Best movie of this year hands down!

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

It is not only a funny movie, but it allows a great amount of joy for anyone who watches it.

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

This film is now available in all its 98 minute glory on a Dutch (Region 2) DVD for a very reasonable price. The really good news is that the rape scene is nothing like as graphic or as protracted as other reviewers suggest. The five minutes are intercut with the police questioning of the victims. I'm at a loss to understand why four minutes were cut from the original British release as the rape scene itself lasts for no more than two minutes.My title for this review has a question mark because it is very different from the treatment we have become used to in long-form dramas like "The Bridge". The film is very much of its time. It is certainly not as action-packed as modern American dramas which may be why some reviewers find it slow. I thought the portrayal of Van Der Valk was reasonably true to the novels save, of course, for the philandering with Feodora.The film as a whole worked well aside from the hippy-trippy bit towards the end which really stamped it as being from the early 1970s, although I think that the basic plot idea or rich kids going bad is one of Freeling's less believable stories.

A gang of six wealthy hoodlums break into a married couple's house and rape the wife while forcing the husband to watch. Thus begins a dogged investigation by a determined detective who quickly finds that their cult-like solidarity can be a serious obstacle to breaking them. Here's another little oddity that's been particularly hard to track down. This was originally released in the US with an X rating and was later re-edited for an R. All of the rips I have seen are 94 minutes, but the IMDb run-time for the film is 98 minutes. Thats a big discrepancy, even allowing for different frame rates. I will just have to keep looking for that illusive 98 minute cut.

It has been said of the 1960s, if you can remember them, you weren't really there; the same has on occasion been said of the 1970s. This film dates from 1973, and I must have been there because I watched it on Monday and didn't remember it, although shortly before he uttered them, I repeated the villain's last words verbatim – words that can't be repeated here.I'd probably forgotten "Because Of The Cats" not because of the passage of 4 decades, but because it is such rubbish.This is an off-beat film, even for the 1970s; the gang rape scene at the beginning is both extremely graphic and very realistic, but not really necessary; the gratuitous male nudity is inexcusable, as is the wooden dialogue. As for the terrible plot...was any police investigation in the UK, Holland or anywhere ever conducted like this? There was no DNA in the 70s, but the same cannot be said for fingerprints.And the detective, this is not the Van De Valk I remember from the TV series. Unless you have an unhealthy fascination for pubic hair and/or male genitalia, give this one a miss.

BECAUSE OF THE CATS is a relatively entertaining thriller that is realistic (if a bit out-dated) in it's handling of the subject-matter.A group of six spoiled boys take pleasure in robbing, raping, vandalizing and causing general havoc. A detective begins investigating the incidents and links the crew to several crimes, but evidence is tentative at first. The rest of the film deals with the detective playing a cat-and-mouse game with the youths in an attempt to break the case...My main gripe with BECAUSE OF THE CATS is the slow pacing throughout. All of the investigatory scenes are relevant, they just sometimes move at a snail's-pace. The ending is pretty cool as you find out the amount of devotion that the crew and their girlfriends have for each other, and what lenghts they'll go to to protect their secrets. A pretty solid thriller that could have moved a little faster...7/10