best part of the movie.The euthanasia theme is far better explored in other movies, for example in the mundane Million Dollar Baby, but even better in Mar Adentro. And the movie is a bit of a copy of Les invasions barbares.

j-bouwmeester This movie is about a wide variety of emotions, topics and people. The dialogs are brilliant. Simon has a hilarious sense of humor, but his character, like the others in the movie, is still very well portrayed. All typical dutch subjects like gay-marriage, soft-drugs, euthanasia, etc., are handled in a way that it is still convincing. The last part, where euthanasia becomes the main topic, is where the movie rises above a good comedy and becomes a great comedy/drama instead. The acting in the last part is so brilliant that it almost feels like it is shot for real.Certainly a movie to recommend, and I think that even when it is translated (with a possible loss of dialog)it is still a movie worth seeing! But see a subtitled version and not a synchronized voice-over version, for the latter will be terrible