Skip to main content

The present will look after itself. But it’s our duty to realise the future with our imagination.

Until the End of the World
(1991)

(SPOILERS) With the current order devolving into what looks inevitably like a passively endorsed dystopia, a brave new chipped and tracked vision variously in line with cinema’s warnings (or its predictive programming, depending on where your cynicism lands), I’ve been revisiting a few of these futuristic visions. That I picked the very Euro-pudding Until the End of the World is perhaps entirely antagonistic to such reasoning, seeing as how it is, at heart, a warm and fuzzy, upbeat, humanist musing on where we are all going.

Director Wim Wenders’ “ultimate road movie” certainly has a claim to that title, especially in its Trilogy Cut form (280 minutes’ worth – I’ve yet to see the seven-minutes-longer Director’s Cut). If you labelled it indulgent, I doubt very much Wenders would dispute the charge. Its sprawling content and accompanying untidiness is part of its appeal, as is the not-really-very-original attempt at retro-noir fashions (all the men wear hats), as if Wenders and Stephen Hopkins determined Until the End of the World and Predator 2 exist in a shared universe. Some of the technology appears laughably quaint (anything featuring in-computer graphics), but the central gizmo, of which more shortly, represents a strong core concept, if one lacking a sufficiently versatile visualisation. And the soundtrack, which in many ways is the film, lends it a supremely atmospheric and informing spine, including as it does the titular U2 track but also the much more evocative (I’ll Love You) Til the End of the World from Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds. And Graeme Revell’s score is a career best.

The emphasis on the music underlines the lyrical, meditative nature of the picture, which in the three-chapter form of the Trilogy Cut sometimes can tend to the somewhat aimless, but never offputtingly so. There’s a languorous charm to Wenders’ idea of a can-do future where the worst thing to worry about is a nuclear satellite. Which may not really seem like much of a potential powder keg for sparking global unrest, but then, unwanted EMF can have a very undesirable effect, or side effects, especially if it’s put down to something else entirely. Plus, there's the devastating combination of nuclear power and satellite technology... providing you believe either exist in the first place to weave their dark magic spell.

Sam Farber: I am neither a spy nor a jewel thief.

Wenders developed the idea with then-muse Solveig Dommartin (Dommartin died in 2007 at only 45), star of his previous, possibly career-best Wings of Desire, and there’s something of a precursor to a manic pixie dream girl in her presentation. Claire Tourneur is an ever-elusive, unpinnable-down object of desire to many of those she encounters. Most notably her former boyfriend Sam Neill, on account of his narration (he’s an author) going on and on and on about it; it’s the kind of obsessive ex thing that becomes a bit irritating after a while (Neill’s really good, though, as you’d expect). In turn, she repeatedly gets the brush off from Hurt’s initially mysterious fugitive Sam Farber, which only goes to fuel her obsessiveness (the difference here being that, when Sam does have time for her, he is amenable).

This mismatch of characters crossing paths and weaving in and out of minor altercations and each other’s lives takes up a good half of the picture. Less central characters include Rudiger Volger’s PI Philip Winter and a pair of bank robbers, the fate of whose appropriated funds is inextricably tied to Claire.

Despite the nominal threat established as a backdrop, this is not a frightening then near-future. And it isn’t one where tech overshadows life and liberty, or one where decay and pollution advance inexorably (despite the very ‘80s radiation count). Instead, dystopian demons are very much interiorised, and the emphasis is as much on the road trip of the mind, something the narration continually returns to (Neill’s Eugene Fitzpatrick has a very pedestrian imagination, so all he can do is follow his muse).

There are sequences here that flat-out don’t work. An attempt at screwball slapstick during a Tokyo episode rather falls on its face; Wenders is out of his element, but you appreciate his willingness to try it for size. There’s a very “World Music” attempt to impress upon us natural healing and knowledge versus the tunnel vision of the materialist, allopathic western model. As commendable as that may be, the results rather whiff of patronisation; Sam first has his eyes treated by wise Japanese ancient healing wisdom. Later, he is cured of his dreamtime issues by Aboriginal Australians, whom Sam’s father Henry (Max von Sydow) has helped immeasurably, we are told, in some sort of white-saviour way.

If Wenders is in danger of letting the material drift that bit too much, he gradually reels the focus back in during Part 2, subsequent to revealing Sam’s mission. Sam has a camera that takes pictures blind people can see, and he intends to return the footage he has been collecting to mother Jeanne Moreau (Lois Chiles pops up as his sister). Everyone arrives in the Outback, an ideal spot for cheap science fiction (all that desert) and an EM pulse goes off, leaving radio silence across the world as the characters pursue their respective obsessions uninterrupted. Von Sydow is an enormous boon to the picture, nursing curmudgeonly gruffness towards his offspring but genuine affection towards his wife. Hurt clearly relishes acting against him in their father-son friction; everyone raises their game.

Henry Farber: You’re now looking at the human soul. Singing to itself. To its own god.

It’s in Part 3 that Until the End of the World really comes into its own, however, doubling down on its key science-fiction concept. The camera can also be used to record and play back one’s own dreams, leading to addiction on the parts of Claire and Sam, gluttons for their own subconscious flights.

There’s something rather endearing about Wenders’ vision of an Outback community. Essentially, it’s a small-scale Womad, cosmopolitan in nature and presided over by a spirit of traditional (local) mores (David Gulpilil inevitably appears). The festival spirit is at its most self-conscious in the characters’ increasingly popular jamming sessions; this ought to be irritating and not a little embarrassing, but Wenders somehow achieves an alchemy and makes it work. It feels both seems seamless and germane (“The purpose of our journey had been so this music might blossom at the edge of what was possibly the end of the world”).

Something of Until the End of the World’s VR concept was used a few years later, to much grislier and queasier effect, in another millennial SF movie, Strange Days. Its dangers are occasionally voiced in on-the-nose fashion (“You think we want you walking through our dreams with your fancy cameras”), just as Neill’s voiceover can be a tad deadly (“Their dreams became black holes of isolation. Complete loss of reality”).

Nevertheless, the idea of grasping one’s elusive, ephemeral dream state and replaying it has considerable cachet, and Wenders weaves a hypnotic spell during this section of the picture. If there’s a failing, it’s that the renderings we see, in intentionally scrappy, grainy high-def video, suggest no reason for those involved to be quite so entranced. They’re almost wilfully mundane. But perhaps that has its own merit; dreams can only be entirely personal in intrinsic value, so seriously attempting to depict them, with all the CGI budget and the bizarreness of dream logic, and fluctuations of space and time, would be self-defeating (you’d have to go off at a complete tangent, à la Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind).

I must admit, I’d forgotten how ripe the “Green Space” coda is; Claire, through “her extraordinary vision”, has found herself “a place on a space observatory watching the oceans for pollution crimes”. Little Greta would be so proud! The weightlessness effects are every bit as convincing as NASA footage, though. And such rosy optimism definitely makes for an antidote to future doomsaying.

Man in Bar: Look at them! We’re on the eve of destruction and all they care about is laughing, drinking, carousing!

Of course, with thirty years hindsight, we know much better than to indulge such silly daydreams as Wim’s. Until the End of the World wasn’t so rapturously received and sort of drew a line under Wenders’ growing international reputation just as it had fully blossomed. He has continued to work prodigiously, across genres and forms, yet never quite finding the same audiences or feting as he received during his ‘80s zenith. As such, there might be good reason for regarding Until the End of the World as the end of his peak period. It’s certainly one that more than overcomes its occasional lapses to warrant the mantle of a classic.


Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Do you know that the leading cause of death for beavers is falling trees?

The Interpreter (2005) Sydney Pollack’s final film returns to the conspiracy genre that served him well in both the 1970s ( Three Days of the Condor ) and the 1990s ( The Firm ). It also marks a return to Africa, but in a decidedly less romantic fashion than his 1985 Oscar winner. Unfortunately the result is a tepid, clichéd affair in which only the technical flourishes of its director have any merit. The film’s main claim to fame is that Universal received permission to film inside the United Nations headquarters. Accordingly, Pollack is predictably unquestioning in its admiration and respect for the organisation. It is no doubt also the reason that liberal crusader Sean Penn attached himself to what is otherwise a highly generic and non-Penn type of role. When it comes down to it, the argument rehearsed here of diplomacy over violent resolution is as banal as they come. That the UN is infallible moral arbiter of this process is never in any doubt. The cynicism