Simon

A spoiler light review of Simon should begin with tone, because Eddy Terstall understands exactly how this comedy ought to feel. Simon gains early credibility from Cees Geel, whose presence is balanced by the different rhythm of Marcel Hensema. The foundation of Simon can be stated simply: A mild mannered gay dentist and a hedonist womanizer rekindle their unlikely friendship when the latter's terminal cancer drives them back together after a decade apart. Within its 1h 42m running time, Simon reveals both the benefits and the limits of that disciplined approach.

⁠

Visually, Simon is most persuasive when performer rhythm guides attention without becoming an attraction separate from the drama. Fortissimo Films supports Simon with performer rhythm, giving individual scenes a shared design logic. The Netherlands production character of Simon is clearest in its use of comic timing built around character to make place feel consequential. Even during its busiest moments, Simon benefits from an edit and sound mix that protect the immediate emotional line.

⁠

The central idea running through Simon concerns embarrassment, status and the gap between confidence and reality. Cees Geel gives that idea a human scale, allowing Simon to remain accessible even when its world becomes larger. By returning to a difficult choice, Simon turns theme into a source of pressure rather than a message waiting to be delivered. The handling by Eddy Terstall lets Simon leave a little interpretive room, which gives its better scenes an afterlife.

⁠

The plot of Simon is built around the uneasy relationship between the central character and an important relationship. For Cees Geel, that relationship gives Simon an emotional objective stronger than simple forward motion. The screenplay associated with Eddy Terstall lets a difficult choice reshape the direction of Simon in stages. Although the treatment of the wider conflict could be sharper, Simon never entirely loses the thread established at the beginning.

⁠

Simon relies heavily on Cees Geel, and the performance responds with enough specificity to carry changes in mood. The contribution of Marcel Hensema gives Simon a useful counterweight instead of merely echoing the lead. Rifka Lodeizen makes the smaller exchanges in Simon count, often through timing rather than emphatic dialogue. Eddy Terstall understands that Simon becomes more persuasive when the cast can imply feelings before the script names them.

⁠

Simon benefits from Eddy Terstall being careful about tone and generally effective about what each sequence needs to accomplish. Instead of making every beat equally loud, Eddy Terstall lets Simon create contrast between pressure and release. The film delivers more often than it misses throughout Simon, with the strongest decisions feeling connected to character rather than display. It is still fair to say that Simon suffers because the middle loses a little urgency, but the problem remains contained.

⁠

Taken as a whole, Simon is a likeable film whose strengths survive its limitations for comedy fans who respond to personality and timing. Simon leaves its strongest impression through performer rhythm, the work of Cees Geel and a clear understanding of tone. The limitations around how the middle loses a little urgency should be acknowledged, but they do not erase what Simon does well. I would return to Simon for its personality and its willingness to connect genre pleasure with recognisable feeling.