StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Aiden Melton The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

The_Film_Cricket 'Until the End of the World' is a disassembled mess that lays a lot of plot points on the table but never bothers to put them all together. It is directed by Wim Wenders, a specialist in movies that start out with mysterious strangers and gradually involves us in their plight.This very long movie starts off rather well: A nuclear satellite has been knocked out of earth's orbit and his heading for earth. A young woman (Solveig Dommartin) is on her way to be with a man who is not her boyfriend. Along the way she meets a man (William Hurt) who is being chased by some rather tough characters.From there the movie is a long series of travels from on continent to another picking up things that we think will be important to the story. Eventually we end up in Australia where Hurt's father (Max Von Sydow) is working on a cure for the blind. Ho-hum. What does it all matter when the end of the world hangs over their heads.I just saw "Last Night" another movie the about approaching apocalypse. That movie was about real characters and asks what they would do in this situation. This too long with too much plot.I like Wenders style of taking characters and having the patience to develop their story rather then tell us everything them play it out. This movie does that but it means nothing. It is all a confused jigsaw puzzle seemingly containing pieces it can't use.

Voyou Nobodysbusiness I went to see that film with a Wenders' die hard fan. When we left, it was quite easy for her to recognise... That was utter rubbish.Paradoxically, she was bored all along while I was not, as I was busy laughing at loud at the innumerable ridiculous moments. The thing is, because Mr Wenders thinks he is smart, or deep, or whatever nonsense, he thinks he can make an SF oeuvre without a look at any earlier material in the genre. Of course he failed. His vision of the future is laughable in every aspect and detail.Into this conceptual and visual disaster, put a 10 minutes plot that drags on for hours. No amount of acting ability can save that recipe. Even the great Jeanne Moreau was wasted in this.The only redeeming moments, for me, came from the short parts of E. Mitchell and Chick Ortega, who for some reason seemed to really enjoy being there, and from a few beautifully filmed scenes here and there. Their worth is only by comparison to the general ineptitude, though, and in no way would justify watching this perfect specimen of turkey.

ptunes I guess the question you have to ask yourself if considering taking on this film is, Do I want to spend almost 5 hours of my life on this? The conception of the film is ambitious and brilliant, it covers a huge amount of ground. It's visually stunning, and the choice of music and its melding with scenes and moods is inspired - especially Ray Davies' 'Thank You for the Days' whenever it appears. But does the film actually work? Unfortunately not. And the main reason for this, for a native English speaker, is that we have non-native speakers of English being directed by a non-native speaker of English. Although novelist Peter Carey had a hand in the writing, he obviously didn't help Wenders with the directing. So many of the lines are badly delivered, and much of the acting is wooden. Even actors of the stature of Jeanne Moreau and Max von Sydow can't deliver lines in English without good direction. Maybe it all sounded good to Wim, but sorry Wim, it doesn't work for Anglophones. Even William Hurt's and Sam Neill's lines often fall flat. If you speak German, try the German version - it sounded better to me. Otherwise, why not spend the time watching 'Wings of Desire' TWICE, or watch three of Wenders' great early films? They are much more rewarding.

eluhnabroad I quite enjoyed this movie, for the most part; especially the near-future, global-electronic-village touches (the Beijing memorial in the background drew a big laugh when I saw it in the theatre). Unfortunately, just as one story reaches a denouement, a subplot emerges and drags out into yet another story arc. It's like a trilogy crammed into one movie. By the third reboot, I was too tired to enjoy it much and wondered when or if the movie would ever end. It's a shame, because the characters are very likable, and each story is entertaining; but it becomes too much and too long of a good thing. For this reason, three 8s add up to a 6. You might enjoy this movie more if you split your viewing into three parts.