The End of Violence | | Cast : | Traci Lind, Rosalind Chao, Bill Pullman, Andie MacDowell, K. Todd Freeman, Gabriel Byrne | | Director : | Wim Wenders | | Studio : | Mgm/Ua Studios | | Format : | Color, Widescreen, Closed-captioned | | Released Date : | September 12, 1997 | | DVD Released Date : | May 01, 2001 | | Language : | Unknown (Dubbed), English (Dubbed), French (Dubbed), French (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled), English (Original Language), French (Original Language) | | Audience Rating : | R (Restricted) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON | Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | September 26, 2004 | | Summary | I'm a computer scientist. This is Hollywood. | Content
 | Painfully, Wim Wenders pushes us through two hours of convoluted story, comatose characters, and an array of random lines all attempting to connect at some point. What begins as a political thriller slowly devolves into a poorly executed social rampage on lies, privacy, law, and corruption. Nothing in this film makes any sort of coherent sense.
Byrne plays a computer nerd that is searching for that shred of human decency through the lens of a Government issued spying device that currently surrounds Los Angeles. Bill Pullman plays a business Hollywood producer that will put money before any living soul. Somehow, these two have met in another life and this is where our story begins. Thankfully, Wenders decided not to show us any pre-story, so we are forced to watch the consequences of an unseen action. So, struggling to keep up, I watch as an unused Andie MacDowell stumbles through her lines obviously not comfortable with her character. Then, out of the middle of nothing, I witness the detective that should be solving the surrounding case instead trying to fall in love with a struggling actress that Pullman gave a big break to. This is the perfect example of random lines trying to connect, but never do.
Mix in this big Government conspiracy and you have the entire half-eaten pie known as The End of Violence. Reminiscent of a fever dream, Wenders tries intentionally to build this film into a budding social commentary on Hollywood and the control of our Government in a very 1984-esque fashion, but fails. One of the biggest failures of this film is his use of poetry to do ... well ... something. Whenever I thought that I was on the right path, that the film was suddenly going to come alive, I was quickly sidetracked by narrations from other characters in the form of beat-poetry. What?
This is a pure example of what happens when ideas are more powerful in the mind than on the screen. I could see where Wenders wanted to go with this film, but unfortunately, it never got there. You could tell that he was one of those kids in school that would write a report about a very heated topic, but never really put any meat on the issues. He would just jumble through the motions, hoping to hit a chord with someone ... anyone.
What a sad, sad film.
Grade: * out of ***** |
| Rating |   | | Date | September 18, 2004 | | Summary | The end of cliches | Content
 | Does a movie about Hollywood and all its cliches, have to be filled itself with cliches?
The geeky technician with the pocket protector, the lonely computer scientist, the powerful b-movie producer, the beautiful hispanic maid, the handsome cop, the spook dressed in black, all beautifully lit and photographed.
The b-actress plays herself, model-turned-actress plays a trophy wife, wooden actor plays movie producer... art or reality?
Hollywood spoof or pretentious commentary?
The typical Hollywood casting of plastic, shallow, characters, most of them playing themselves, wonder how their world is turned upside down by some powerful and unknown force driven by a dark secret; characters fueled by their own unrealistic motivations.
A journey of self-discovery that leads nowhere.
The slow, poetic first-person narrative that worked on 'Wings of Desire,' 'Faraway so close' and specially "The million Dollar Hotel" can't help this meandering, failed movie.
|
| Rating |      | | Date | February 10, 2004 | | Summary | The End of Freedom | Content
 | In George Orwell's masterpiece "1984", Oceania is one of three new-world-order totalitarian governments that are in a perpetually mutual state of war. Oceania's propaganda motto is, "War is Peace", "Freedom is Slavery", "Ignorance is Strength". The Ministry of Truth, where the protagonist works, controls the dissemination of all information, and constantly rewrites the historical record. "Newspeak" is the re-formulated and politically correct language used in this process, designed to obliterate all original thought and any past or present events perceived as adverse to the health of the State. Government surveillance is everywhere, even in the "private" rooming houses for example, where all residents are forced into morning calisthenics under two-way television monitoring by BB - Big Brother. This reviewer can't know where Wenders got his inspiration for this way under-recognized film, but one must conclude that he was deeply aware of Orwell's and other such work. After seeing this film in 1998, this collector prematurely dismissed it, perhaps having little appreciation of how prescient it would shortly become; and having considerable disenchantment with Wenders' previous artsy, unrealistic and truly awful "Wings of Desire". Yet despite this reviewer's negative view of "Wings", the themes and method of depiction in "The End of Violence" became, in retrospect, increasingly haunting. One could consider this film as being a more nuanced and updated "1984," or a more constrained and intellectualized "Enemy of the State" (another great movie). The pacing is just the opposite of Enemy's frantic activities, rather being (almost maddeningly) leisurely and surrealistic. The basic plot is this: A computer development expert (Gabriel Byrne) is deeply involved in the test development of a highly classified FBI prototype in Los Angeles, a system involving city-wide surveillance webcams and spy satellites to constantly monitor all citizen activities. Developing major ethical concerns about the use of this system to commit political murders, and knowing he personally is being monitored, he tries clandestinely to email the secret details of the system to an acquaintance, a casual though (in desperation) trusted film producer who probably has the public connections that could facilitate action as a whistle-blower. In the parallel and converging plot lines, the film producer (Bill Pullman) realizes he is in mortal peril when he survives a bungled (and attempted disguised) assassination attempt. Confused as to why, but knowing his life is in danger, he flees to anonymous refuge with a mom-and-pop Mexican gardener troupe, from whence, with the occasional help of troupe members, he conducts his own pathetically limited fact finding. He discovers that the perception (by whomever) that he has come into possession of a highly classified FBI report via his email has motivated the assassination attempt, thereby forcing him to go into hiding indefinitely. This is not science fiction! And this film doesn't go far enough! The technology for this sort of stuff exists today. All that's lacking is access of and coordination between the information pools and data bases which already exist or are coming into existence. There is feverish pursuit for such programs through enabling legislation like the "Patriot Act". One hears terms like ECHELON, CARNIVORE, Total Information Awareness, and "facial recognition technology." There are spy satellites too; as one character says: "Watching the skies from the earth is easy. Watching the earth from the skies is more difficult." There are spycams everywhere on major highways, at traffic-lights, gas stations, shopping malls, and ATM machines. Using current or developing computer technology, such programs propose to expand and integrate these data sources to support an ever-widening surveillance network. In Wenders' parlance, the result is an "end of violence" - by whatever means necessary! The film's leisurely, surrealistic quality makes it all the more chilling. Wenders makes one feel that if an "Oceania" is not already here, we are heading pell-mell in that direction: His ending prognosis for freedom as we have known it is not very upbeat. Some viewers may be put off by Wenders' artsy techniques. For example, he likes to keep viewers off balance by cutting abruptly away in the middle of an important event to one of the other several interconnected threads, then revisiting that event after the fact to examine the consequences. But Wenders assumes viewers of his films have some measure of intelligence (a dangerous presumption perhaps?) and can follow these multiply inter-connected threads. To those who must have every detail spelled out in sequence by the numbers, with spectacular (frequently impossible?) action sequences like car chases, gun battles or explosions, this film is emphatically not for you! Perhaps your viewing habits should be limited to flicks written by 13-year-olds for 13-year-olds. This dual-sided disc has the theatrical release widescreen (2.35 to 1.00) presentation on one side, a standard pan-and-scan on the other. The widescreen's day and night color, detail, and composition cinematography is breathtakingly beautiful, a work of the highest cinematic artistic merit! Stereo sound is excellent and at times startling. The intellectually-challenged or those with their heads in the sand can skip this thoughtful, highly entertaining and challenging film. |
| Rating |  | | Date | December 12, 2003 | | Summary | Political toast with no beef to back it | Content
 | Empty space, this movie has no coherent story. In the end, we are told that the government is watching everybody, but somehow, our hero gummed up the works before he disappeared into the night. Awful, preposterous, garbage. If I did not know any better, I might think it is a video game, it barely resembles a movie. |
| Rating |   | | Date | February 10, 2003 | | Summary | Eh... | Content
 | Too self-consciously artsy-fartsy for my taste. This is the sort of movie pretentious people love since it allows them to make a big show of pretending to appreciate something "challenging" that a general audience would not "get". If you don't have that sort of agenda when watching a movie, however, you might want to stay away from this one. It's deliberately obscure in many places, to the point of self-indulgence and beyond. There was enough in it for me to care vaguely about the Pullman and Byrne characters, but I still felt like I had just wasted 2 hours by the end. It seemed much longer. |
|