thinbeach Unseen by the human population, other than those who were once like them, angels wander around bleak Berlin, wondering what its like to be human - to see, to feel, to taste, etc... One falls in love with a beautiful trapeze artist and decides he must become human so as to be with her. How he does this we aren't told, but he does. Once he meets her, he doesn't even need to say a word, she immediately loves him, apparently because he visited her dreams, or some mystical connection. It is an ode to the human experience, with a wonderful transition from observance to experience. The ever flowing camera movement mimics the flight-like nature of angels, and gives the film a dreamy, poetic feel. However all the existentialism becomes quite monotonous, and one can't help but feel it should have been told in half the time. Without a plot it feels aimless, and although the themes are slowly revealed, it is far slower than necessary. It does sink us into the mundane, un-feeling nature of the angels, but it doesn't make for compelling viewing!I can't help but feel there are some cryptic messages behind all this, but like the angels, they are seen only by some, and I shall continue my human existence, invigorating the senses, and wondering what it's all about.

MisterWhiplash An angel (Bruno Ganz) gazes along the streets and city of Berlin, ruminating, being romantic for... something, anything, or for an actual person. And meanwhile, a famous actor (Peter Falk) ruminates about the ways of the world, of acting, of cinema (if not directly then in the subtext), and we follow him for a bit. Whether there will be direct interaction, who knows. But the angel makes a decision, and falls from the sky to try and become something else. Ultimately, the Angel is all about romance - whether he finds it directly is another question.Such is the thrust of Wim Wenders Wings of Desire, a film that many have touted as one of the greats of the 1980s. I think this is the kind of movie you either go for, or you don't. I mostly went for it, and the poet in me liked a lot of the words that came out in the voice-overs. It's a very humanistic movie and if nothing else it can be praised by that... actually, it's the visual scope that dominates and triumphs (I'd like to take this DP out for a beer).If only Wenders could back off just a little from his super-mega-sumptuous-Berlin-poetry and get back to the story a little more, it would really be something fully magical (rather, a marriage of the two). I have to recommend it strongly for its visual and usually aural beauty, and Ganz's touching performance too. But I didn't find it to be quite the masterpiece most do. I apologize on behalf of my brain not taking in all of the supposed awe-inspiring words spoken by people (almost everyone has the poetry of a master, and many of them just sound like they're reading as opposed to naturally speaking), but it's just how I took it in.Oh, and Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds makes a prominent appearance in the third act. Reason enough to see it alone, and it makes the final act have a stronger impact than you might expect - there's poetry AND rock and roll combined!

victoriabailey20 We all want something in this life, a burning desire for more or what we cannot have. Even someone who has everything still longs for more. Much like, in the movie "Wings of Desire". Therefore it came as no surprise when the main character Damiel, an angel, longs to be human, in order to be with the mortal women he falls in love with. Though this movie sounds like it has great potential, do not be conned into thinking it's something worth seeing. The story line is amusing, but overall it is two and a half hours of confusion and disappointment. The viewer would assume the overall plot would be very predictable if the story was simply an angel who falls in love with a mortal, but that is not the case in this film. The director of this film wanted it to go more in depth. In order to do that,t the movie has over ninety plus minutes of black and white commentary of the thoughts of everyday people. Through this, adds emphasis to what the angel's go through and observe, this portion of the movie is extremely dragged out. Most of the commentary is irrelevant to the plot of the movie, and it confuses the viewer as to what the story is. Even when one of the main character in the movie, the trapeze artist, appears the film continues to go off subject. This makes the viewer wonder what their main focus should be on.As for the acting in the movie, this should be rated as decent. Decent in the sense that the parts in this film are relatively easy to portray. Majority of the characters in the film, are simply standard by passer, which can be played by anyone. As for the two main angels, their parts were played well enough, but even a majority of their character is emotionless. The overall all look of the angels being dark and mysterious was chosen well in the appearance of the two men. The look for the main female actress was also matched well with the character being portrayed. She gives off a look of youth and innocence and when speaking her dialog she does well in seducing the audience with her eyes and voice. The combination of her looks and the look of Damiel, is an awkward combination. His appearance being much older and more mature than hers, makes them an awkward pair for the audience to connect to.The setting choice for the movie, works for and against it. Berlin being chosen as the city the story takes place, makes you wonder right off if the movie is based on what's going on at the time. Though that aspect adds more interest in the thoughts and emotions of the everyday people the angels observe, it only add to the confusion on what your focus should be on. If the German title for the movie "The Skies of Heaven over Berlin", would have been kept, the viewer would immediately think the movie had everything to do with what tragedy was taking place in Berlin at the time and would draw attention away from the actual plot of the movie.Another major point of confusion in the movie is the question of who's, what? When the Damiel transitions into a human, we find out that the English actor Peter Fauc is also a former angel himself. We know this because he can sense their presence when the angels are around him. With that information, who's to say the main female actress is not former angel herself? There is no evidence in the film that says she not, but there is evidence that says she could be. For instance when she knew she was looking for a man but did not know who, and when she spoke alone in the movie it was as if she knows someone was listening. Same way Peter Fauc did when he sensed the presence of an angel around him. Also, towards the very end of the movie she knew exactly what man to go to in the bar, and her closing speech was implying she knew who he was all along and that they were going to meet? This is all evidence that supports that she could have also been a former angel herself, which leaves the viewer with even more confusion as to the characterization in the movie.The overall rating for the movie Wings of Desire would be a three out of five stars. The acting and overall story of the movie is not a complete lost cause. The main downfall for the films is its pacing and pointless scenes, which leads to much confusion and loss of interest throughout the very beginning on. The story line has great potential, therefore this movie would do great if remade the right way.

gizmomogwai Nearly every film I've rated as a masterpiece won its place in my heart for capturing Buddha's lesson- life is suffering, and, as Ofelia's mother put it in Pan's Labyrinth, the world is a cruel place. Wings of Desire is likely the greatest film that comes at it from an opposite angle, and is amazing in a whole new way. Yes, there are depressed characters, a prostitute, a suicide. This isn't a naive film. But the overall message overcomes it all- we can focus on the positive.As a story about an angel, Damiel, who longs to be human, Wings of Desire can open a viewer's eyes as to how the physical world is not a bad place to be. We see what the angels lack that we have- colour, touch, taste, freedom. We learn we can be amazed by these things, and should be. There is something mystical to the woman who folds up her umbrella and lets herself get soaked, to the child who describes how a fern grew from dirt to an astonished teacher, to the boy who listens to The Odyssey and stops blinking. The divine and the amazing are all around us, for anyone who knows where to look.Peter Falk, who plays himself as a former angel, lays it out in his companero speech, in my opinion one of the greatest scenes in the history of cinema. It's wonderful to be here, he says, to have coffee, to rub your hands together, to draw. He offers his hand as a gesture of friendship- Damiel chooses to take it, indicating he has overcome his last bits of reluctance to "take the plunge." His fellow-angel, Cassiel, who earlier couldn't help himself from smiling at the thought of mortality, does not take Falk's hand.The feel of the film, as a whole, has an otherworldly, poetic tone, thanks to screenwriters Wim Wenders and Peter Handke, the latter whom contributed Song of Childhood, which runs through the film and helps tie it together. This contributes to the stunning, awe-inspiring feel of the film, only enhanced by the Criterion Blu-ray. It's particularly the black and white scenes that benefit from the exceptional detail, sharpness and texture. Even the circus and the music of Nick Cave take on divine meaning in this film.The film ends with a "To be continued..." which will nag everyone to see the sequel, Faraway, So Close! (1993). It disappointingly loses the whole tone and message of the first film; the message of Faraway, So Close! appears to be "Oops, turns out the world sucks after all. Stay away, angels." I don't blame The Criterion Collection for not releasing the two films as a double feature. Wings of Desire is only one film, unlike any other, and truly a stunning experience.