Amanda Yates
Wim Wenders:
�Why Do You Make Films
Note: it seems a bit strange writing a response
paper that rivals the length of the essay in question, but Ill disregard the
notion for the sake of discussion.
Wim Wenders written
response to the question Why Do You Make Films is less about his final
concluding statement than it is about his own personal meditations on the
question itself. He does indeed give
what could be pinned down as the ultimate answer, (to create) a record of
somethings existence so it doesnt disappear, but this seems trite and
overly summarized. Perhaps it is this
simple for him, he just wants to record what exists with no manipulation of
natural variables but I think there is more to making films for him than can
be described in a few lines of a questionnaire reply.
The
depth of his feelings on the subject is alluded to by his attitude to the
question itself. He opens by calling it
terrible and ends by calling it bloody stupid. In this way, he suggests the complications
involved in answering such a simple question: why should he have to answer such
a general, impersonal question with an exact response? Its like asking an
artist why he paints and expecting a one-sentence summary of all his thoughts
and works. Its just too hard to be
answered succinctly.
So in
order to delve into the answer, he goes through a short series of thoughts
ranging from the first film he made to quotations from Bela
Balasz and Cezanne.
This self-questioning stream-of-consciousness reply is appropriate,
showing a depth of his internal struggle with the theories. He throws out some ideas, but doesnt really
establish a satisfactory reason, perhaps because he doesnt completely know
himself. In addition, by floating from
thought to thought, under the pretense that he has tried many times to no avail
(at least in his own eyes) to answer the question Why Do You Make Films, he
shows us the complications involved.
Although
Wenders provides a succinct answer: that he makes
films to rescue the existence of things, the simplicity of the question and
his hesitation to arrive at this conclusion cannot be overlooked. It appears
that although he has a response for the interviewers, he is still actively
pursuing the answer.
Is Wenders response to this questionnaire to be trusted as his
theory of filmmaking? Is there more to it than simply creating a record of
somethings existence? Is this
evidenced in Alice in the Cities?