German director Wim Wenders will always be known as part of the celebrated triumvirate of filmmakers–along with Rainer Werner Fassbinder and Werner Herzog–who comprised the famous German New Wave of the 1970s. Such Wenders classics as “Alice in the Cities” (1973), “Kings of the Road” (1976) and “The American Friend” (1977) are still being studied in film schools around the world. In the 1980s, he came to the U.S. for a few years, where he directed the haunting “Paris, Texas” in 1983, before returning to Germany to make the spiritually packed “Wings of Desire” in 1988.
Wenders’ most recent film, “The End of Violence,” which is his first U.S. movie in many years, is a complex tale about an action movie producer (Bill Pullman) and a surveillance expert (Gabriel Byrne) who experience serious changes of heart about violence once they come a bit too close to it in their work.
At 52, Wenders is a thoughtful and soft-spoken man who enjoys drawing circular designs on a pad of paper as he thinks and responds to questions.
Q–Are you pessimistic about the future of cinema?
A–Not at all. At least not now. I was very pessimistic around the late 1970s, when I made “The State of Things.” I didn’t think movies would survive this century. And how wrong I was. Movies are doing better because there’s such a big variety. The B-movie that had entirely disappeared exists again, in the form of the independents.
Q–Suddenly, there are a lot of European and Asian directors coming here to make big-budget movies. Is it easier for them now than it was 20 years ago?
A–It depends on how well they adapt. I mean, Wolfgang Petersen (“Air Force One”) is probably the best action director in Hollywood today. He made “Das Boot” in Germany, but he’s actually become an American director.
Q–What’s the risk for a foreign director when he comes to America?
A–It’s different in each country. In Germany, it is risky, because the Germans live very strangely with success. As soon as somebody’s really successful in Germany, everybody’s bashing him, which is strange. So if you become really successful in America–which I didn’t–Germans tend to hold it against you.
Q–With American studios making larger and more expensive films, it seems that these films contain more violence. Why did you choose to address this issue of violence in your new film?
A–Linked to that question of violence is another question, which is the whole issue of what movies are about and what they’re made of. In other words, can they only be about what they show? Most movies today are strictly about what you can see. Whereas, in the history of movies, most films showed more powerfully what they were about by leaving it out.
Violence, which was once such an important subject in American movies, is no longer the subject. Films today don’t deal with violence. They just blast us. If you watch “Taxi Driver” again, violence is thematic from the first to the last frame. Most movies today just pour violence over everything, but it’s not the subject.
Q–Can you think of films other than “Taxi Driver” that address this question of violence?
A–For me, “Pulp Fiction” did it too, with a remarkable irony and almost Brechtian distance. This irony, of course, is lacking in the many imitators, who weren’t able to successfully walk that tightrope.
Q–What about some of the Western directors?
A–“The Wild Bunch” was a ballet of violence, but different from today, because violence wasn’t a consumer article back then. I think it has to do with the link between violence and special effects, which are mostly used to produce violence, which creates a spiral, because you always have to top last year’s effects. It was unthinkable 20 years ago for audiences to go see movies for their special effects. Now, it’s the biggest highlight. You’re invited to come just to see the special effects. Twenty years ago, we were trying to hide the effect. Now it’s the opposite. And it’s the same with violence.
Q–Perhaps it’s the special effects that make it easier for audiences to swallow greater amounts of violence. I mean, when we see the White House being annihilated in “Independence Day,” we’ve already seen how it was done on some cable show. Is violence now a guilty pleasure?
A–Probably, but there’s a discrepancy, because while we are able to distinguish this violence in movies and really enjoy it, in real life, we are more afraid of it than ever.
