User reviews

This is a story of human interest.The film may be weak in some aspects,but based on then real life of a person who fought for himself and his people to have freedom from their cruel oppressors, can only merit thought at how the concept of superiority made the slave owners immune to any sense of humanity.If it wasn't for the uprising in Haiti,no slave would have had the courage to challenge slavery.It came to end too late unfortunately for other islands like Curacao ,but it did end,thanks to people like Tula.Its a story to be watched or read.Are we to ignore history of slavery forever,and criticise those who try to tell these stories for the costumes that the slaves wore as too clean,and one commentator here seems to think,or listen to voices of those who sacrificed themselves for their god given rights ,and the good of others.

Being a slave was a clean and easy job in those days. At least that was the only conclusion I can draw after having sat through this screen disaster. Everyone was wearing clean clothes all the time (c'mon guys, dress up, you're on camera !); slaves could wander freely through the woods without being hindered and without getting dirty (or caught for that matter), and they had no trouble adjusting to the lifestyle of their masters (well okay, that was possible). The story had no real beginning or end and when the credits ran, you were just wondering what had been the purpose of it all. Danny Glover must have felt like a stranger amongst this Dutch gang; he certainly looks and sounds that way. What a waste of money and energy !! The only somewhat decent job was done by Jeroen Willems (sad he is not among us anymore); to determine the worst performance is more difficult: so many actors are vying for that slot ! Having to chose I would take Jeroen Krabbe. His Gouverneur was beyond any believability. It was Jeroen Leinders' (were they all chosen for their first name?) first movie. Unless he decides to start following a course, it should be his last.

This film had excellent subject matter and fantastic locations........but missed the target. The film did not capture me and resulted in me turning it off after about ten minutes. The main problem is the poor execution on the part of the actors. It felt as if they were not committed to becoming the characters they were depicting. It feels amateurish to me. The character development was lacking. The script didn't feel historically correct. The pace of the film seemed rushed. Maybe I'm being a little too harsh, but I just couldn't get excited about seeing how the main characters arrived to their final destination.

Man seeking freedom. How do you screw a story like that up? This one managed to do so. It starts with all Whites are bad except one crazy woman, then goes downhill from there. The depiction of a slave worked to death makes about as much sense as a horse being starved to death or car intentionally driven with no oil in the pan. A plantation owner relied on their slaves and would not callously destroy his workforce. The reaction to his death was the real sad part. It was pure Hollywood oh woe is me one minute and 2 minutes later who was that guy? The combat scenes were beyond absurd. Some of the worst fighting scenes I've seen in my life. The dialog didn't even give lip service to the historical period. The zero historical accuracy of the revolt sadly is normal for Hollywood. Tula was neither reluctant or peaceful in his revolt. His revolt was joined by other slave leaders from other plantations. This could have been an interesting story. First if they'd depicted actual living conditions of slaves on the island at the time. Next if they'd even loosely followed the actual events. At the least they could have taken a few minutes to write combat scenes that didn't look like bored re-creationists A little effort on developing characters would have helped. At the end of the movie you wind up not really liking anybody. Everyone is so shallow and the effort of the writer to develop empathy for the revolting slaves just didn't survive the directing. It was like a high school remake of Braveheart set on a small island.

Pity. This could have been an excellent film. I guess it had a limited budget. One or two known names acted in this but they failed to lift it. Lighting was inadequate at times and if this was intentional to try and make the film 'dark in nature' it didn't work. Subject matter was interesting but it was difficult to believe some of the characters.

Tula: The Revolt is a biopic about a slave rebellion at the end of the 18th century on one of the islands owned by the Dutch at the time. Danny Glover and a host of B actors (many of whom are not very effective) portray the events of this revolt.

The pace of this film is a bit uneven, although it does have its moments from time to time. I believe the screenplay could have been stronger, and that the directing might have been tighter.

The premise is interesting; a group of slaves in a Dutch colony march to seek an audience with the governor, but the governor is not interested in the agenda of the slaves; he is interested in maintaining the economic viability of the colony. The film really does not gather the momentum needed to put across such a dramatic premise. Good try, but no cigar.