Watch Tulip Fever full movie online free – I loved it. After reading the reviews of other users, I had no expectations from the movie. But, I was very surprised after I finished watching the film that I actually thoroughly enjoyed it. The plot itself is very intriguing and forces the viewer to enter a game of guesses and speculations on what will the characters dare to do next. It’s a wonderfully playful and thrilling love story that I would recommend everyone to go and watch.
Tulip Fever putlocker – Watch Tulip Fever full movie online free
Tulip Fever review by Ivan Romashchenko – Tulip Mess
Several reasons may tempt you to watch Tulip Fever. In my case those were the historical background (Amsterdam, 17th century) and the actors. Indeed both factors are worth noting. Based on trailers one could easily mix up characters of the movie with the figures from Rembrandt paintings. It seemed that production design was done at its best so that the viewer is dipped into the epoch. Plus, characters are played by famous actors, Christoph Waltz, Alicia Vikander and Dane DeHaan. Interestingly, Clara Delevingne is also there, as if we see a prequel of Besson’s Valerian.
Despite the mentioned ingredients, which if used properly could be a good recipe for the Oscar contender, the movie is a disappointment. The biggest problem is probably the script. Dialogues and actions do not convince at all. The historical tulip fever in the movie is not impressive at all. The romantic line is shown very superficially. It is really difficult to believe that what you see on screen could actually happen in reality. There is an obvious lack in the development of characters. Due to this they may surprise you a lot during the film. Some story moves are completely unexpected. The director’s work also raises questions. The authors of the movie have not decided for themselves how serious their movie has to be: whether it should be a drama, a comedy, or rather a TV show. It seems that the movie starts in one genre and ends in another. Of course, some movies are difficult to be attributed to a specific genre, for instance, some pure art-house joints. However, in this case this is not art-house at all, and jumping between different ways of storytelling is not a good idea.
So, the only reason to watch this movie is to convince yourself that good actors play sometimes in bad movies.
Tulip Fever review by Nesdon Booth – Not as bad as reviewers make it out
I have put a lot of store in Metacritic ratings, but found their rating on this surprisingly far from mine own impression (them 37 me 71). This is rare, but then again I rarely go see movies if they rate it below 70. Stoppard is a genius, and as a production designer I can’t pass up a film whose trailers show decent period design, so i had to go see it on the big screen.
The design here was indeed pretty good, a little stagy on the interiors and a bit too obvious CGI, but worth the price of admission on its own none the less. The acting is actually very good, and the script has some nice subtleties, with a clever, satisfying and unusually nuanced resolution.
Perhaps part of what turned the critics were the expectations. The budget was high, the cast renowned and everyone agrees that Stoppard is a genius, leading to some let down for what might have been. But you need to meet a piece of art where it stands and not where you hoped it might be, and this is a much better film that its reviews suggest.
Tulip Fever review by Tyger-Flynn – Ignore Critics – Engrossing Film
Saw this film this past weekend. I had initially checked out reviews here – which at the time were strongly biased to the negative. Having now seen the film I feel I was seriously misled. I went into the film less positive than needed. This is an excellent historical drama. At least 8 stars, and I have given 10 stars. I left the film decided to write this review to let others know that this is a decent film for entertainment, and for thinking. Well worth anyone’s time.
Some negative comments made were sufficient to create such a confusing impression that they are inexplicable (imo) – examples: voice narration makes perfect sense, and there is nothing confusing about the initial 45 minutes of plot. I could go on but that should be enough to indicate that everyone should approach this film in a positive frame. If you are into period dramas and history elegantly rendered, this film definitely deserves your attention. Definitely deserves awards for costumes and sets Imo.
As stated by some others, source material for this screenplay was excellent so the story is both compelling and unique. The production is lush and beautifully realized. If you love period dramas, and good love stories, this one will do just fine, with the added joy of being an historical drama fully realized taking place in Amsterdam (rather than London). I found the tulip trade backstory fascinating.
Performances all round are uniformly excellent as well. No complaints. Well done, All.
Tulip Fever review by Dave McClain – a film that’s dramatic, romantic, erotic and greatly entertaining
Subprime Mortgage Crisis! Dot-Com Collapse! Stock Market Crash! Tulip Mania! Wait. What? What was that last one?? Yes, Tulip Mania was a thing. Centuries before those 20th-21st century examples, Tulip Mania seized the Netherlands in the first half of the 17th century, creating what many economists consider to be the world’s first economic bubble. Just like the more recent bubbles in real estate, tech start-ups and Wall Street securities, the Dutch tulip market was seized by rampant speculation, with the value of tulip bulbs growing exponentially and far exceeding their actual worth. Speculators bought and sold contracts for bulbs that didn’t even exist yet – and that they wouldn’t be able to claim for months, until the end of the tulip season – sometimes for ten times as much as most men could make in a year!
Finally, investors stopped buying and the bubble burst. Fortunes had been made and lost overnight and, in the end, many speculators were left holding their bulbs. Many men were ruined and their wives and families paid the price for their greed and foolishness. Using admittedly incomplete historical accounts and financial records, economists and historians argue amongst themselves over to what extent Tulip Mania constituted an economic bubble in the modern sense, but some of the facts are indisputable: In 1636, during the Dutch Golden Age, when the Netherlands was the richest country on earth and its military, trade, science, art and culture were the envy of the western world, the price of tulip bulbs (both present and future) rose dramatically until February 1637, when the bottom fell out and the market crashed. This might seem an odd backdrop for a tale of romance, but “Tulip Fever” (R, 1:47) gives such a saga. Much more than the fictionalized version of a historic financial collapse, this drama focuses more on its love story, creating a film that’s dramatic, romantic, erotic and greatly entertaining.
Sophia (Oscar winner Alicia Vikander) had lost her parents to a plague and grew up in an orphanage just outside of Amsterdam. When she comes of age, she’s married off to a wealthy local businessman named Cornelis Sandvoort (Oscar winner Christoph Waltz). Having previously lost a child and, later, his wife and baby, during childbirth, he’s anxious for a male heir to inherit his fortune. But, alas, as an older man, he has trouble in bed, which causes his young wife a great deal of frustration and dismay. Otherwise, Sophia and Cornelis have a relatively happy marriage. She is a dutiful wife, thankful for being saved from a life of poverty, and he is a loving and respectful husband. If Cornelis has any faults, they would be that he can be a bit aloof and prideful. Although somewhat concerned of the vanity of such an endeavor, he hires a young painter named Jan van Loos (Dane DeHaan) to create a portrait of the couple, in order to immortalize his wife’s beauty and to stir admiration of his good fortune – in business and in marriage.
As Jan works on his painting, he is drawn to the beauty of his subject and to vitality in her eyes. After some hesitation, the two of them come together and have a passionate affair. They make plans to run away together and Jan gets involved in the blossoming tulip market as a way to finance their future. This venture has him relying more then he should on his alcoholic best friend (Zach Galifianakis) and also puts him in business with the Abbess (Oscar winner Dame Judy Dench) of St. Ursula, a nearby orphanage which raises children – and tulips. But Sophia getting away from her husband is going to take more than money. It’s going to take a grander plan, which ends up involving a doctor named Sorgh (Tom Hollander) and Sophia’s maid and friend, Maria (Holliday Granger), whose character narrates part of the story and whose lover, William (Jack O’Connell), mysteriously disappears only one of this film’s many surprises.
“Tulip Fever” is surprisingly and fully entertaining on every level. It works as history, drama, romance and mystery, with plenty of twists and turns (which feel mostly organic) and even some subtle but enjoyable comic relief from a couple of minor characters. Even though this movie was filmed back in 2014, the three Oscar winners in the cast live up to their well-deserved reputations, in place at that time and enhanced since, while the supporting players are all excellent.
Based on the 1999 novel of the same name by English author Deborah Moggach (whose earlier novels became the movies “The Ex-Wives” and “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel”), screenwriter Tom Stoppard (“Brazil”, “Empire of the Sun”, “Shakespeare in Love”, “Anna Karenina”), who co-wrote the screenplay with Moggach, gives us a multi-faceted story which is unusually engaging and even instructive in its lessons regarding financial misadventures and their impact on people’s lives. (Think of this film as “The Big Short” meets “Romeo and Juliet”, if you can imagine such a thing working – which this one does!) Director Justin Chadwick (“The Other Boleyn Girl”, “Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom”) takes the script, a broadly and deeply talented cast, uses sets that feel raw and real and puts it together almost perfectly.
Filming was just weeks away from kicking off in 2004 (with Jude Law, Keira Knightley and Jim Broadbent starring) when producers lost their financing (due to a change in the U.K.’s tax incentive laws) and then, after it was finally filmed, Movie Fans ended up having to wait three years to see the finished product. Some may consider this film’s long road to the big screen a bad sign, but I don’t work myself into a fever over such things. I say “Tulip Fever” was well worth the wait.
Tulip Fever review by HillstreetBunz – Strong source material, cast and detail overcome confused and shaky 1st reel.
I had the privilege of seeing this film in preview in the famous Tuschinski theatre in the heart of the canal district in Amsterdam. Having enjoyed the novel whilst living there in 2011, I have watched as it’s release dates have been continually changed giving all the signs of a production in distress. Early rumours of poor test screenings can be damaging whether true or not! Like another reviewer I found the opening narration at odds with the images and consequently confusing. The first 40 minutes edited in a pedestrian style merely to tick off necessary plot points, and without any sensitivity to mood or place, so prevalent in the novel. Strangely, the movie seemed to be both full of beautiful ‘pictures’, historical detail, visual treats and mood, and yet at the same time, the continued use of one street set left it feeling small and enclosed and almost like stage set. Little sense of Amsterdam as a City State enjoying a glorious rise on the world stage. At that point (after 40 minutes) having laid out the plot points and established the characters, the film starts to build, thanks to the real tension in the original story, a good script and some fine performances. I got over a niggling feeling of disappointment at the ‘smallness’ of the set production, and instead decided to enjoy the abundant visual detail and the way the story started to rip along. Ultimately the great story rose above the shaky first reel and the production design above its limited scale. I was with two friends who hadn’t read the book, and we all three came to really enjoy the film, despite the confused and hurried beginnings. It deserves to rise above its production history and be widely seen and enjoyed. It doesn’t quite reach the heights of the source material, but it’s far from a failure with much to enjoy.
Tulip Fever review by CineMuseFilms – Gorgeous production cannot disguise the contrivance and melodrama
How could such a beautiful looking movie fall so flat? Sumptuous filming, a stellar cast, with brilliant period sets and costumes are not enough to disguise the fact that Tulip Fever (2017) drowns under the weight of its own plot contrivance and melodramatic performances.
Set in 17th Century Amsterdam, it tells the story of an orphan who “arrived barefoot and left in a carriage”. Selected to marry for her great beauty, Sophia’s (Alicia Vikander) sole purpose is to bear a child for wealthy merchant Cornelius (Christopher Waltz) whose first marriage was barren. Cornelius commissions struggling artist Jan (Dane DeHaan) to paint their portrait to celebrate his wealth and her beauty but the artist immediately falls under her spell. While the affair progresses, her maidservant Maria (Holliday Grainger) falls pregnant to a fishmonger and the two women concoct a subterfuge whereby Sophia pretends to be pregnant to keep Maria’s secret. As a background sub-plot, Jan seeks his fortune in the over-heated tulip market by purchasing the rarest of tulip specimens from an imperious nun (Judi Dench). Melodrama turns into farce as the multiple narratives interweave, tighten, yet ultimately go nowhere.
High visual production values do not make up for story implausibility. The months of unsuccessful mating between Cornelius and Sophia is portrayed as a bawdy comedy of nightly rituals where Cornelius struggles to perform his marital duties. The affair under her husband’s nose, the fake pregnancy, and fake birth are all ludicrously implausible. The background tale of wild speculations on the fickle tulip market is a distraction rather than necessary for Jan’s predictable investment outcomes. The script sounds unnatural and dialogue is delivered unconvincingly: many lines are spoken across class boundaries in ways that would have been unimaginable in that era. With a top- shelf cast, the acting is flawless although Alicia Vikander stands out for the way she plays the same Alicia Vikander that we have seen in several films. The chemistry with both husband and lover is of the barely flickering variety, and her impersonation of Mona Lisa is, as always, impeccable.
Does the film’s ending justify the effort? Disappointingly, no. The fate of all the characters is disconnected from the narrative flow and the storyline threads remain dangling in the wind. For some audiences, the beauty of this production will be worth the commitment. However, after an hour and forty-five minutes, all we learn is that great beauty, wealth, greed, and deception, do not bring happiness; nor do aesthetics alone make a great movie.
Tulip Fever review by Msbnitski – If you love tulips & love then watch this movie.
I really liked this movie. It was fun, wicked and full of lust. A young women marries an older man. She can’t conceive but she tries to. Her husband wants their portrait done by a young artist and of course the lust and betrayel begins.
The tulip bulbs are flying off the shelves like gold and everyone is investing and making money. It’s a fun movie, kinda predictable but hey, it’s a romantic movie with the typical lovers twist and turns of lust. Looking for a lite romantic 17th century Dutch epic than this is a great movie that will make you wonder if it’s all worth it, love that is and tulips.
Tulip Fever review by Reno Rangan – An affair that changed the lives of many around it forever!
It is very sad to know that only blind people have seen it. Otherwise, this is not a response the film deserved. It was almost a solid 10 out of 10 film. Superfast narration. Beautiful setting. Of course the background score was good, but if it had an even better catchy score, then it would have been one of my all time favourites.
Surely one of the best costume dramas I’ve seen in my life. It seems like a drama, but it was more a romance-thriller. Especially the final quarter was amazing. Little predictable, but overall the narration kept surprising me frequently. It was a secret affair that has been waiting to take along everyone around to the down!
This story was narrated in the background as it had happened, that tells us about an orphan grew up in a convent and later an old wealthy man took her in as his wife. In return, she has to give him an heir, a son. But she’s not succeeding, until a young artist who came to make the couple’s portrait, then they two has fallen in love.
The secret romance takes the surprise twists when it had interlocked with other people’s affair around them. Now they all who are involved in it must try to fix it once for all. And of course, at the end someone must get hurt, at least not physically. Who is that or is it more than one is the conclusion unfolded so touchingly rather than too much emotion.
This project saw too many obstacles. I’m happy it’s now here after all these years of struggle. Based on the book of the same name. Excellently transformed into the screen. And not particular, but all the actors were equally great. I’ve heard lots about the love between the Netherlands and Tulips, but seeing it in a film was truly wonderful. Pay no attention to film critics and their ardent followers. It’s one hundred per cent a fantastic period drama of the year that’s not to be missed, particularly by the grown ups!