Wings of Desire

Wings of Desire

Angels look for love in some very odd places and discover among other things, a lonely trapeze artist and the real-life Peter Falk (sans raincoat).

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

Angels look for love in some very odd places and discover among other things, a lonely trapeze artist and the real-life Peter Falk (sans raincoat).

The idea is winning. Angels walk the earth invisibly and listen in on the unspoken thoughts of people who interest them. The idea is also potentially funny, but Wim Wenders’s new film—his first in Germany in ten years—rarely cracks a smile. Its deadpan quality gives it an inadvertent charm, a kind of secret wit. The mostly black-and-white cinematography by Henri Alekan, who photographed Cocteau’s La Belle et La Bête, suggests the otherworldly elegance of a Cocteau-like dream.

Wenders has always been more interested in states of soul than in narrative. Among the big three of the German new wave (along with Werner Herzog and R.W. Fassbinder), he has been the doleful poet of the episodic. His production company calls itself (in English) Road Movies—a whimsical tribute to a half-dozen American genre films of brief moment in the late 1960s. Obviously Wenders himself is the king of the road movie, and perhaps the only filmmaker of note still checking out the open road. His films—even his most plotted work, The American Friend (my favorite)—are in no hurry to get to the seemingly no particular place they’re going. What they ask of us as filmgoers is trusting patience.

Wings of Desire spends its first hour almost solely in ambiance, offering us an angel-eyed, and angel-eared, view of certain aspects of Berlin. The black-and-white cinematography connotes the solemn, colorless universe of angel apprehension. Wenders’s film is about the humanizing of one of the angels, played by Bruno Ganz, an actor who brings intelligence and weight to whatever he does. When the film breaks into color, and initially the shift is startling and beautiful, it is because Ganz’s angel is having a human episode. Angels perceive the ethereal and unheard (they are like certain artists), but they are cut off from human emotions. When Ganz’s dour angel sees a circus trapeze artist in mock angel wings (Solveig Dommartin), he falls in love with her and the film takes on the color that symbolizes his human transformation.

There is no dailiness in this film—no concern with the trivial particularities of a life. The angels are tuned in to preconscious thoughts, the language of the inexpressible. As it is with fables, life-and-death matters are often at issue. What these angels give us are readings of the soul. The lack of concern with the prosaic needs of the flesh gives this film an abstract quality, a remoteness, that is at times almost too rarefied to bear. We must engage this film on its own terms, watch it like eavesdropping angels ourselves, or lose it altogether.

Peter Falk, in a subplot, plays himself performing in a film on the Holocaust being shot in the same part of Berlin in which the two central angels hang out invisibly in their desultory angelic manner. See how easily Wenders’s film lends itself to mockery. In fact, there’s a suggestion along the way that Peter Falk—the character—was once an angel himself.

Wings of Desire has an ingenuousness, a sweetness of spirit, that triumphs over the conventional rigidities of its calculation. I am tempted to say that it is a film steeped in German romanticism, except that Alan Rudolph’s recent Made in Heaven has similar thematic concerns. Wenders, like Rudolph, though on a much higher level, continues (after his brief Hollywood flirtation) to make quirky personal films that offer little or no concession to the impatience, actually poor concentration, of audiences raised on the mindless up-tempo pace of television sitcoms. Wings of Desire has its pleasures—it is both touching and elegant—but requires viewers, I suspect, with just a touch at least of the angelic.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x