Flesh+Blood (1985) User Reviews

Great fun

[iaido · 7/10 · 10 January 2000]

After the success of Conan the Barbarian, the 80's saw a glut of Midevil adventure movies, but none of them stand on the same ground as Flesh and Blood. No movie, at the time, was more unabashedly filled with gore and nakedness. It doesnt try to be glossy or romantic in any way but isnt heavyhanded or serious either.

As he was so often in nearly every role he played, Rutger Hauer is perfect and at ease, alive, and eating up every frame of film he is in. A sad reminder of the days when he had so much promise, before he went downhill into Direct-To-Video Land.

Jennifer Jason Leigh is caught in one of her rare stilted preformances. Instead of going above the b-movie tone, she sort of wallows in it, but everyone else in the movie is also over the top and caricatured, so the film does not suffer and is invigorated instead of being obtuse.

The perfect blend of violence and sex, good and bad acting, b-movie tone with a studio budget. One enjoyable movie.

Dark Robin Hood story

[Vartiainen · 8/10 · 16 February 2017]

In this tale told by Paul Verhoeven and written by Gerard Soeteman, we follow a group of medieval mercenaries who get double-crossed by their commanding officer, which leads them down a path of revenge, crime and bloodshed. Essentially it's a Robin Hood story, or an underdog tale, but with no punches pulled and with a taste for the gore and splatter. Verhoeven is most known for his dark scifi action films, like Total Recall and RoboCop, but this film is very much his creation when it comes to the style.

And I have to admit that I like it a lot. Verhoeven's signature style is all over the screen with this one and it just might be one of the most brutal medieval adventure films I've ever seen. No one comes out of this film unscathed and it's such a jaded film that it's even hard to pick sides. The mercenaries are justified in their lust for revenge, but they also end up kidnapping the bride of the son of their betrayer and abusing her in very dark ways. On the other hand the bride is not a saint either, and very much not a damsel in distress, being willing to do whatever it takes to survive. Whereas the son of the betrayer, the groom as it may be, is perhaps the most virtuous of the whole cast, but even he has his dark tendencies.

And it's just a great adventure film in its own right. The setting is great, the characters are all shades of awesome, the action scenes are just the right amount of over the top and the whole film has this unmistakable style of the 80s. Blood and gore, smoke and shadows.

Very much worth a watch for all fans of dark and one of my favourite Verhoeven movies.

Sex and violence in medieval Europe

[Tweekums · 8/10 · 11 August 2018]

When a fortified city is taken from its rightful ruler while he is away he hires mercenaries to help retake it. I promises that they can have twenty four hours to loot as the please but once they are victorious he betrays them; ordering them to disarm and leave any treasure they have found. Soon afterwards the departing mercenaries discover a statue of St Martin and take it as a sign that their leader, also called Martin will make them rich. Not long after this they meet the man who betrayed them and make off with wagons loaded with valuables... and Agnes, the young woman promised to his son Steven. The mercenaries rape her but soon it becomes clear that Martin wants her for himself; especially after she helps him seize a castle which the mercenaries use as their new home. Of course things are far from over and they will have to contend with attacks from opposing forces and an outbreak of the plague!

If you have seen other films from director Paul Verhoeven you will have an idea of what to expect; violence, sex and nudity. While this means it won't appeal to everybody it didn't feel overly gratuitous. The film captures the filth and unpleasantness of the era in a way that might feel familiar to people watching things like 'Game of Thrones' now but would have been unusual at a time when things were far more sanitised. Our protagonists are more morally ambiguous than one expect; Martin is far from heroic as he forces himself onto Agnes and later she shows a cunning side as she appears to fall in love with him but doesn't forget Steven... one feels she will do what it takes to survive in the least unpleasant way possible. Rutger Hauer impresses as Martin and Jennifer Jason Leigh does a solid job as Agnes. The supporting cast are pretty good too. The action scenes are suitably gritty with many characters getting killed in ways that aren't swift and painless. One or two of these deaths are also quite inventive thanks to Steven's scientific approach to warfare. Overall one for fans of the genre who don't like things overly sanitised.

Gloriously over the top

[General_Cromwell · 28 October 2002]

Gloriously over the top middle ages saga from Verhoeven,who certainly makes sure the film lives up to its title!This is an exraordinarily bloody film,and apart from the gore we get dead babies,brain damaged nuns,plague infected flesh,raping,pillaging,and some terrible table manners.This is hugely enjoyable stuff,with some terrific black humour.Verhoeven also stages some excellent action sequences.The opening battle to take back the city is good,as is the amazing contraption to scale the castle that gets destroyed,and the final battle inside the castle is gripping.Rutger Hauer is reliably excellent in this,not so much a loveable rogue as a steely eyed psycho.Even better is Jennifer Jason Leigh as the kidnapped princess,who turns out to be a cunning,scheming,bitch.Witness the scene where she turns the tables on Hauer,who is attempting to rape her.There's good support also from Susan Tyrrell as a revolting whore,and Ronald Lacey as a demented priest who seems to have stepped straight out of the film 'The Devils'.This is miles better than all the other sword and sorcery films that were around at the time,because Verhoeven pulls no punches,and instills the film with a savage wit.Great music as well from 'Conan' composer,Bazil Poleduris.This film deserves a sequel!

I'm not really sure what I should think about this movie.

[innocuous · 6/10 · 12 January 2005]

Wow. Maybe Verhoeven was warming up for "Robocop".

This movie makes me think of "Requiem for A Dream" and "Crash". Even forewarned, you find it difficult to to handle ALL the characters being not-very-nice people. At least in "Requiem" and "Crash" we got some idea of character development, even if some of the characters were totally reprehensible. Most viewers could at least root for the "least awful" character.

I'm not sure that there IS a "least-awful" character in "Flesh + Blood". Everybody is pretty awful, so you're reduced to making decisions like, "Do I prefer serial rapists to military commanders who betray their own troops for money? Is it worse to deliberately blow up your friend to test a gunpowder bomb, or to deliberately poison small children?"

***MAJOR SPOILERS****

At the end, I was vaguely hoping that a thermonuclear device would be transported back in time, like in "Sliders", so we could just off everyone and have a clean slate. No such luck. The 4th worst person rides away with the the 7th worst person, while the 3rd worst person trails behind. Meantime, in the background, the 2nd worst person escapes what appeared to be certain death...and gets rich in the bargain. The 5th worst person rides off back home to take up farming.

There ARE some things that make the movie interesting, though not necessarily good:

1. You learn that lightning can melt an iron chain without hurting the person imprisoned by it.

2. You see how two dozen ragtag mercenaries, both male and female, can attack and take a walled city with a collection of silly swords, knives, and wooden shafts. (I'm not really sure about the need for these mercenaries, since they are immediately chased out of the city by their employer using a significant number of armed and mounted troops wearing decent armor. Perhaps he was keeping these troops in reserve exactly so they WOULD be able to chase out the mercenaries.)

3. You get to see how the hook and ladder truck, complete with telescoping ladder, was invented in 1501, though it was made of wood and so it was not the best choice for fighting fires.

4. I was not aware that you could cure bubonic plague by lancing the buboes and draining them, but I didn't attend medical school, so I am not sure about this.

5. Jennifer Jason Leigh obviously showed up late for filming and the wardrobe department was closed. She only manages enough clothes for about 2/3 of the scenes. It seems to me that most stars in this sort of movie are reluctant to frolic in the buff too much, leaving that to the secondary players and erotic dancers. Not Ms. Leigh. She takes the burden on her shoulder's and makes sure everybody gets a really, really good look...coming, going, fighting, bathing, sleeping, and so forth.

Anyway, there's no question in my mind that a high-schooler writing this script would be expelled in about 30 seconds and not let back into school until he/she had some super-strength counseling. Now that I think about it, the mercenaries WERE pretty much just high-school boys who had been drinking a bit much.

If it sound like I didn't like this movie, it is not true. I found it very interesting and entertaining. I'm just not sure what I'm supposed to think at the end.

*** out of *****

Not for everyone

[ivanmessimilos · 6/10 · 3 June 2021]

The Middle Ages in the Verhoeven way, in short. Extremely cruel film, a lot of blood, sex and violence. However, the film does not go into trash because the director made an effort to make everything look extremely realistic and convincing. He even did a good research before filming how everything was then at that age. Good cast, I was personally surprised with (then young) Jennifer Jason Leigh. I understand that this is not a film for everyone and for every mood, including me. It may have been fun for someone, but it wasn't for me.

Machiavellian, Violent, Amoral and Hypnotic Adventure in the Middle Ages

[claudio_carvalho · 9/10 · 4 June 2005]

In 1501, in the Western Europe, in a period when the black plague is jeopardizing the populations, an army of mercenary peasants leaded by Martin (Rutger Hauer) fights side-by-side with the noble Arnolfini (Fernando Hilbeck) to retrieve his castle, with the promise of a huge reward. However, the band is betrayed by Arnolfini, and decides to pay him back, assaulting and stealing a caravan under the command of Arnolfini and his son and student, Steven (Tom Burlinson). In one of the wagon is traveling the fiancée of Steven, Agnes (Jennifer Jason Leigh), who is accidentally kidnapped and later raped by the group. Agnes becomes Martin's mate, and the mercenaries decide to invade a castle, without knowing that the army of Arnolfini is chasing them.

"Flesh & Blood" is one of the best movies in the Middle Ages I have ever seen: it is a Machiavellian, violent, amoral and hypnotic adventure, indeed very brutal, with the peasants being poor and ignorant people, with dirty clothes, spoiled teeth, living in dirty and muddy villages. Therefore, a vision totally different from Hollywood movies, with fancy castles and villages with beautiful people. The direction of Paul Verhoven is efficient and perfect as usual, and the entire cast has magnificent and very natural performances, highlighting the amazing Rutger Hauer in the role of Martin, and Jennifer Jason Leigh who has one of her best performances, in the stunning role of a young woman that uses her body to fight for survival in a hostile environment. I have this movie on VHS, but I bought the DVD recently released in Brazil by the distributor Continental, and it was a worthwhile investment, since the widescreen image and the sound are excellent. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "Conquista Sangrenta" ("Bloody Conquest")

Violent and wild Middle Age film well played and compellingly directed

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 15 July 2004]

The movie is very strong and cruel , this is a timeless adventure, a passion for wealth and power. The setting is at Middle Age . It's a time of hunger , destruction , pest and 100 years war . The plague and war originated thousands deaths . It is set in a savage time, torn between two rivals she fought for survival with the only weapon she had... herself. The film centers about a group of thieves commanded by a two-fisted warrior (Rutger Hauer) who abducts a count's daughter (Jennifer Jason Leigh) in revenge of a debt . As the plague and warfare cut a swathe of destruction throughout the land, the mercenaries hole up in a stronghold and await their fate . They attack the castle where have got shelter . After that , the bunch will fight the boyfriend (Tom Burlison) and the father's army . Betrayed by power. Corrupted by love. Bound by honor. Here only the strongest will survive .A timeless adventure, a passion for wealth and power. Only the strongest will survive .

The flick is pretty violent , there is rampage , woman rape , murders , the struggles are very bloody and breathtaking . The movie mingles medieval set , action , drama , sex , love , adventures , gore and is enough bemusing . Rutger Hauer is top-notch as brave as well as brutal Medieval warrior . This was one of numerous theatrical feature film collaborations of Dutch actor Rutger Hauer and Dutch director Paul Verhoeven. These include succesful films made in Holland as ¨Steppers¨(1980), ¨Holland fruits¨, ¨Turk fruits¨ (1973), ¨Katy Tippel¨ (1975), ¨Eric, soldier of Orange¨ , and ¨The fourth man¨ . Actress Jennifer Jason Leigh as the kidnapped and betrothed daughter said that the stronhold they were shooting in was so cold that during her numerous nude scenes her hands and feet would actually turn blue . The main actors are very good , likeness to support cast and there was so much competition for screen presence among the secondary actors : Simon Andreu , Bruno Kirby , Marina Saura , Ronald Lacey , Brion James , John Dennis Johnston , Susan Tyrell , though everybody plays baddies , villains and ugly people .

Direction by Paul Verhoveen is nice , cinematography by future filmmaker Jan Vont is riveting and the musical score is excellent . The movie was a co-production of one American nation and two European countries: Spain, the USA, and the Netherlands. This was literally Paul Verhoeven's last project in the Netherlands for two decades . He attended the Dutch film festival, during which the film premiered, and he took a plane to the USA the very next morning, in order to direct his American debut ¨RoboCop¨ (1987) and , subsequently , ¨Total recall¨, ¨ Basic Instinct¨, ¨Starship troopers¨ ¨Invisible man¨ and other American successes . This is director Paul Verhoeven's first English-language film , following a very successful career in the Netherlands, notably including ¨Any Special Way¨ or ¨Holland fruits¨, ¨Turk fruits¨, ¨The Fourth Man¨, "Soldier of Orange" , ¨Spetters¨ (1980) , many years later , in 2006 he returned Holland to shoot ¨Black Book¨and ¨Steekspel¨ (2012) . Rating: 6,5/10 good . Worthwhile watching .

i haven't written a review in a long time....had to come back and write up this one

[chickyfornia · 9/10 · 29 January 2005]

This is one of the most raw, refreshing and UN-Hollywood movies you will ever see. It's truly a classic, and it stands alone, because nothing like it has been done before. The movie is invariably entertaining throughout, and it contains so many fresh ideas from Verhoeven that it really has you saying 'wow' an awful lot. The rape scenes that everybody freaks out about in their reviews aren't so horrible....they get they're point across but aren't TOO sexually explicit. Whats nice to see if you can call it that, is that the rape is real, and horrible, its not meant to be provocative like it would be in a Hollywood movie, not that i'm a fan of any rape scene, not at all...but at least this is genuine. The performances aren't spectacular or anything, but they are far far from weak. After one viewing this is one of my favorite films, and I recommend it very highly to you.

This film should also be of interest to the highly religious because of all the imagery in it. Verhoeven is known for religious imagery and this film is full of it. It's very Christian in its themes, not that the characters are big in practice, but the movie has a lot of religious points to make.

nasty times

[dromasca · 7/10 · 21 October 2019]

Paul Verhoeven's films leave indifferent few of the spectators who dare to watch them. The combination of violence and eroticism that characterizes them has been around for 40 years and is a mark of most of the Dutch director's films. 'Flesh + Blood' is a kind of transitional film between his first European period of creation and the American period. Frustrated, perhaps resigned, perhaps in protest at the reception his previous films had enjoyed, Verhoeven sought American funding and distribution. The theme of the film is very European, however, an episode from the bloody history of the old continent in the mid-millennium. It would be the period described in the gallant films of the 'cloak and sword' genre but there is nothing gallant in what we see in 'Flesh + Blood'.

1501 Europe is a world haunted by wars. Nobles, soldiers, and gangs of mercenaries fight each other, conquer castles, kill, rob, rape. When they do not die by the sword, the people of those times are threatened by the plague. The signs of the civilization brought by the Renaissance try to make room in this world of blood and flames, but it will take some time until they will prevail. This is the world in which Verhoeven places the story of the young Agnes (Jennifer Jason Leigh), fallen prisoner of a band of mercenaries, and forced to survive by any means. The two men in her life - the head of the bandits Martin and the noble son Steven - will fight each other to death, because she will ultimately belong to the one who wins, regardless of her feelings. The woman's right to decide will be invented and honored only a few centuries later.

34 years after its release, 'Flesh + Blood' is no longer shocking, viewers have seen much more extreme stuff, from Verhoeven and others. What impressed me is the direct and naturalistic approach and the attention to historical details. The film avoids a precise location, it could happen almost anywhere in Europe at the time, but still seems extremely authentic. Characters that we seem to know from historical novels (the noble prince, the brigand, the princess, the priest rather in the devil's service) are thrown in a realistic and bloody version of their legendary times. Some details age less nicely: for example the music, or the intricacies of the Renaissance machine copied as if from Da Vinci's notebooks. And yet, not only for Verhoeven's fans, 'Flesh + Blood' remains an engaging and interesting film that immerses the viewers in its world.

Incredibly (and intentionally) sordid medieval romp.

[barnabyrudge · 5/10 · 15 April 2006]

Director Paul Verhoeven has always enjoyed shocking his audience with violence, sex, gore and filth. This love of all things sordid can be traced right back to his European films of the '70s. In Flesh + Blood, his English-language debut, Verhoeven delights in pushing back a few Hollywood boundaries and serving up a medieval romp that alternately intrigues and disgusts. While it is most definitely not everyone's cup of tea, Flesh + Blood is never boring.... and certainly shows the plague-ridden period in a more authentic light than most films that have gone before.

In Western Europe during the early 16th Century, a gang of mercenaries led by the charismatic Martin (Rutger Hauer) help a nobleman to win back control of his city. The nobleman (Fernando Hillbeck) promises that they may take loot from his city if they help him. but once the battle reaches a favourable conclusion he goes back on his word and banishes the mercenaries to the wild. Martin's gang return for revenge and discover that the nobleman's son, Steven (Tom Burlinson), is to be married to a virginal princess named Agnes (Jennifer Jason Leigh). The mercenaries kidnap Agnes and head off with her, leaving young Steven to lament his loss. Agnes is abused and tormented by her captors, and ultimately raped by Martin himself, but she gives the impression that she is actually enjoying her ordeal. Martin falls in love with her and takes her as his "official" lover, making a home for her and the band in a nearby castle. Meanwhile, Steven enlists an old soldier, Hawkwood (Jack Thompson) - once a colleague of Martin's - and together they plan a way of rescuing the princess from the clutches of the mercenaries.

Flesh + Blood is full of deliberate unpleasantness. Rotting corpses hang from trees; a stillborn baby is crudely stuffed into a barrel and buried in a puddle; gang rape reigns supreme; heads and torsos are impaled on lances; nuns are disfigured and murdered; a plague-ridden dog is dismembered and its body parts used for a primitive form of germ warfare. Verhoeven is clearly having a ball rubbing our noses in all this dirt, and he somehow encourages his well-known cast to enter into the vile proceedings with full-blooded gusto. The problem is that the story is not all that compelling and takes a long time to play out to its obvious conclusion. There are occasional foolish moments that mar credibility too, such as the scene where Steven's soldiers build an unbelievably complex assault contraption overnight (a scene which hilariously reminds one of The A-Team!), and the bit where Martin spends several hours in a poisoned well but climbs out uninfected, while other members of his band drop down stricken merely by drinking a sip of the same water. Flesh + Blood is ultra-violent, ultra-brutal and ultra-sordid, so you'll need to be in a certain frame of mind to enjoy it. In other words, it's admirable but not enjoyable.

"Flesh" & "Blood": Verhoeven's clever euphemisms for "Sex" & "Violence", his trademarks. Exceptional.

[Kill-Gore · 10/10 · 22 September 2001]

Ok, we're talking about a movie that's basically titled Sex & Violence by none other than Paul Verhoeven?! Those of us who know better should know what to expect here. For those of you who don't, know this: the same man responsible for the ultra sexy "Basic Instinct" and the ultra violent "RoboCop" made his debut (in American cinema, at least) with this masterwork concoction of ultra sex AND ultra violence.

Set in medieval Europe, the utter savagery of the sex and violence in this film is perhaps more at home than it could have been in any other setting. Depredation and debauchery: to the victor go the spoils, be they women, wealth, or what have you. And just a brief word about the plague: there's been a lot of criticism about the accuracy of its use in this movie. How 'bout the sheer ingenuity of it: the use of plague ridden slabs of dog as biological weaponry. Repugnant. Vile. Ingenious. Priceless, I loved it.

Rutger Hauer is excellent, this is probably my favorite performance of his. He's a power inflated pillager who is a bit of a tyrant to his followers. He's the devil we expect him to be. Jennifer Jason Leigh is surprisingly good in her youth as a sexually curious, devious little wench whose loyalties sway with the wind. She's a survivor.

Who this movie is NOT for: Those who have to think too hard about every movie they see, who demand a certain level of intellectuality (which is commendable). Plot holes? Are you kidding me, what plot? This isn't English Patient, its Sex and Violence. And for those with inhibitions about film content, who demand a certain level of decency (which is understandable), again, Sex and Violence, this movie is certainly not for you.

One of the few films I would call a masterpiece. But that's coming from someone who thinks Apocalypse Now is the finest cinematic experience ever realized, so take that for what its worth. RoboCop, I would call a masterpiece. U Turn, I would call a masterpiece. Big Lebowski, I would call a masterpiece. Flesh & Blood I would call a masterpiece.

10/10 easy

I love it when people miss the point of movies...

[tenthousandtattoos · 6/10 · 15 July 2007]

...they always sound so amusing when they berate films, just give em one little shocking scene and they start climbing the walls. I think Paul Verhoeven also loves this, as his films certainly have some decent "shock" value, and are for the most part hopelessly misunderstood, just look at Starship Troopers. I think maybe 10% of people actually "got" what PV was trying to say with that one.

I won't go into plot, because I've read the other reviews and those other ones cover it better than I could. What I will say is this film has some of the more original and memorable moments I've seen, like the hanging corpses/mandrake bit...if you've seen the movie you know exactly what I'm talking about...this could hardly be called "erotic" but it's a great little snapshot of a romantic notion during such brutal times. The feast scene is great, where the mercenaries suddenly decide that because they are now "nobles" (they've captured a castle) they must use knives and forks to eat. Great scene, as some of them begin wielding their knives and forks like they are going into battle against their dinner, and have to be shown the correct way to hold them.

This film is anything but "anti-women" in fact, I'd say it's more "anti-PEOPLE" than anything else, as the men in this story endure just as much suffering, as the women. JJL's character is actually a very smart, switched on young lady who realises her only chance of survival is to USE her sex BY degrading it, to STAY ALIVE. And who could blame her? Life was incredibly cheap.

I think the sex scene in the tub with Rutger and JJL is awesome...totally original and very erotic. And the rape scene is bad but serves the plot as i mentioned above. The fight scenes are awfully choreographed but i can't help thinking this was a slightly misguided effort to appear more realistic. I mean, the warfare back then often consisted of running headlong into your enemy and beating/stabbing him to death with a stick or blade...not very gentlemanly or dignified, and probably looked just as horrible as it would have felt.

Before you label me arrogant, there are a lot of movies I don't "get" at all. For whatever reason Paul Verhoeven's GOOD movies (he has made some crap) seem to come across clear as a bell to me, and I'm always impressed. For his introduction to Hollywood, and thus IT'S introduction to him, Verhoeven certainly had some guts to present them with this film. I'm actually a little surprised it got made, especially in the US, with it's seemingly random assortment of rape, murder, foul-ness and debauchery.

The romantic notions of the dark/middle ages etc are great, and I'm a fan of "high fantasy" as well, but I've also read much of the reality of the times, and it was not pretty. Nonexistent medicine, certified lunatics living among the general population, rats, dirt, disease, more dirt, blood, gangs of thug mercenaries wandering the countryside, chased and hounded by equally vicious soldiers. Not to mention the plague. A time to visit in history books and in the imagination, but if ever finally complete my time machine, I'm NOT going to Western Europe circa 1500...no way!

Bloody awful

[hall895 · 2/10 · 18 February 2012]

It's 1501 and somewhere in Europe a city has been taken in a coup. Its rightful ruler Arnolfini hires some mercenaries to lead a siege to take it back. They do just that. Their commander Hawkwood unfortunately almost hacked some nun's head off during the siege and is now overcome with guilt. Watch where you swing that sword buddy. Anyhow the devious Arnolfini promises to provide medical care for the nun with the hole in her head if Hawkwood will turn on his men and assist in expelling them from the city, denying them the looting opportunities they had been promised. Cue sad faces from the mercenaries as they wander the countryside.

The mercenaries now follow their new leader, Martin. He's the leader because he found a statue of Saint Martin while he was digging a grave for his stillborn son. Seriously. Meanwhile back in the city Arnolfini has arranged a marriage for his son Steven and his well-styled 1980s hair to some young heiress. Steven is not interested, perhaps because he worries the girl will have nicer hair than him. But the two would-be lovers meet and after eating a magic root they find under a hanging, rotting corpse they fall in love. Seriously. Oh by the way, this young girl, Agnes, is clueless in the ways of love so she has just had her maid and some random dude physically demonstrate for her how to have sex. The maid is played by the voice of Bart Simpson. Seriously. Guided by the all-powerful statue of Saint Martin the mercenaries show up and sack the traveling party, making off with all the wedding loot and taking Agnes too. Cue sad face from 1980s hair boy.

Sweet, virginal Agnes is brutally gang-raped by Martin and his men but doesn't seem to mind very much. She forgets Steven and falls for Martin. So innocent she didn't even know what sex was a day ago she's soon playing footsie under the table and, while having sex in a bathtub, thrashing about like some kind of medieval porn star. Fast learner this girl. Steven sets out to rescue her. Hilarity ensues. Oh wait, not hilarity. Plague. Plague ensues. Did you know you can instantly get the plague and drop dead if you take a sip of contaminated water but if you are submerged in a well full of that same water for hours you'll be just fine? Also, Steven constructs a massive, complicated war machine, the medieval equivalent of a Sherman tank, in approximately five minutes. Amidst all the nonsense is a constant stream of the worst, most laughable dialogue heard in any movie ever. Every once in a while Jennifer Jason Leigh takes her clothes off again. More nonsense happens. Then more nonsense. And more nonsense. And then the movie ends.

A Surprisingly Good Film

[matthewr-4 · 17 September 2004]

I decided to watch this film after a very heavy three day drinking session and to be honest was not expecting a great deal. However, at the end I deemed it to be the best two hours of my life. What a film!

The Cardinal (Ronald Lacey) was by far the most outrageous and stand out performance. I may be a bit biased from England but over the top acting from Lacey seems to be his forte and he certainly does not disappoint. Rutger puts in a typically strong performance as does Jason-Leigh and the supporting cast.

My favourite scene had to be Soldier Martin standing in front of the upturned carriage with the wheel representing the halo from the statue of Saint Martin. For me this was the icing on the cake.

The only question mark about this film is the contraption that Steven constructs to storm the castle. It definitely is a work of art and for those times would be considered quite an Engineering achievement. Not to mention the time in which it is built in such an effortless manner. However, PV seems to make this fit with the spirit of the film and after a few chuckles it is all forgiven.

Its certainly a film that will not stand up today with modern attitudes and morals but I fully recommend this film. Add it to your collection NOW!

Moral ambiguities and barbaric reality in post-Medieval Europe

[Wuchakk · 7/10 · 15 May 2019]

At the beginning of the 16th century in plague-ridden Western Europe an uncouth band of lawless mercenaries led by the charismatic Martin (Rutger Hauer) kidnap a virgin noblewoman (Jennifer Jason Leigh) as revenge against a double-dealing Lord (Fernando Hilbeck). The tough commoners hole up in a small castle while the Lord's son, Steven (Tom Burlinson), tries to save his betrothed (Leigh) with his militia.

While the events in "Flesh+Blood" (1985) take place just after the medieval period, it could be categorized as a medieval flick. It takes the general setting & color of "The Last Valley" (1971) and mixes-in the music & tone of "Conan the Barbarian" (1982) with genius Basil Poledouris scoring both (although this score is nowhere near as notable). The film's brutal grit and vulgarities influenced "Rob Roy" (1994) and the hole-up-in-a-castle plot was recycled in "Iron Clad" (2011). If you favor any of these movies you'll probably appreciate "Flesh+Blood" despite some overdone elements, like Susan Tyrrell's verging-on-lunatic performance.

There are two conflicting factions: The nobles & their knights and the armed "commoners," but neither are portrayed as the "good guys" and "bad guys." Martin, for instance, is a bold and charismatic alpha male, but he's also kind of scum; sorta the best of the worst. Steven easily stands out as the most gallant individual, but when he doesn't get his way he pompously threatens retired-knight Hawkwood (Jack Thompson). At the end of the day this is a unique, adult-oriented film about using your natural gifts, including your wit & body, to survive in a barbaric disease-ridden reality. Memorable moments abound.

The film runs 2 hours, 6 minutes and was shot entirely in Spain. The Castilla-La Mancha was also used in El Cid (1961).

GRADE: B

Flesh+Blood

[phubbs · 7/10 · 8 March 2014]

Pretty creepy title for a historical film and one that doesn't exactly mean much if you ask me, although there is plenty of both on screen so...I prefer 'The Rose and the Sword' which was its alternative title for a time. The story is apparently left over script from the Verhoeven directed Dutch TV series 'Floris' so one could almost say its the movie adaptation of that show.

Gotta be honest I thought this was a fantasy film as this is the first time I've ever seen it, so yes I got it wrong again. This is actually a historical 15th Century Italian period set...errrm hack n slash film? rescue film?...errrr wait, coup d'état film? black plague film?? oh geez. OK OK its a film which involves a lot of rape and pillage with the onset of the black plague and a bit of a rescue somewhere at the end...kinda.

The story revolves around a band of medieval mercs led by Rutger Hauer who were evicted from a city they had just helped siege. The owner of the city, and feudal Lord, promised them looting if they get his city back, but he lied. They get their own back by robbing the rich owner, generally killing his entourage and accidentally taking his sons bride to be. The mercs haul up inside a castle they overthrow and end up defending it from the Lord, his son and their troops.

So this being a Verhoeven film I'm sure you're expecting blood and guts...well as I said you get it. Its in no way as violent as other future films from the Dutch director but its most certainly much darker bleaker and more controversial. The main factors in this film which will shock are the out and out rape sequences of the young bride to be Jennifer Jason Leigh. The male members of the merc team take turns raping her in full view I kid you not, a most unsettling thing to watch I must admit. Not only this but the main character played by Hauer also rapes her but to soften the blow she pretends to enjoy it, this eventually leading to feelings for the character.

This opens up various quandaries for us the viewers as you don't know who you're suppose to be rooting for anymore. The city Lord is obviously untrustworthy because he betrayed the mercs in the first place. His son is also as ruthless as he is but he shows signs of devotion to Leigh's character, but surely Hauer's character is suppose to be the roguish dashing hero? well I guess not. He's certainly dashing in his elegant period set attire, much style and pomp in abundance with those blue eyes and blonde hair, but he kills, he rapes, he pillages and steals. It is indeed the Lords son and surprisingly the Lords honest respectable Commander that you end up getting behind, although it takes most of the film.

Throughout the film there are many slightly unsettling things that take place. One such seen is the birth of a baby to Hauer's character which died in the womb. He merely crams it into a small wooden barrel and they bury it without much thought or ceremony. Its a very harsh scene which is swept aside very quickly just as the characters do in the story. Another is the 'romantic' sequence between Leigh's bride and the Lords son. Only Verhoeven would think to set this kissing scene beneath the dangling rotting bodies of two hanged men. Yeah sure its in the countryside and very picturesque but wow! really? kinda odd.

The band of mercs are a truly disgusting bunch, they have little worries and merely go around killing robbing drinking and raping. The band is made up of a few males including Bruno Kirby and Brion James plus a few women too, one of which has her young son alongside her watching it all. I suppose it is based around semi facts, I don't know but I'm sure back in this era many things happened that today would be seen as horrendous. But back then life was cheap, many people were extremely poor, didn't know any better and didn't live very long anyway, not that that's an excuse really but times were very different.

This film confused me really, it felt very grotesque in places but almost like a fun swashbuckler in others. The use of modern day profanity didn't seem accurate to me and while the high level of nudity is typically Verhoeven, it does add to the realism but also feels a bit too much at times. Also some of the cast like Kirby didn't quite look right in this era and that big siege tower seemed ridiculous. How on earth did they build something that big and mechanically impressive so fast?!.

It all looks great visually and pretty realistic with some nice locations used. At the start Hauer looks badass with his rag bandanna and that sword he wields but alas his character doesn't retain that heroic badassery. Hauer's ragtag team of mercenaries repulse you and in the end you feel they get their comeuppance, including Hauer. The finale is worth the wait but don't expect too much. One thing is for sure, with all the visuals of nudity, plague and chopped up plague ridden dog meat, it will put off eating meat for awhile I reckon. Verhoeven knows how to grab your attention...as if you didn't already know.

7/10

Master of symbolism and storytelling

[amid77 · 10/10 · 21 February 2005]

Almost everyone who knows who Paul Verhoeven is, takes his knowledge from his Hollywood pictures, starting from "Flesh & Blood". But the man was famous director in Holland in 70's with some really great movies, from which I especially recommend "Spetters", one time masterpiece with very disturbing scenes and amazing story.

"Flesh & Blood" was his first Hollywood project and I was glad to discover that Verhoeven keeps sharping his talent. The movie offers to viewers highly intense experience, I remember watching it on one breath, and occupies the mind with very powerful images and philosophical meanings.

There is nothing average, simple or normal in this film. Everithing is complex, deep and extreme. There is no action, no move, no look, no word, that exists here without reason and meaning. If there is such thing as mathematic movie, this is it.

But don't be confused by this word. It's not some dry and intellectual movie like Bergman's stuff. The story is very humane and it's easy to sympathize and understand everyone. There are tears, struggles, disappointments, happiness, dreams, violence, death and a lot of sex. (Young and nude Jennifer Jason Leigh - a must see)

Dramatic value of the film, with symbolic conflicts and incredible behavior of all characters, exists on very high level from the beginning till the end. There are many surprising moments, everything bound together by twisted but consistent internal logic.

The combination of interesting story, great acting, smart directing and high quality production, makes a brilliant and truly hypnotizing movie.

There is no single and simple way to describe this cinematic experience or to criticize it. The film has very rich meanings, questions and conclusions. It presents many problematic and sensitive situations, and does this in very direct and very exaggerated way, which makes the whole thing very symbolic and formalistic. Something that fits with Paul Verhoeven's other great works, and makes him such a special artist.

And if you managed to read and fully understand my review, no matter if you liked it or not, this movie is for you.

Flesh + Blood = Nudity & Violence

[tbills2 · 6/10 · 25 May 2018]

This epic, sprawling medieval adventure starring Rutger Hauer and Jennifer Jason Leigh is like a one of a kind, terrific, brutal, and audacious warmhearted tale with warranted flesh and blood. Jennifer Jason Leigh is as sweet, as pretty, as gorgeous as they come. Hauer and Leigh give epic+sprawling portrayals! I really love Jennifer's epic sprawl in Flesh+Blood! A 6.9! I love this movie. An 8 in my book. JJL is like a sweet feast! I love her. She's got the goods.

stands the test of time

[Oosterhartbabe · 10/10 · 5 December 2005]

I saw this film about twelve years ago, and I thought it was very good then. I recently got the DVD from Netflix, and was amazed to find that not only is it as good as I remember, it was better.

The first thing that struck me is how very correct to the medieval point of view the movie is. All of the characters act as they should for the times they live in. The Lord Arnofini is a scheming jerk with a will of steel, which you had to be back then to be a Lord. After all, things could change so quickly, such as when the mercenaries raid and take the castle later in the movie. You could lose your standing and/or your life, if you weren't ruthless. Martin and his band of mercenaries are crude, sly, jolly, practical, greedy, and hardened by life-as mercenaries would have been, trading their lives for a bit of cash all over Europe. Some might have been disturbed by the cheerful lasciviousness shown by the women, but back then women knew that they had only a few things to trade for safety and security, namely their bodies or their standing. If they had no standing, their bodies were the only coin they had. They had to find a strong man to protect them, or they were vulnerable to any man that came along with bad intentions. Jennifer Jason Leigh's young noblewoman knows that lesson as well, and schemes ruthlessly to stay alive and escape once she's taken by the mercenaries. The casual nudity and dirtiness are also characteristic of the middle ages, when practically no one bathed and clothes were seldom washed. In fact, the lower orders thought that washing invited devils into your body and made you sick, so it isn't surprising that Martin's mercenaries never bathed.

The plague scenes towards the end of the movie were ingenious and showed how terrified people were of the disease-and rightly. it killed off a third of Europe's population, and spread like wildfire. The scholarly Steven's telling the monk to lance Hawkwood's plague boils is correct, because Nostradamus himself studied among the Arabs for a time, then came back and tried to convince people to lance the boils. A movie is in the details, and Verhoeven gets almost all of them right. He captured the mad religious practices of the time, as terrified people grasped onto any sign that might have been from God. They were starving from a little ice age, dying from a dreadful disease, and plagued by wars. Its no wonder that people fell into such a religious fervor.

The interaction between the characters is wonderful. The rivalry of Martin and Steven over Agfnes is very interesting to watch. The two men, like young and older alpha wolves, circle and attack, watching for every opening. And Agnes, an alpha female, watches and makes her choice of mate in the end.

I'll definitely be buying a copy of this movie on DVD, because it is one of my favorites. For once, Hollywood actually got it almost right. That is astounding, especially since it was made in the mid-80's, not a time known for depth or realism in movies.

Killing is My Business

[Tweetienator · 7/10 · 18 June 2019]

Paul Verhoeven gave us the incredible Starship Troopers, the original Total Recall (Arnold Schwarzenegger), Robocop and - Flesh & Blood.

Flesh & Blood is one of my favorite movies with Rutger Hauer of the 80s, in one line with Ladyhawke (published in the same year, 1985) and The Blood of Heroes (1989), Blade Runner of course stands on its own ground.

Anyway, Flesh & Blood is a fine movie with some blood and gore and a good production: a band of mercenaries not paid goes rogue in Italy around 1500 and the Black Plague is lurking just around the corner... Popcorn cinema with some violence and nudity, certainly no The Name of the Rose (1986) but rather a good watch for the connoisseur of movies like Conan the Barbarian (1982), Excalibur (1981), or a decade earlier The Last Valley (1971).

costumes

[audrey_hepburn · 5/10 · 8 January 1999]

As a costume movie that takes place BEFORE the 18th century, the costumes are unusually well done. Some details here and there might have been better, but the overall look is fairly good. One reason for their success is that they have understood that fashion could be very regional-bound. By the judge of the costumes in this picture, they settled for Germany, first half of the 16th century.

Good film, if you don't expect the wrong things from it.

[smatysia · 8/10 · 31 March 2001]

This film is definitely off the beaten track. I enjoyed it a lot, and thought that there were some truly stand-out performances here, notably Rutger Hauer and Jennifer Jason Leigh. Some other actors and actresses that I didn't recognize were excellent. The tone is relentlessly bleak as befits the times. A couple of scenes put the times in perspective. One is where Agnes and Stephen talk and flirt beneath the hanging corpses without giving much thought to what we would consider today the horrid nature of such a sight. Another is towards the end, when one of the women has been captured (Polly, I think) and is being raped, and the lord (Stephen's father) simply walks past, barely noticing. I don't know if they are simply there for shock value, or if Verhoeven is making the point that one cannot judge mores, morals, and customs of past ages by the standards of today. (Something done quite a bit these days, most notably about slavery.)

Some of the criticisms in other comments are valid. True, none of the characters are very likeable. I was sort of hoping that they would all be dead by the end of the movie. But, again, I'm judging them by 21st century standards. Also, about the plague. I'm sure Verhoeven knows that plague is spread by rat fleas, so all of the machinations about the plague has to be from people's points of view in 1501-2.

This film is worth viewing, but don't expect gallantry, chivalry, or even decency. And no, it's really not a "date movie" Grade: A

Not really the Middle Ages.

[okpilak · 7/10 · 4 October 2023]

An enjoyable romp with lots of gore, blood and nudity, so what is there not to like? It really centers on three actors. Martin, Steven and Agnes. Martin is with a group of mercenaries, and after the opening castle raid, is expelled and left to fend on their own. Steven would be considered sort of a nerd, and he is betrothed to Agnes, a convent girl, who he never met. They only get a brief meeting, when Martin and his gang attack, and capture Agnes. Martin and his group storm a castle, capture it, and hole up in it. The King and Steven find where they are, see that they have Agnes, and set about attacking it. The build a rather interesting 'tank' with an extending ladder. Don't ask too many questions and how, as this is only a movie. Oh, and the bubonic plague arises. Will Martin be able to rescue Agnes, does Agnes want to be rescued, and will Steven survive the sword fights? All a lot of fun.

Not a pleasant experience

[eanderso · 1/10 · 22 May 2001]

I found this movie a very difficult and unpleasant one to watch. It has a good 'period' look to it, and the acting is - well, professionally acceptable; but the attitudes and behaviours of the characters are disturbing. I found the rape of Agnes, and her later falling in love with Martin, so uncomfortable that I was going to ask to have it turned off (I was watching it in the company with others on a bus). I discussed the movie with several of the other women on the trip, and they agreed that the violence and sheer nastiness made it a movie they would not want to see again. I rather regret having watched any of it.