Hey everyone. Today I'm reviewing Wings of Desire. I heard about this film from a relative and somebody recommended it. She recommended it, and other people have recommended it. And I regret to inform everybody that I did not care for this movie. I thought it was okay. But really the more I listened to the voiceover in this, with all the muttering, various mutterings about various things, the more I was reminded of an angst-ridden teenager, an angst-ridden teenager. Yeah, I'll learn to talk someday. That's kind of the way it came across to me. Like an angst-ridden teenager had written the script. And as for the music, that band, I could have totally done without. Thank you.
Let me tell you. Yeah, Wings of Desire. Yeah. It's all about an angel who wants to experience life as a human being because he sees this woman and falls in love with her. She's an acrobat, and her various physical attributes are obvious and are used to good effect, let's say. And let's see what else? This takes place. I believe in Berlin, I think it was, and I didn't know what year it was, and I wondered what year it was, but it's in the, I don't know. Is it after the war? Is it during the war? I don't remember. Wouldn't there be? I don't know. Anyway, I don't know what year it's, but it's back then World War II ish or post World War ii. Maybe it's post World War ii, right? I don't know. Anyway, they're angels and there are two of them, and one of them falls in love with this woman.
And let's just say, I think the moral here is be careful what you wish for, because if you ask me, we leave. Okay? I'm going to give you a bit of a spoiler. We leave with the feeling that here are these two people infatuated with each other and God knows what she's like or what she's been through, or what I don't know. All I can say is it romanticizes poverty for one thing, and I was reminded of Rent with that. Anyway, I won't go through the various things I was reminded of during this movie, but I will say that I do agree with Pauline Kael, my hero as a reviewer, who was one of the few reviewers to not like this movie, as well as bell hooks. Pauline Kael called it "postmodern. kitsch." Yes. That's a good way of describing it. And bell hooks observed that the universality of its themes did not extend to black people, or it was like a whites-only territory. Which reminds me of the thing I wrote as I was watching this movie. Where is that thing I wrote that I really loved?
It's not here, of course, and I can't find it. Let's see. No birds. Something about rent. Oh, here it is. This was my comment. I call it “Existentialism 101 for White People.” That's what this movie is. Okay, having said that, now everybody's going to hate me who's out there, who loves this movie.
Oh, I should say that Peter Falk is the best part of the movie. Of course. Of course. So the movie was made before Peter Falk died, and as I've observed before, Peter Falk is way more than Columbo. But these people don't seem to realize that. Oh, well. Be seeing you!
And about the two people who fall in love or the two, well, let's just put it this way. Do you think that's going to last? Do you think a certain angel might have regrets after the honeymoon's over? Hmm. Now, okay, I can hear you saying, but that's the point. Pain is part of life. Well, yeah, that's true. And it sucks when you're in pain all the time. Said the woman who is in pain right at this moment. So yeah, sometimes we got to be careful what we wish for. That's all I'm saying. That's it, all of it. Sometimes you don't know what you don't know. Does that make sense? I don't know. Be seeing you.
PS: After reading the Wikipedia entry, I suspect the year depicted was somewhere in the 1980s.
That terrible band should have been the first clue. :)
Thia one gets three stars. I added one for the cinematography.
Share this post