City of Angels

I was hesitant to see this movie for the longest time. Nicolas Cage and Meg Ryan in a romantic drama would seem to spell a movie filled with forlorn looks and sweet nothings whispered to each other. Upon seeing it, this movie proved my suspicions true.

However, I was astonished at how much more this film had. The sheer amount of interesting concepts, combined with the ability to look at humanity from some distance, made this movie well worth the watch. If this film succeeds, and I believe it does, it is precisely because of the mixture of Hollywood gloss and original Wenders magic. Something for everyone, if only you give it a little thought.

Touching date movie, nice discussion piece, and filled with attractive people, City of Angels is wonderfully shallow and surprisingly deep at times, making it well worth the watch.

Loose remake of Wings of Desire that goes less for the artsy approach and more for the romantic drama. Nic Cage plays an angel who falls in love with pretty surgeon Meg Ryan. Cage, as always, is an acquired taste. His usual half-ham approach to acting is on display here. If you are familiar with him and don't like his style, then you will hate this so don't bother. Ryan is adorable and pretty and can cry on cue. So she's perfect for this kind of schmaltz. Dennis Franz appears in a reworking of Peter Falk's wonderful role in the original film. Falk was the best part of Wings of Desire for me. Franz is OK here but not particularly memorable.

Despite its flaws, I was actually enjoying it for the most part. Not loving it, but enjoying it. It was pleasant enough. But the downbeat ending killed the whole thing for me. Look, you don't want to make a pretentious art film like Wings of Desire -- OK, cool, I'm with you there. But if you're going to make a mainstream love story, then stick with that and don't give me some depressing ending. It made me feel like I wasted my time with the whole thing. It had nothing profound to say and certainly didn't have the nice visuals of Wings of Desire, so it really needed to make the love story work. Instead it makes an attempt at the last minute to become something more than it is and it fails. Nice soundtrack though.

Overall, this is a nice love story that I enjoyed the first time I saw it but decreasingly so with future viewings. After three, it was enough, but that's two more than I usually watch of Meg Ryan films.

Since it's Hollywood, you know there is going to be misguided theology, in this case the subject is angels and heaven. None of the "sermons" in here are Biblical, believe me. it's really more of a love story than anything else. Plus, it's an interesting story with good visuals.

Nicholas Cage plays a likable guy. There are actually a few good messages about God and angels - mainly that they exist - and another good message being that all of us should appreciate more what we have here on earth, starting with our senses (smell, taste, touch, etc.)

Anyway, if you like a good romance story, you should like this movie.

In 2020 I would rather watch this movie for the tenth time than watch silly shallow romance movies of these days, this movie touch the the soul and heart, every time I feel I want a reminder of meaning of life I watch this movie.

The photography will blow you away. The scenes concocted and shot are breathtaking. It's almost better not to know this when you enter the cinema. And this movie should work far better in the cinema than on the small TV format at home.

As for the story, it concentrates on one small aspect of the original - and, according to about half the viewers, pulls a "dirty trick" on them, altogether unfair.

I left the movie house cursing the director and promising to punch his teeth in if I saw him. The ending, IMHO, was gratuitous sermonizing, and not at all what the majority of moviegoers came to see.