Since I am a Berlin-based photographer and film enthusiast, Palermo Shooting was very appealing to me: Wim Wenders, a key figure of contemporary German cinema, shooting a story revolving a photographer learning to see anew? What could go wrong? Well, pretty much everything, I'm afraid.There are problems with Campino's delivery of the lines (insufficient acting or unbelievable dialog?), with a soundtrack that feels like an ipod on shuffle (and hey, I love Portishead as much as anyone), and with the general rush of scenes. The same filmmaker that twenty years ago made wonders directing with restraint (How to forget the cabin scenes of Paris Texas, for instance?) is nowadays lost in camera movements, cinematography effects, and 'dynamic' editing.However, the main problem of the movie lies on how its thesis actually contradicts the film itself. Here we have a photographer, Finn, who at the beginning of the movie believes that photography can just depict surfaces because that's the only thing there is to reality. The film, therefore, will follow him as he learns otherwise: that the things we cannot see shape our experiences and understandings. How ironic –and disappointing-, that he gets his final lesson from a guy painted in white who IS Death. And how disappointing, too, that when our hero overcomes his fear to Life by embracing Death, Wenders has to actually show us how they hug. There's no subtlety, no space for the images of the film to mean more than what they are; they feel clichéd and, sadly, superficial.Maybe Wenders should now look for his own Palermo and, instead of having characters delivering grandiloquent speeches about the unseen, show us what lurks under the visibility of things, because Palermo Shooting is shot with the same disregard for the revealing qualities of the photographic/cinematographic image, as Finn shots his fashion campaigns. Just surface.

Like many films, I failed to catch the opening credits for "Palermo Shooting", and until the end I knew nothing about the creators. I was pretty surprised, both in a positive and negative way.The frame was just perfect, in the best possible way. Excellent shots, camera positions, strong and yet gently muted colors, beautiful scenery and filming locations... The visual aspect of the movie is pure art and eye candy. The story, well, in it's basis it's pretty intriguing. As a photographer, I could easily identify my self with the main character. Also, death has ever been a complex, a source of unanswered questions and mysticism and it's one of life's eternal dilemmas.So, it wasn't all that surprising that Wenders wrote and directed this film. He is a brilliant director. However, the acting ruined "Palermo Shooting", which could easily get close to perfection. The main actor, self-named "Campino" (what sort of a name is that...?) was anything but convincing. The same could be said for Inga Busch, and the final kiss of death was Dennis Hopper's performance. A story that was deep and complex in it's core, turned out to be a watery semi entertaining shot in the air. Why Wim, Why...? Overall, visually perfect, and as for the rest, forget it as soon as possible.

image - still and moving - digital - film - panorama - window - painting. how is the world described in photographic/image capture? who sees? framing. who is seeing? what is seen? what is shown? dreams. i am a camera. this is maybe an over extension of the metaphor, but clearly states the idea of the seer seeing. audience. and the seer showing. story through experience, not always linear or real. and always - great views of the city. great mix of language & languages. vision. so much feeling, showing and not telling. faces, moments, real, unreal... "I watch it for a little while = I love to watch things on TV" this was interesting to see in las vegas, of all the places in the world.

This is easily Wim Wender's most pretentious movie to date, and that's saying a lot given that Wenders is perhaps the most pretentious director of his generation. There is so much symbolic Mumbo-Jumbo I don't know where to begin: Dungeons. Coffins. Dead people. Ghosts. Including Lou Reed as a black-and-white specter of himself. Flocks of sheep. A shape-shifting city skyline. Hooded strangers, shooting arrows and causing crashes. All of which I have seen before, and with more panache: In "Dark City", in Cronenberg's "Crash", Paul Auster's "Lulu on the Bridge", Tom Tykwer's "Winter Sleepers", even in TV's "Lost". I'm not even mentioning "The Devil's Advocate". At the height of his self-importance, Wenders has Dennis Hopper, in the part of Death himself, make a speech about the merits of analog photography. Sounds ridiculous? Go figure. But the weakest link is Wender's choice of Campino as photographer Finn Gilbert, the lead character. Campino, a German rock star in his day job, may be photogenic in an aging toy boy way, but an actor he sure is not. Anything he says sounds like a line from a script, and the script is weak enough to begin with. Wenders asks too much of him, and too little of his co-lead Giovanna Mezzogiornio, a fine actress restricted to sleepy smiles and sullen glances in this movie. Charming guest appearances by Jana Pallaske as a feisty arts student, Inga Busch as a sexy swimming instructor in Ugg boots and a bathing suit, and by the divine Milla Jovovich as her glamorous self. Nice enough soundtrack, featuring Bonnie Prince Billy, Nick Cave, and The Velvet Underground. Watch with your eyes closed.