MovieChat Forums > Der Himmel über Berlin (1988) Discussion > The only flaw in a masterfully painted p...

The only flaw in a masterfully painted picture


I just watched this movie and loved it. To me it is a celebration of survival for the people of Berlin after all the wars and tragedies they suffered. And also a triumph of love.

The only part that ruined the experience for me a little was at the end when Marion finally meets Damiel. To me that scene was about them connecting and when he leaned forward to kiss her the connection would have been made. Instead she stops him and launches into this overly long monologue that at points is irrelevant and distracting. It goes on for so long that by the time the kiss finally happens part of the impact is lost and it isn't as powerful as it would have been had it happened when they met. I don't understand the point of her speech, especially in a movie that mostly relied on imagery to tell its story thus far. If the director had cut even half of it the movie's ending would have been much better IMO.

--
To learn how to ruin a perfectly fine, popular TV show talk to Jeremy Carver or Russel T Davis.

reply

I agree. It went on forever and seemed like it would never end.. I had the exact same feeling while watching the movie.

reply

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that - far too much waffle that didn't mean very much at all! A shame because some parts of the film were brilliant

reply

Wim Wenders has this recurring problem with ending his films. Watch Paris, Texas. Same thing there.

reply

I always love reading opinions regarding cinema because it reminds me how vastly different people can be from one another. In my opinion, Marion's monologue was one of the best portions of this splendid film. It was a culmination that would have been lessened had her dialogue been shortened. I cannot imagine this film without every syllable of her monologue remaining intact.





Pretentious is a three syllable word for any cinematic thought too big for little minds.

reply

I think I could watch this film a dozen times and still not totally comprehend and appreciate it. I've seen many a faux-"profound" and pretentious movie but this isn't one of those. It is filled with the kind of questions we all of us ask ourselves and God (or whatever Higher Power you relate to, be it the Almighty, Buddha, Allah -- or even just "the cosmos" if theology ain't your thing.) Many of those questions can only be answered by just "taking the plunge," as Dammiel put it, and just taking in and drinking the cup of life.


Marion, who is an introspective soul, was asking herself those questions and thus drew Damiel's attention. She sensed his invisible and intangible presence as he watched over her. When her circus gig bottomed out and she was back to Square One with her life, she once again felt the presence of the now mortal Damiel, at the same dive where the same grunge / acid rock musicians as before were now performing.

That's my take on it, even though no one can say such an explanation is logical or rational. But "logic" and "rationality" are hardly what drives this story, are they?

Thus, Marion's monologue is in harmony with, and serves as a capstone to, the intimate thoughts she was having when we met her in the previous scenes where Damiel invisiibly looked on.


reply