Wings of Desire

The movie playbill for the American version of the movie (the one you see on the site) is quite misleading: a naked woman in the background with the title "Wings of desire" -- it almost looks as the movie should have some erotic content. But there's nothing here which will try to appeal to your immediate senses. This is a poignantly beautiful metaphysical excursion on what it means to be human. Wim Wenders has recognized the metaphysical nature of the movie by dedicating it to Truffaut, Ozu and especially Tarkovskij. And everything -- the bleakness of the landscape, the ubiquity of the Berlin wall, the anguish in which the characters are immersed -- acquires a deeper meaning when we see it through the eyes of two angels. And the sky over Berlin, with its angels, is the only thing that keeps together two painfully divided sides of the city, and the only perspective from which to see it as one.

But handle with care: if you're looking for a movie with an enthralling plot, a clear language and a reasonable pace, you'll be disappointed. The first time I saw this movie with a friend we laughed all the way. I've seen it more 5-6 times now and I've stopped laughing. I sit there and I'm mesmerized.

The movie was born without a script and it is a melting pot with dialogues by Peter Handke, improvised monologues by the actors, connecting material written by Wim Wenders. In one example, Wenders indulges too long in a scene just because he regrets removing it due to all the work the actress has made for preparing to be a trapezist. This is clearly against all rules and all common sense.

Despite all this the movie works and the reason is, the movie somehow manages to touch deep strings all the way through, because of its beautiful imagery (thanks to director of photography Henri Alekan), its eerie soundtrack, the disorderly collection of truly poetic dialogues/monologues, very inspired acting, and the impredictable combined effect of all this -- surely beyond what was planned by Wim Wenders himself. Should I add that the movie has created its own language for making its point?

The film has also become an incredible documentary on Berlin just before the fall of the wall.

If my grandchildren ever ask me what it was like back in the Cold War, I'll tell them to watch this movie. It is both frighteningly bleak and lyrically beautiful. It captures the spirit of the times (Western civilization immediately before the fall of the Berlin Wall) better than any movie I've ever seen. And it manages to be a love letter to those times while also showing the place and time in all its inescapable ugliness.

The overall plot moves forward pretty nicely for a movie where plot doesn't seem to matter all that much, and there are some beautiful vignettes, beautifully photographed, acted, and directed. I'm not sure how anyone can make it through the movie without falling in love with Bruno Ganz's angel. I think the movie's lyricism holds up well on multiple viewing -- as long as you liked it the first time. If the self-consciously art-house form bugs you, however, or you find the screenplay's "poetry" to be too facile, you'll probably find this movie grating. I, however, have never seen people reading silently in a public library without thinking of this movie . . . .

A note to those of you who have only seen the bland, woefully wrong-hearted and half-assed "City of Angels", an unnecessary Americanization of this modern classic: this film leaves Nicolas Cage and Meg Ryan in the dust. Co-writer/director Wim Wenders spins a visually stunning tale of angels living in Berlin before the wall came down. As they float through the lives of all they encounter, one of them falls in love with a beautiful and lonely trapeze artist. He soon must choose whether or not it is worth sacrificing the endless grace of being an earth-bound angel to know what it is like to be human, to "see at eye level."

After having seen this film eight times or so, I can safely say that it is my favorite movie of all time. I have to watch it at least once a year and every time I do, I discover a new detail, while still being enchanted by the things that made me love this film in the first place. Although leisurely paced, every scene makes a valuable point about how our lives are touched by divinity every day.

A calm and wonderful fantasy with such a simple vision that makes you want to believe in angels. Perhaps they are there... whenever my mood changes, seemingly unprompted, I always wonder.

Hijacked and debased by people who don't know any better (even U2, I'm afraid, and the American remake must be avoided at all costs - ideally it should be wiped from the record and the memories of all who saw it) this film has become iconic and has infected the imaginations of countless filmmakers. Look carefully and you will see its influence in the most unexpected places.

I always thought that one masterpiece is all that anyone can aspire to in life. Wim Wenders has made several but for me this one stands out above all others. My favourite film.

Digging deep into the thoughts and dreams of mortals and the angels who look after them, WINGS OF DESIRE is a masterfully-made work of art and Germany's finest. It matches lavish cinematography, flawless direction by Wim Winders, impressive performances and a simple plot told with such brilliance, symbolism and will.

The first half of the film resembles more like a beautifully-painted mosaic or an avant-garde film showing empathy for every character brought about by the screen even showing traces of the Nazism era. Here, the idea of supernatural beings that indirectly assist humans in day-to-day life is introduced. The mystifying beings are unseen to everyone except to the young-at-heart. Hovering atop statues or wandering inside public libraries or apartments, they see and know everything as Winders etches the black-and-white world of the angels. The story evolves when one angel Damiel (Bruno Ganz) wonders what it is like to be human, how it is like to be able to feel, to hold or to be seen. Once he comes to the aid of attractive trapeze artist Marion (Solveig Dommartin), he feels a spiritual devotion he has never felt before.

Winders' slow-but-steady rate gives time for the viewer to contemplate on the questions a child asks ("Why am I me and why not you? Why am I here and not there? When did time begin and where did space end?"). He allows the audience members think what they want to think in a new light instead of manipulating them. The scenario of a ghostly being falling for a human may seem overworked now (GHOST, JUST LIKE HEAVEN) but WINGS OF DESIRE is a fresh, innovative piece of cinema with remarkable photography and unbelievable performances. Henry Alekan's cinematography is both insightful and visually dazzling. Every camera angle takes on a new connotation. Ganz and Dommartin are equally irresistible as two different "people", who worlds apart from each other; both characters are looking for love, no matter how close Damien is from Marion. Peter Falk, playing himself, is an amusing attribute to the cast being "Columbo" in the popular TV show. Being a mysterious character himself, he metaphorically adds a little color to the film amidst all the spellbinding drama and discloses an entertaining revelation that helps the film progress.

This revolutionary masterpiece of craftsmanship is considered by many as the greatest non-US movie ever and it deserves all of its praise entirely. WINGS OF DESIRE breaks new ground in romantic and dramatic film making. Every scene in this movie offers a chance for hope, understanding and compassion. Unbearably creative, outstanding and poignant, this superbly-made motion picture is not another art-house flick. Astounding.

WINGS OF DESIRE was remade in Hollywood as the sleek yet disappointing CITY OF ANGELS(1997).