User Reviews

Definitely not one for the Multiplex so score one for the art house circuit. Ursula Werner is in her sixty sixth year as I write and she leaves actresses half her age dead in the water. She bears a passing facial resemblance to the great Simone Signoret in her Mama Rosa period and her acting compares favorably with that of Signoret and I personally can offer no higher praise than that. There will be those who take exception to a movie like this for all kinds of reasons, graphic - albeit tasteful - sex between geriatrics being one of them, pace being another but the trick is to ignore the sex scenes and the pace and decide if 1) this is a movie with something to say and 2) does it say it, with an optional 3) how well or badly does it say it. Ultimately it is a fine art house film built around an outstanding central performance.

"Wolke 9" or "Cloud 9" is a German movie from 2008, so this one will have its 10th anniversary next year. The writer and director is Andreas Dresen, one of Germany's most successful filmmakers and possibly the most successful from the former GDR right now. The title of this movie is a play on words (and numbers) with the German "Wolke 7", where you find people that are in love, so the translation Cloud 9 is not accurate at all as it should be Cloud 10 or 11 perhaps. Anyway, this movie here is about a woman slightly under the age of 70, who has been married for a long time, but falls in love with another man. This has drastic consequences of course on her life, on her husband's life and also on the new guy's life. This film received major awards recognition at several prestigious ceremonies, such as the Cannes Film Festival or the European Film Awards. At the German Film Awards, Dresen won for his direction, Werner won for her lead performance and the movie itself was picked as one of the top three of the year.

I personally felt as if this film needed quite a while to get going and become interesting. But from the moment on when her husband finds out about the affair, even if that is already pretty late in the movie, things get better quickly and I was mostly underwhelmed before that. I would also say that i was not too impressed by Werner here. She did what she had to and she wasn't bad, but it was nowhere near such an awards-worthy turn in my opinion. I guess they honored her because of her courage as she is in nude and sex scenes despite her age. The film is much more about the script here than about individual performances. The depiction of life and sexuality above the age of 60 is something that is just not done frequently in film, maybe because many don't find it too much of an interesting, let alone, aesthetic topic. So it's okay that Dresen did it I guess. But being different is not the same as being good, so you should not appreciate a film merely for the reason that it elaborates on a subject that has not been elaborated on that much. You still have to deliver quality. For example there are hundreds of Nazi-themed films out there and occasionally, they still manage to make convincing new ones despite the quantity of films existing already from this corner of the movie genre world.

Anyway, all in all, I recommend "Wolke 9" as it was a decent watch and there were no real weaknesses about the film. At 95 minutes, it is already pretty essential, even if it dragged on some occasions in the first half of the film. What I also liked, however, were the musical interruptions here that provided a strong contrast to the more serious scenes that came before or after these. "Freude schöner Götterfunken" is always a joy for sure. I give this movie a thumbs-up, but just a cautious one and I think the awards attention really may have been far too much.

I don't think there is another film in the history of cinema that examines the lives of seniors (including -- gasp! -- their sex lives) with such honesty, poignancy and, yes, accuracy as Wolke Neun (Cloud Nine). Those characters on the screen could be your parents or grandparents, and there they are, still grappling painfully with the problems of love after all these years.

This is a powerful film that is about much more than a mere examination of old people f***ing. Despite the typical stress on the (non-explicit) sex, it is a film more about the discovery of first love by a woman well advanced in years, a woman who should have known all this stuff (or so the theory goes) 45 years before.

Hats off to director/co-writer Andreas Dresen for giving us this honest, courageous film that can upset and depress you at the same time as it can ultimately uplift you.

Ursula Werner provides a shattering, bravura performance as the besieged, 66-year-old Inge, a married woman who is strongly attracted to a man ten years older (Karl, played by Horst Westphal). She engages in an affair with Karl while still proclaiming her love for Werner (Horst Rehberg), her husband of 30 years. Inge cannot understand the startling turn of events, or why they happened, but she discovers she loves Karl.

Inge says, again and again: 'I didn't want this!', but the camera forces the viewer to challenge her. This woman has lived a life hidden from herself; she has spent 30 years being protected by Werner, who helped to raise her child. After a sheltered life dotted by drudgery and routine (she goes on aimless train trips to please her train-loving husband; she sings methodically in a church choir), we see Inge coming to the painful realization that she is finally emerging as a real person at the age of 66. She begins to understand, with tortuous internal conflict, what love really is.

There is a riveting scene in the film when the sublime Werner (Inge) stands by railroad tracks in cascading rain. With her back to the camera, she screams at the earth (or is it at herself?), then turns and walks towards us: we see then a face of boundless anguish, a face that has realized something for the first time: after all these years, it is, for her, a terrifying and devastating discovery.

There are flaws in this film (we know little about Karl or Werner, for example), but I still highly recommend it. This is a first in cinema, an adult film about REAL 'old people,' and we'll probably not see another like it for a long time to come. Finally, seniors in cinema have been given a genuine, authentic voice. It is a tribute to Germany, and perhaps Europe in general, that a film like this could be made. It's a work that would never (repeat, NEVER) be considered in the dumbed-down, juvenile, cartoonish world of Hollywood, which prefers to mass-produce movies that have little to do with the reality and pain of everyday human existence.

The people in Cloud Nine are not motivated by middle class psychology, such factors as relationships with parents and emotional deprivations in childhood. Rather, their motivations emerge from their basic characters. To a surprising extent, their characters reflect elemental types. Inga, a sixty-seven year old woman, is a feeling type who works as a seamstress and is a member of a choir. She has been married for thirty years to Werner, a thinking type who likes railroads and timetables. Their daughter, Petra, is a sensate type. She has young children and favors practical solutions. Karl, Inga's lover, is an intuitive type who impulsively makes love to her when he tries on a pair of trousers that she has mended.

These types are not pure or absolute. As in everyday life, aspects of people's characters continually rub against themselves and against aspects of other people's characters. This rubbing is what the movie's about. Inga, a bright, shining, and moderately overweight woman, is delighted by her affair. Contrary to her daughter's advice, she tells her husband about it. He considers their marriage a happy one (we see nothing to contradict this) and finds it incomprehensible that she would want another lover. Inga and Werner separate. Inga moves in with Karl. Werner kills himself.

Cloud Nine's plot is the structure within which its characters interact. All dialog is improvised. The improvisation is by skilled actors who have a full understanding of the relationships among their characters. In terms of naturalness, this approach is highly successful. In a few instances, things that we expect to be there are left out. When Werner says to Inga that he assumes her affair is with a younger man, she does not tell him that Karl is nine years older than her. And no one states explicitly that Werner has killed himself. As would happen in real life, we assume it because of the way people act.

Many comments on this film, both by reviewers and by people I've talked to, involve its portrayal of nudity and sex among people in their sixties and seventies. The many close-up depictions are both graphic and discreet in ways that would be inconceivable in a Hollywood movie. The scenes stay with the viewer. Old and less than perfect bodies can be admired without cosmetic enhancement. Death's sting is unavoidable but can ultimately be accepted. The cloud nine on which Inga lives is not in outer space but is a beautiful part of nature.

Sometimes you watch movies that are pretty empty. Well, this is one of them. A woman falls for another man in an affair that seems to be only motivated by sex. After some arguing, she decides to choose her new boyfriend and leave her husband for 30 years. After that, her husband dies, probably of suicide. (That is really not explained). This all takes a very long time. Except for the songs of a choir, there is not really a soundtrack. This makes it more difficult to understand the emotions and also makes some very long scenes very boring. What stands out for me, is that this woman decides against her love for life even though she still loves him, for a life of sex. And that her daughter agrees with her and even encourages her to continue. If that were my mother, I would certainly advise against a thing like that.

While some acting was good, others was not very convincing. I especially think the directing lacked coherence. The use of rain and colors did not clearly add to the meaning of the film. Perhaps, the lack of a score did really make this movie really appear empty. This is reinforced at the end, when the "new" couple hold to each other shortly after the tragic event. All this adds up to a very poor movie. Definitely not recommended if you want to have an enjoying evening.

The film poses the question : what do we do when we can the chance of some happiness, and someone else may be hurt as a result? Ignore it if it makes us feel guilty, or give into it and accept that there will be a price to pay. And it is a good question as happiness is such an elusive quality. Igne has been with ( and presumably married to) Werner for some thirty years. They are fond of it each other, content with each other, but their relationship is dull, maybe always was. He loves trains, likes watching film of trains, travelling on them, reading about them, telling their grandchildren about trains, a man obsessed. Meanwhile Inge unexpectedly feels a strong attraction to Karl and for the first time, late in life, and goes off Werner's rails. She is torn ( "I didn't want this"), still fond of Werner, but drawn to Karl. She confides in her daughter Petra who is glad her mother is happy, who tells her to say nothing to Werner. But Inge cares so much for him, she tells him. It is a truly remarkable performance from Ursula Werner. The scene when she learns of the death of Werner is wonderfully moving. The direction is excellent and subtle. I liked the scene of the morning after she tells Werner and the camera is static as she walks around their flat not knowing whether to disturb him, finally knocking on his bedroom to find (we presume) he has gone out. She no longer knows what he is doing. And the scene at the funeral where Inge is frozen with true grief as people line up to formally comfort with. It is a very "real" film. All the actors distinguish themselves. I found this film compelling from the beginning to the end. It is genuine, heartfelt. The question is impossible to answer but I felt sympathy for the plight of Inge. We do the best we can. Time spent watching this film is not time wasted.

Films about how elderly people conceive love and romance are usually ones with potential. This one, however, isn't. The main problem with this film is the poor character development, making all characters extremely unsympathetic and impossible to sense empathy for as a viewer. Especially Werner, the stereotypical old grump in this show, is extremely selfish and only makes the viewer feel hatred towards him, instead of sympathy. In a final act of selfishness, he takes his own life, taking his unsympatheticness to a whole new level. One of the worst films to come out of Germany recently: you can get a lot more value for your buck at your local movie theater than this.

A reviewer referred to this catatonic movie as a "feminist horror story". While I wouldn't disagree with that, I'd prefer to call it a plot-poor yawn-fest melodrama with a cretinously banal story-line. Old people's love-triangle Bumsfest romantic drama? That works too. Or I could simply refer to this pseudo-cinematic drivel as GILF porn. The hideous actress who toys around with men (and very "fittingly" looks like one too) is naked throughout the movie. Yes, it's such a "deep", involving, artistic story, isn't it. Actually, all these different descriptions could be merged into one simple term: rubbish.

Pretentious rubbish. Note the absence of music – aside from the inane, superfluous choir scenes which somehow are needed to remind us that she is indeed old, and not 18. You see, the absence of music means the director bows down (to his knees, and then chin-to-ground) to Lars Von Trier's Pretentious Dummies 95 manifesto, which basically instructs its blind (and empty-headed, not to mention talent-free) adherents not to utilize music because somehow a soundtrack makes the story "insincere" (or some such rubbish; I don't pretend to know much about this cretinous, art-fart Eurotrash movement aside that it's absolute horseshit for bird-brained film students and impotent, obese film critics). One of the other tenets of the 95 (bowel) movement is that porn is not only acceptable, but that dangling (or upright) male genitalia represent another highly artistic step toward more sincerity. Yes, I know. We all know: Lars is a degenerate, pompous ass. And European cinema still wallows in its own self-indulging ineptitude laced with sexual obsessions most of which are perversions. No, I don't mean old folk having sex, I mean full frontal nudity of an underage girl, a scene which the lustful film-maker somehow managed to squeeze in, despite that being the only scene in which any minor appears, and despite that girl being wholly irrelevant to the plot. (The old "sneak-a-bush" tactic.) Or was this some tiny New Age feminist commentary about how "progressive" the nympho's daughter is to have her kids running around naked in the garden? European film-makers know their audiences all-too well: give them naked underage kids, incest, or bondage, and your movie-festival rating as an "artist with a unique vision" goes through the roof.

The story? An amazingly stupid old nymphomaniac woman (who looks like Gary Numan after years of alcoholic binging) screws her husband – literally and metaphorically – by cheating on him with an even older geezer. Now, it's not as if she develops a romantic, touching, unintentional, spontaneous relationship with this other guy over a period of time. No. Like a hormonally-challenged teeny-bopper she has him humping her within minutes of meeting him for the first time. No, this is no joke. Nor am I joking when I tell you that the woman's adult daughter LAUGHS and then SMILES and then APPROVES of her affair when her mother confesses about it. Her daughter – ever the ungrateful skank but viewed sympathetically through the film-maker's immoral feminazi prism – actually encourages her mother to continue the affair, because, after all, the man she is cheating on is "only" her step-father who "only" sacrificed his best years to bring her up (another man's offspring as his own) so why the hell not, right? She warns her mother to keep it secret though. She does have THAT much common sense at least. So not all female characters in the movie are necessarily utter imbeciles, only partially mentally and morally impaired. However, in the film-maker's eyes, they are not moral degenerates at all.

Alas, her daughter's advice is not heeded by the choir-singing floozy who turns out to be beyond daft. To selfishly unburden her sense of guilt, the fat ugly cow tells her hubby about how she's been shagging this other guy. As expected, her hubby is outraged, becomes depressed, and concludes that his wife of 30 years is "a moron". It is at that point that the audience in the theaters rapture into a spontaneous applause: "yes, man, she is soooo dumb!"

Oh, but I kid. Of course no audience applauded (nor would I ever watch this trash in a cinema). No, not because most of audience are feminazi zombies, but because most of them were snoring by this point. You see, this movie is so saturated with padding. It's so full of unnecessary Euro art-fart BS that if you'd compress this sex-film-impersonating-a-serious-character-study into its plot-relevant scenes, you'd get something like 10 minutes. So yes, the movie WOULD be a 10-minute GILF porn clip with a touch of generic drama if only there weren't all those fabulous scenes of German landscapes and parks, which are intended to give the typical hipster-hat-wearing coffee-sniffing art-fest film-goer a chance to MUSE over the incredible philosophical ramification of a fat nymphomaniac having sex, over the ridiculously underdeveloped characters, or simply a chance to go for a leak.

If only the lazy film-maker had had the common sense to make her husband impotent. At least that could've served as some flimsy but somewhat credible excuse for the affair. But no. Her husband is still sexually active, AND she enjoys the sex with him, whereas it's the new boyfriend who can't always get it up! Sure, in many ways this has all the hallmarks of an Ed Wood classic.

Her husband – very very very predictably - ends up committing suicide shortly after being ditched by his perpetually wet wife, and that's it. What's the point? The message, dare I say? Well, in terms of feminist "logic", the message is: "girls, enjoy yourselves, indulge your hedonism, and by all means screw over your loyal partner if your vagina ever gets that nympho need". For the rest of us, the message is more like: "all you fat, ugly, selfish bitches should keep your affairs secret – IF you're going to cheat on your husbands."

Want more laughs? Read the comments section.