IMDb user comments for
The End of Violence (1997) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Index

65 comments in total

---

20 out of 23 people found the following comment useful :-
Slow, slack, but still satisfying, 23 June 2001

Author: castipiani from Seattle, Washinton, USA

You don't turn to Wim Wenders when you're looking for nerve-tightening suspense. Though written (by Nicholas Klein, with Wenders) in paranoid-thriller form, the script lacks even a nubbin of McGuffin to anchor the narrative. Two stories run in parallel: Bill Pullman's an action-film producer gone missing after an attempt on his life; Gabriel Byrne's a NASA computer jock on loan to a mysterious satellite surveillance project. Just as yuppie cop Loren Dean is on the point of tying the two tales together, the movie's over, the plot unresolved.

Oh, well: Los Angeles (mainly Malibu, Santa Monica, and Griffith Park) looks great (cinematography Peter Przgoda), and Wenders has an uncanny ability to get actors to feel comfortable in their skins. The most notable skin in question is Traci Lind's: her role as a stunt-woman turned aspiring actress would have made her a star in a more mainstream movie.

If you're a Wenders fan, don't let the commercial failure of this film put you off: Compared to, say, 'Far Away, So Close' it's as electrifying as 'The 39 Steps.' And somehow, as usual, Wenders's almost childlike intensity of gaze makes you look harder, too. The aroma of the film lingers, even as its substance slides through your fingers like sand.

---

17 out of 19 people found the following comment useful :-
mmm. five is generous., 19 September 1998
Author: matt smiley from phoenix Arizona

How 'bout a four? Visually, there are some great moments. I think the most interesting scenes are those where there is no dialogue but the camera follows the characters as they inwardly contemplate what this all means (Bill Pullman, Andie McDowell). Unfortunately, we as the viewers are also given (too much) time to contemplate what it means. Everything is WAY too understated. The movie slows to a stop in many places. You start to like it (the romance with Kat and the investigator, the interaction of Bill Pullman's character and the Mexican-American people) and then it doesn't follow through. The dialogue at the film school, in which the characters give a monologue for a class is probably the most interesting dialogue. Some rap, some tell a story, some recite their own poetry. That was the most moving part of the movie. While Wenders has a important point to make, it doesn't come through clearly and the viewer is left uncaring, uninterested. Maybe the only thing that could have helped the End of Violence is more good ole fashioned...violence <g>.

---

17 out of 22 people found the following comment useful :-
The State of Control, 25 April 1999

Author: anonymous from Denmark

I watched this movie a few times, and I have met very few people who liked it as much as I did. I see it as an artful expression of all the critical thoughts in philosophy, sociology etc. that show how genocide, ultra-violence and fascist methods of population-control can develop out of all the promises of order, justice and peace the the modern state makes to its citizens. Also, the dialogue has absolutely superb moments, as when Mike the fugitive of the state says to his wife confronts his ex-wife with the words "Who can I turn myself into? Well I see who you turned yourself into...". A lot of people seem to dislike the loose ends and unexplained shifts that the characters make - but I say, in that very absence of rigid structure the film makes a parallel to the manifest ambivalence of modern life as a citizen: Our greatest protector is also our greatest threat.

---

11 out of 13 people found the following comment useful :-
Too much ambition, 5 April 2001

Author: valadas from Caldas da Rainha, Portugal

A film producer who escapes death by murder and chooses to lead a simple life afterwards, a group of good Mexican gardeners, a second-rate movie actress who becomes jobless, a police officer who is not happy with the filing of his case, a Salvadoran maid whose family has been shot by death squads, a NASA employee who knows too much and his old father who doesn't want to exchange his old typewriter by a computer, a mysterious project of ending up violence in the world by putting everyone under surveillance, with all those ingredients what could a movie director have made? Surely an excellent movie. This one however is too much ambitious and produces rather poor results in comparison with that ambition. Where the contrast between dream and reality, love and greed, poetry and vulgarity could have been explored we are left with a story not bad in itself but not very deep and not especially moving.

---

14 out of 19 people found the following comment useful :-
It takes violence to snuff violence, 26 January 2004
Author: prairiem from Valier, Montana

I'm not surprised that a child would not understand this movie. To me it was very meaningful, but only in terms of lived experience in jobs and politics. It's really "Brave New World," where authority figures keep order by putting up cameras everywhere and intervening to eliminate anyone who is disorderly or criminal. Violence is a huge preoccupation, but only tolerated as make-believe -- but the make-believe gets confused with real violence. Control, transgression, power are the pivots of the well-to-do. Ashcroft stuff.

But the Mexican and immigrant families offer a warmer, truer alternative. In the end, they are more powerful because they are free and can think. The Kinko's episode, in which the police are defeated from taking control by their own preconceptions, is a good example. As underlings, laborers, the Mexicans understand what's at stake and they are everywhere, invisible to their employers.

The intellectual technician doesn't catch on until it's too late.

I'm told that what I saw was a re-cut and that the early version was indeed chaotic with a lot of loose ends. All I can say is that now this is one of the videos I rewatch and ponder.

---

14 out of 21 people found the following comment useful :-
Such beauty...!, 6 December 1998
Author: anonymous from Toronto

This is an astounding movie, and as others have noted, it is precisely the kind of movie that passes most people by because it rocks so gently as to be almost imperceptible.

The first time I saw this, I was disappointed. 'Until the End of the World', to me, is a brilliant piece of work, with more beauty, reverie, and complexity than any ten average films put together.

So...I was ready for some heady stuff with 'End'. But the movie seemed to be lost, missing in action.

But six months later I watched it on video, and I realized I was looking at an entirely different movie.

Then I watched it again...and again, and again, until I'd seen the thing ten times, including one where I only listened to the film, to see if I was simply addicted to Wim's luminous visuals.

What you realize is that this film is cooking up some very threatening ideas about the quality and nature of love, and the companion six degrees of violence and hatred. It is really about the way in which fear and love pulse in contrary and similar ways, much like particle and wave, dancing together.

It's also a fantastic critique the "confederacy of dunces" and the manner in which we manufacture enemies to suit our paranoia.

I must say that there are few directors that move me as much as Wim Wenders, and I have to confess that I have cried many times over the beauty and grace of some of the scenes and visuals in this movie. Much like Robert Altman or Atom Egoyan, Wenders cares about people, believes in their struggles, and he creates tension that moves them, at least temporarily, to understand their natures more fully.

A masterpiece, if a masterpiece means your heart moves even slightly...

PS Ry Cooder's soundtrack is brilliant!

---

6 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
Controlling street crime in L.A., 8 September 2006

Author: jotix100 from New York

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Wim Wenders "The End of Violence" is a film that evokes the director's own work. Also, we are reminded, somewhat, of Antonioni's "Blow Up" because of the elements the director has brought to the movie. At any rate, this is an enigmatic piece of cinema that will divide the audience. Some will love it, some will hate it; there's no two ways about it. It might help to take a second viewing, as things will, no doubt, fall into place.

The film focuses on Mike Max, a powerful Hollywood producer, who we meet at the beginning of the story. Mr. Max, like all key players in the industry must be wired to all kinds of devices in order to keep on top of the movies, the trend, and the gossip, associated with making movies. When his wife Page wants to talk to him, she calls him to his poolside perch to announce she is leaving him.

The other important character in the film is Ray Bering, a laconic man we watch going to an observatory where he works. There are a lot of monitors in the place, and we realize Ray is spying on what's happening in the outside world, a sort of Big Brother Voyeur, if you will. When Mike Max is kidnapped by two hired assassins and he is taking under some highway overpasses, it registers in one of Ray's monitors, but being so far from the scene, he can't determine who it is. Ray believes that by controlling the street crime, the violence will disappear.

Max, who didn't die, is found by a group of Mexican gardeners who take him to the home of one of them without asking him questions. This proves to be Max's salvation because he stays out of harm's way. To make matters worse, the producer was told at the start of the story a lengthy FBI file has been found in his email. Mike Max, who is producing a movie, now in production, can't prevent Page, who realizes her husband might be dead, to take over the film and his business.

There are a few other narratives going on, but suffice it to say, they all come together at the end, as we realize what has really happened. Wim Wenders, who made this film much earlier, seems to have pointed out to last year's "Crash", with its multiple stories happening also in Los Angeles. Pascal Rabaud's photography gives a different look to this L.A. in the picture. The music of Ry Cooder, who went to collaborate with Mr. Wenders, gives the film another dimension with its enigmatic score. Nicholas Klein's wrote the screen play with Mr. Wenders.

Bill Pullman has great opportunities in the film. This fine actor never ceases to amaze for his range. Gabriel Byrne is seen as Ray Bering, the man overlooking the street crime he wants to eliminate. Traci Lind and Loren Dean are fine as well. Anddie MacDowell appears as Page, the ambitious wife who takes over when her husband disappears. Legendary director Sam Fuller has a small part as Ray's father. The ensemble cast does a wonderful job.

Wim Wenders directed with his usual fine style this moody film that is worth a look by any movie fan.

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
A movie producer is kidnapped and goes on a silly adventure..., 30 December 2006

Author: fedor8 (fedor8@yahoo.com) from Serbia

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

"The End Of Violence"!!! How grand-sounding! Another hopelessly pretentious and clumsily made drama as only Wim Wenders can make it. From all the German directors who ever made it outside the confines of Germany he is easily the worst. At the very beginning he gives us a taste of nonsense to come: Pullman informs us that he went into movie-making because as a child he was afraid(!) of movies (and people in general). First of all, I've never heard of "movie-phobia", and even if such a person existed outside of Wenders's silly fantasy world they would probably end up in a lunatic asylum at best, and not as a successful yuppie. The next nonsense is Byrne telling a friend that the reason he doesn't drive is that he wants to have as little to do with modern technology as possible; meanwhile, he works in an observatory, surrounded by amazing high-tech gadgetry! Driving a car, by comparison, is like living in a cave! This wasn't meant to be Wenders's humour but an attempt to define Byrne as a complex and fascinating character. The attempt failed. After Pullman, the hot-shot producer, more-or-less mysteriously survives the kidnap and attempted murder, he is virtually adopted by a Latino family! And works there as a gardener or something for months to come! Weird, yes, but in a dumb way. All the while it is so obvious that the bald grim-faced guy is responsible for all the nasty goings-on. Then there is the detective who starts his investigation by flirting with a stunt woman(!)-turned-actress and later professes his love to her even though they still barely know each other! After they have sex, she rewards him with info as to the whereabouts of the missing Pullman. It's all so silly, so inane... The same detective hugs McDowell (Pullman's wife) during the interview! In between all the absurd and far-fetched goings-on there are the obligatory "deep European" moments: we have a black woman recite "poetry" - or modern poetry - which is so painfully PC, not to mention pointless, stupid and so very dull. After she finishes her pretentious little poem (about her father playing with her vagina) the stunt woman approaches her and says that she never met her daddy. How deep is that??! Later on, a badly-written black character raps more poetry and gets an applause for it; we later get to see his penis, which is also obligatory in "deep European art" films. Then, what's the point of that fight in the bar?! Utterly pointless. And what's with that dialogue between Pullman and McDowell at the end? What's all that nonsense about? Dumb, dumb, dumb... The mark of every bad director is to have children behave like adults, so why should Wim be an exception? The little Latino girl philosophizes about not having a chance to see her dead father: "but we can't always get what we want"; this, coming from the mouth of a 7 year-old! She also says something in the last scene but by then I was almost half-asleep so I don't remember it.

But what can one honestly expect from a person who makes a movie that is partly scripted by Bono(?!?!?!?!?) and in which he casts a rank amateur such as Milla Jovovich, in a piece of garbage known as "Million Dollar Hotel"?! It is monumentally ironic and arrogant that Wim makes a brief mock-attack at Schwarzenegger early on in the movie; the latter may be a bad actor, but his contribution to the world of film is already about a hundred times that of Wim's. Wim even attempts brief self-satire (if I may call it that) by having the Hungarian director (Kier) make a sarcastic remark about making a mistake to leave Europe to make movies. In reality, Wim should thank Satan, with whom he must have a contract, that he ever got a chance to direct at all, let alone for Hollywood. As is plain to see, I have used many exclamation marks in this review; the movie is full of absurdities, bad duologue's, and is rather pointless. But the "!" is more a reflection of my hatred towards talentless, pretentious European directors than this particular movie - as insipid as it doubtlessly is. Leonard Maltin actually refers to this film as "gorgeous to look at" but even he wasn't so gullible to give it a good rating.

---

7 out of 10 people found the following comment useful :-
A near-masterpiece for the right person, 7 October 1998

Author: Jesse Thompson (hipcheck) from United States

No, this is not the perfect film for everyone. In fact, it may be the sort of thing that you need to be in the right mood for... Then again, there are those that loved "City of Angels", but thought that "Wings of Desire" was slow and boring.

This is the anti-Joel Silver film. Forget the explosions, "End" is clearly disdainful to the successful formulas that make Hollywood films work. The pace, while not as slow and deliberate as "Paris, Texas", still takes its time, and allows the viewer to explore all sides--not just of a shot or a line, but a moment. This is one of Wenders' great strengths, his disregard for hammering things home. He has such a poetic sense of subtlety, that very few film-makers have ever matched it. To some, this will feel like plodding, and misdirection, but it is a choice, a very clear choice, that works perfectly in what it tries to accomplish.

There aren't any elements of "End" that I thought could have been improved much. The dialogue seemed a bit rushed in spots, but technically, everything else is terrific. The ensemble cast complements itself well, there are some great cameos, such as Sam Phillips accompanying a hand-held tape player, and the soundtrack ia gorgeous. The themes are as rich as apropos as can be, and the visuals are so well thought-out they could have come from Kubrick.

This is a slow-paced, heavy, convoluted film. My vote for film of the year.

---

5 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
A game for pseudo-intellectuals - and it's terrible!, 9 June 2007

Author: Martin Bradley (MOscarbradley@aol.com) from Derry, Ireland

A movie about the business of making movies in all its vacuity and of recording things on camera. This is Wim Wenders' "Le Mepris" and his "Rear Window", (it's all about looking and not about seeing), and it's full of movie references. Sometimes they are about the only thing to distract you from all the ennui and the lack of anything remotely interesting happening up on the screen. In place of believable characters and a decent script or lines you might want to listen to Wenders fills his screen with images that are supposed to engage us on a movie-buff level. The film's like a game pseudo-intellectuals play; you fill in the blanks and if you can guess the better film the blanks come from, all the better, you get brownie points. In other words, this is pretty terrible, the kind of unmitigated disaster only a great director could make when he starts believing his own hype. I mean, Wenders can't lay the blame entirely on the cack-handed script; after all, he co-wrote the original story with script writer Nicholas Klein. I was going to say it goes deeper than that, (or aspires to), but deep isn't really a word you want to use when reviewing this pile of horse dung. OK, it looks terrific; what more can I say? Oh, except he talked the legendary Samuel Fuller into appearing in it and he's terrible, too.

---

---

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user comments
Your vote history