What do you do when you make a film about the most famous seafarer in Dutch history? Shifting between fact and fiction. In Michiel de Ruyter's case, this is not an issue, with a few exceptions. You can see that historical research was done, but also that choices had to be made to appeal to a wide audience. After all, it remains entertainment.
The film immediately draws you into the Battle of Ter Heijde (1653), a naval battle off the coast of South Holland during the First Anglo-Dutch War. The visual effects provide never before seen images of naval battles from Dutch soil. The impressively depicted naval battles and the action that comes with them (fire, sinking ships and flying bullets, wood splinters and people) play a prominent role in the film. Ter Heijde is not the only naval battle that appears in the film, it is a long row. The Battle of Lowestoft (1665), the Four Days Marches and the Two Days Naval Battle (both 1666), the Battle of Kijkduin (1673) and in between the humiliating destruction of the English fleet and the capture of flagship Royal Charles at Chatham (1667).
Not a tribute but an ordinary boy
The fact that the film bears the name of the naval hero has more to do with his name recognition than with the character:there is not much depth or growth in it. Michiel Adriaenszoon De Ruyter (1607-1676) is portrayed as a frenzied family man and as the son of a Zeeland beer carrier he remains the ordinary boy. A man of the people, who advances his men into battle, even though he eventually becomes a lieutenant admiral. This highest position in the fleet was normally reserved for a man of nobility. In itself a fresh approach that is played with verve, but in the end De Ruyter lacks the charisma that his historic predecessor must have had to keep the raw sea people in line.
Charisma will return to Johan de Witt, who looks remarkably hip and sexy. The role of this character in the film is certainly not inferior to that of De Ruyter. The political role and decisions of the intelligent De Witt are of great importance in the film. The emphasis he places on freedom for 'the Netherlands' and the 'Dutch' seems very contemporary, but that does not alter the fact that De Witt was also a fervent supporter of the Republic as a form of government, independent of a dictatorial head of state such as Lodewijk de XIV of France from 1661.
Trailer 'Michiel de Ruyter' (A-movie).
Unfortunate ending
The political role of De Witt and that of his brother Cornelis ended in 1672, when the Netherlands was attacked from all sides. This so-called Disaster Year gets a lot of attention in the film. The unemployed Prince William III – prevented from being stadholder by De Witt – wants nothing more than to take over the reins. The treaties that De Witt had made with foreign powers are violated (for example by the wonderfully interpreted English king Charles II, William's uncle) and De Witt and his brother are suspected of treason. Pamphlets from the Orangist camp fuel the fire further.
The final slaughter of the brothers in front of the Gevangenenpoort in The Hague is depicted in great detail, including excised entrails (in the 16 + version), and over-dramatized. The sudden arrival of De Ruyter on the scene is also pure fiction, since the man was at sea at the time. However, it is clear that the death of his friends must have been a blow to him.
The last assignment that the still youthful-looking De Ruyter (in reality the admiral had already passed the retirement age) receives, will be fatal for him. The purpose of the journey was not important enough to the Commander-in-Chief of the fleet and the armament he was given was not sufficient. In the film, this is translated into a direct threat from the prince (“Go or else your family is not safe”), who is now stadtholder.
Because no dates are mentioned and the protagonists do not get older, it is not clear that the film covers a period of more than twenty years. So it is difficult to place the events in time and context. That is a shame, especially because of the goal that the makers had in mind:the film about the Netherlands in the 17 e century.
Forgery?
All in all a pretty exciting action movie, played by modern characters but immersed in a 17 e century sauce. Historical facts and details are certainly used:the refinement of the signal flag system by De Ruyter, the founding of the Marine Corps, letters from sailors' wives and the homosexual William III are historically justified. Sometimes history is presented a bit indiscriminately. De Ruyter's role in the conquest of the Royal Charles is strongly exaggerated and the addressing of the mob by Anna de Ruyter is over-dramatised. Historical details are here and there completely distorted:attack tactics were discussed but not with the help of miniature boats and although the funeral procession of de Ruyter is exactly imitated, the order for his tomb by the watching William III is fictitious. All this for the dramatic effect, the clarity of the story and the design of the set.
Filmmakers are not historians or documentary makers, of course, and the truth is secondary to them, insofar as we don't all look at history through the lens of our own time. With that in mind, Michiel de Ruyter is a film that gives a glimpse into the past of the Netherlands and that is important. By making a popular film, at least more people come into contact with a special part of the history of our country. With a period in which the Dutch Republic was at the top of the world in terms of economy, political science, science, religious tolerance and art.
To the bios
The film Michiel de Ruyter will premiere January 26, 2015, in a very appropriate place:the Maritime Museum. The former Zeemagazijn housed the Amsterdam Admiralty, the rigging and weapons were stored and the board met. Michiel de Ruyter must have walked a lot here, as well as on the adjacent Prins Hendrikkade, where his house still stands.
The Maritime Museum will pay extra attention to De Ruyter from Monday with guided tours, lectures and other activities.
The film can be seen in cinemas from 29 January and also has its own site with information about the actors, among other things.
Kennislink also spoke with the screenwriter Alex van Galen and with De Ruyter's last biographer Ronald Prud'homme van Reine about their vision of the portrayal of history in this film.