Si loin, si proche!

Although it has received mixed reviews by critics, this follow-up to "Der Himmel über Berlin" (1987) is a deeply moving and beautiful film. Wenders explores the polarities which exist in a newly unified Berlin and in so doing examines some of the polarities which exist in life itself. As "Cassiel," Otto Sander has given us another endearing Wenders protagonist who learns all too quickly about what life (and time) can present upon an individual. Laurent Petitgand's stunning musical score enhances the sublime images photographed by Jürgen Jürges. Although "Der Himmel über Berlin" (1987), is an almost mandatory pre-requisite, "In weiter Ferne, so nah!" (1993) is a vastly different film which proves itself in its own right.

Cinema has produced many wonderful films over the past century or so, but when looking at the various elements of film combined here, there is no other movie which touches me quite so positively, quite as deeply as this one.

It's difficult to make a sequel as good as the original. If it's done in the same style, it becomes a poor shadow. Here, Wim Wenders has made something different than in "Wings of Desire:" what I consider a comedy of a misfit ex-angel, to counter the desire of an angel to become human in the other film.

Near the end of the other movie, we saw one of the angels, Damiel, become human for the love of a beautiful trapeze artist. In this film, we see the other angel, Cassiel, become human by accident as he wanted to help people. As much as he wanted to fit in with our world, the more he tried to do good, the worse trouble actually made of things. He often quotes the Lou Reed song he heard: "Why can't I be good, make something of this life?"

There is a cameo appearance of a world leader, when Mikhail Gorbachev (filmed the summer after resigning as Soviet president) ponders the age-old question about the meaning and purpose of life; or two leaders if counting that the guard dog's name is Khadafy. There are jokes about getting lost between East and West, since the Wall no longer was there as a landmark. But there is the serious side at the beginning, of the war and the Nazi past, which is a little hard to follow. I almost forgot about it as I got caught up in the humor of the fallen angel, but even that had the darker side of an evil angel who was leading him astray. Yet the ending tied everything together nicely.

Like "Wings of Desire," there are nice transitions between black and white, which is how the angels see the world, and color, for how humans see things. There is also a poem started at the beginning, about humans being everything to the angels, when Cassiel looks down from the statue to "you whom we love." The angels are just the "messengers who bring light to those in darkness." The poem is repeated at the ending, adding that the message is love.

The angels lament that humans can only believe what they can see and touch. The Wall fell, the tangible symbol of the division between East and West, yet still one driver whose thoughts we heard couldn't see what the difference was between the two areas; freedom can't be seen or touched. Love, the angels message, can be neither seen nor touched, yet that, and not "blood and steel" (as said the Russian poet and diplomat that Gorbachev quotes), is what is needed for there to be peace.

This film is about passion. A flicker on the eyes of an angel, our brief lives are as unique and intense as they are ephemeral, and time itself is the fire that burn our passions and desires. Complex and multicultural, the film is disturbingly deep as it is light, a contrast of innocence and evil, showing how the Faust compromise can be present and right/wrong can become difficult to define. Also, the participation of Lou Reed and Peter Falk as themselves bring Faust to reality, as a mirror to ourselves. The deeply german Wenders pay a compliment to Gorbatchev for the fall of the Wall, maybe telling us the duality of time, that can be good and evil like the faces of a coin. Wonderful piece of art.

Wim Wenders may not be taken seriously by Hollywood (or critics) anymore, but he seems able to pull in actors and musicians at will. Great soundtrack.

Great cast as well. Check out Horst Bucholz (sp?) here and in the 1962 comedy "One, Two, Three" with James Cagney. All the "mortals", especially Bruno Ganz, seem almost gleeful. Only Willem Dafoe appears to be in a "serious German movie".

I may not be qualified to comment on the real value of this movie because "Wings of Desire" is in my permanent top 5. It probably benefits from the glow of it's precursor more than any other sequel, because I really wanted to catch up with these characters. I smiled every time I saw a familiar face.

That said, it takes about an hour to settle in but finally gets sort of serious. Watching this and "Until the End of The World" (also ripped by critics) I get the feeling Wenders was either being lazy or just freestyling to avoid boredom. Looks like fun from here.

This movie is exceptional. It never fails to make me cry. It is a contemporary Epic Poem about an Angel who enters time and becomes human in order to become more skillful at his eternal task. It is long (nearly 2.5 hours) and probably a little challenging for short attention spans. The cinematography is stunning. The script is incredibly complicated with hidden messages and multiple levels of symbolism. It won the Prix du Jury at Cannes (1993). It doesn't suck.