Peereddi I was totally surprised at how great this film.You could feel your paranoia rise as the film went on and as you gradually learned the details of the real situation.

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Lucia Ayala It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Carl S Lau "Faraway, So Close!" is a very confusing movie if one has either not seen its predecessor, "Wings of Desire," or knows something about that movie. I was in that state when I first viewed "Faraway, So Close!" and could only think that I was watching an artsy movie. Fortunately, the movie is now available on DVD in a widescreen anamorphic version with the director's commentary of Wim Wenders. The movie began in black and white and seemed to morph every now and then into color that had me wondering whether or not I had a defective DVD. Eventually, I figured out, as the movie was running, that this was intentional with the black and white sequences depicting the angel(s) observing humans. In the meantime, I managed to miss much of the subtlties of the movie that were only revealed from the lips of Wim Wenders in his running audio commentary. With a backdrop of Berlin, the movie was filmed in German. Fortunately, there are English subtitles and it is sometimes odd when the dialog actually breaks into English. As Wenders points out, this was his third movie with Nastassja Kinski that began with her very first movie in 1975, "The Wrong Movement," and was followed by the 1984 "Paris, Texas." Spaced approximately 10 years apart and with "Faraway, So Close" in 1993, Wenders mentioned that it is now time to do a fourth picture with Nastassja. One can only hope that it materializes.The basic story has to do with the protagonist as Cassiel, the actor Otto Sander, taking human form from his previous angelic state in which he can only observe and sympathize. An event propels his wishful transformation into the human dilemma. Wim Wenders said that this film was a continuation of "Wings of Desire" and not a sequel. It is probably splitting hairs because I do not readily understand the difference, if any. Nastassja Kinski has the major supporting role of Raphaela and is always shown in black and white. Raphaela becomes Cassiel's, always present, angel. It is a very difficult role to pull off because Nastassja only has her voice (in German), her facial expressions, her hands, and her body movements to bring her character to life. Her on screen presence appears natural and effortless. It is nothing less than a superb performance of a first rate actress. But it is up to Otto Sander to carry the movie. The supporting cast is first rate.My third viewing of the film was an experience. 146 minutes passes relatively quickly. The film is dripping with intensity and is larger than life. Wim Wenders' vision and its execution is astonishing and will reverberate through time because it captures the essence of life and death. It is a movie director's awesome tour de force.

patita-1 I didn't love "Far Away,So Close!"like"wings of desire" but some of the concept of the previous film is still there.The city is Berlin after the wall collapsed but the people seem still divided.Casiel(OttoSander) became human accidentally and he really does not belong in this city,this segment of the film is well made but i did not liked others aspects of FASC,Wenders seems disoriented because he want to tell so many stories at the same time that he only achieves in prolonging the movie. I liked when Cassiel is in company with Raphaela(Nastassja Kinski in her most ethereal role)and how they communicate each other through telepathy.Wings of desire focused on Damiel,FASC on Cassiel,the next time(to end the trilogy?)should focus on the beautiful and enigmatic Raphaela,But "Far Away so Close!"is still a worth film to watch.

vcravens To enjoy this movie, view it as a poem. It relies on the language of the heart and asks its viewers to see it as it truly is, through the same myopic eyes to try and understand a dream. There is the duality of existence we all face, mirrored through the experience of an angel who falls to earth, who falls precisely because he can no longer contain himself within the restrictions of his identity. The central metaphor of this movie is about the passion, truth and love we are all promised, should we choose to live life as we were meant. There are the difficulties of trying to live out our singular purpose, the disappointments of relation, the trials of being part of something greater than self. In all these, there is also the beauty inherent, and ultimate understanding. The triumph of beautiful release, when we realise that all that has gone before is both behind us and a part of what we are, and the relief of becoming an individual, and understanding and embracing aspirations gained and lost.

kryan-1 I recommend this film to all the jaded and cynical people of the world. It will touch the core of your heart and give you a spiritual yearning for that which we cannot see. When Cassiel falls to earth he can finally touch, feel, hear and experience the feelings of loneliness and joy. He finds his existence on earth in Berlin difficult and finds it hard to comprehend the swift passing of time and the limited outlook of the individual who can only see their own reality in how it affects them. Natassja Kinski who plays Angel Raphaela is on hand to offer comfort and solace to Cassiel when he begins to despair. The sweeping contrasts between black & white and colour add profound depth to this movie, as do the real people who play themselves : Gorbachev, Lou Reed and Peter Falk. Wim Wenders who directed this movie is a foresighted genius of compassion and ethereal visions.