BlazeLime Strong and Moving!

Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Sanjeev Waters A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

jsrobinson132 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.

polleke-1 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!

ochichornye This could have been a very important movie. The 1953 floods, in which thousands of people lost their lives, was probably the biggest historical event in the Netherlands since the second world war. As far as I know, this is its first major cinema treatment, with the technology to make the storm scenes credible. But that's just about all that's credible.The dominating storyline, of a single mother in search for her lost baby, supported by a deserted naval officer, was melodramatic and totally incredible. The dialog was wooden and full of anachronisms, the soundtrack often out of sinc with lip movements, and the sappy, swelling music in every scene irritating. Those whose mother tongue isn't Dutch won't mind, but there is no attempt at regional accents by any of the main characters, which would at least give the dialog a hint of authenticity. Some of the actors even had Flemish accents, very different from Zeeuws.A big miss.

billwolters-1 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