Until the End of the World

Until the End of the World

Until the End of the World (1991)

Share

Where to Watch

Rent

AmazonApple TVPlayYouTubeFandango At Home

Buy

AmazonApple TVPlayYouTubeFandango At Home

Source: JustWatch

Physical Media

DVDCriterion CollectionUnited States2001UPC 715515239219

a member added 9/25/2026

eBay
Submit a Correction

He shot the film across four continents. It was almost five hours long. His distributors demanded he cut it in half. So he made a duplicate first, did all their butchering on the copy, and hid the original negatives away.

For nearly three decades, the only version most people could see was the one he called the "Reader's Digest version." Then the hidden negatives resurfaced, and the full 287-minute cut he had always intended was restored in 4K.

UNTIL THE END OF THE WORLD (1991) is Wim Wenders' science-fiction road movie set in the far-off year of 1999.

Before shooting, Wenders approached some of the world's top musicians with a strange instruction: Do not just write me a song, he said. Write me the song you think you will be making in 1999.

Talking Heads sent back their final single. U2 was so pleased with their contribution they reclaimed it for Achtung Baby. R.E.M., Lou Reed, Nick Cave, Depeche Mode all answered the same impossible brief. For years, more people owned the album than had seen the movie.

Near the end of the film its characters stand alone in the Australian desert, unable to look away from small handheld screens playing their own recorded dreams, addicted to images of themselves. Wenders shot that in 1990.

About the Film

. . . the ultimate road movie

Directed By
Wim Wenders
Runtime
158 minutes
Released
September 12, 1991
US Theatrical
December 25, 1991
Certification
R
Country
Germany, Australia, France
Starring
Solveig Dommartin, William Hurt (Sam Farber, alias Trevor McPhee), Sam Neill, Rüdiger Vogler
More Credits
Genres
Drama, Science Fiction, Adventure
Language
English, French, Italian, Japanese, Mandarin, Russian, Portuguese, German
Origin
DE
Studios
Wim Wenders Stiftung, Argos films, Village Roadshow, Road Movies
Written By
Wim Wenders, Solveig Dommartin, Peter Carey
Produced By
Ulrich Felsberg, Jonathan T. Taplin, Paulo Branco, Kim Vecera, Greg Coote, Anatole Dauman, Jean-Pierre Spiri-Mercanton
Cinematography
Robby Müller
Music
Graeme Revell
Also Starring
Max von Sydow, Jeanne Moreau, Ernie Dingo, Chick Ortega, Eddy Mitchell, Chishū Ryū
Budget
$23,000,000
Box Office
$752,856

This website uses TMDB and the TMDB APIs but is not endorsed, certified, or otherwise approved by TMDB.

More like this

Comments

Sign in to add to the conversation… Back to top

  3. It is a little too avante garde and obscure. To be honest if you took the small narrative where his mother explains their beginings ‘they were going to raise American babies’ [ not sure if that is the exact re-telling of the dialogue ] , then you could just go to the last 40 minutes of the film.

    Not sure about the accuracy of the U2 song extraction story, however U2 was in a bit of bind despite having a solid fan base prior to the release of Achtung Baby, I even was duped into thinking they were of a Judea Christain evanglical band,

    The story does kind of track when U2 already limited musically abandoned their initial fan base needed evey song to sell an album that eventually gave them at least 10 years of a viable holding pattern.

    The movie kind of sucked and was a little artsy fartsy. The message of delivering something from the children to their parents was lost until the end. They should of as I mentioned earlier led with that.

    Of course Wim Wenders is definitely no Steven Speilberg; if he was this movie would have got dudes like me more interested in Solveig Dommartin. [ I had a huge movie crush on her ] Sad to hear when I looked her up she passed a while ago. Sam Neill was pretty good as a doof and bit of a cuck for Claire.

      1. Jules LR No argument there. I rented this movie when I was overseas in the Army. I am thinking I got access to it in 1992 maybe 1993. That puts me at around 26.

        That was about 34 years ago so it is possible I may have become more cynical and possibly as even more middle of the road too.

        The part where they use the animated bear on a screen to track down a location for an individual was kind of a trip.

        I definitely need to see it again.

      3. Jules LR nothing wrong about being wrong. Maybe but a lot of good ideas are sometimes just that ideas and yes it still can suck.

        Even Wim Wenders knows that otherwise he would not questioned himself and hid the extra footage.

        He was young too.

      4. Richard Renteria I’ll agree that it can be cool and suck too – but he hid the footage from a studio that would have destroyed it.
        He saw what happened to so many films when studios got their hands on the original.

      5. Jules LR I am sure they would have. If you ever get a chance and have not seen it yet, ‘ What Just Happened ‘ with Robert DeNiro and there’s a character named Jeremy Brunell played by Michael Wincott.

        Makes the Apple show, “The Studio” look like a nursery.

  17. I watched the whole thing, was a fan of Wenders and the theatrical version already. I split it over two nights. it made a hell of a lot more sense than the theatrical release. I’d say it’s for fans mostly.

    2. Fritz Toch Okay. And I disagree. The Spine 1007, full version, has come up in conversation in numerous places. Even for viewers unfamiliar with Wender’s cannon, those who made it through the length found it a loveable, accessible, composition. Yet, everyone has different tastes. Some love Paris, Texas; others love Wings of Desire; and others Perfect Days.

  22. I saw this in my second last year of high school at the cool cinema connected to Cape Town’s Baxter Theatre. I’d started branching out in terms of the movies I was watching. I like a lot of the actors and artists on the soundtrack.

    …it looked like a dream, but I’m not sure I “got it” at the time. The cut was of Olympian length (for me at the time); I reeled onto the sidewalk when my folks eventually came to pick me up.

    It’s due for a rewatch, I think.

    2. Sasha Schlichter it’s on Amazon Prime (at least here in the UK). I watched it a few months ago and the almost 5 hours seemed to fly by. Having seen the edited version back in the cinema release, I highly recommend the full version!

  34. I vaguely knew about this movie, and rarely rush out to buy copies of stuff no matter the raves/reviews I read online, but I’m about to buy the Criterion 2-disc Blu Ray edition based just on this discussion – thanks to everyone here, on both sides of the pro/con divides!

  35. Visions of future past. I love this film, to the bone. All the more poignant now that its two leads have passed… Oh, that opening… “1999 was the year that the Indian nuclear satellite went out of control. No one knew where it might land. It soared above the ozone layer like a lethal bird of prey. The whole world was alarmed. Only Claire, couldn’t care less.” Made during the last time in human history it was possible to feel optimistic about what was to come…

  40. I saw this in the theater and was pretty disappointed. Paris Texas and Wings of Desire are a pretty high bar to clear and this movie was just sort of OK. Certainly was a heck of lot better than Faraway, So Close which was a really pointless sequel.

  44. I have the full 5h version on DVD, not sure which edition above but it has no subtitles so there are sequences where I have no idea what anyone is talking about, which I felt was somehow in keeping with the pan-global scale of the film

  47. I’ve been a huge fan of the cut version since it released… I always thought that section at the end felt like like a strange addendum… I’m sure it makes much more sense in his original director’s cut. Where can I see it?

    1. Loved the original cut in the cinema but always thought it felt like two different stories spliced together. Was incredibly impressed and fell in love with it again when I saw the full version a year or two back. Makes so much more sense and adds so much more!

  58. This inspired me to go looking for the 5hr version which I just watched the first 15 minutes of – and – WOW!
    I’m already in love with the extra footage!

    It’s like a dream half remembered that I’ve watched a lot of times of the 2hr version and now it’s AMAZING to get these little tidbits as if a fantastic dream has been restored to my brain!

    I definitely adore this movie to pieces.

  66. Conceptually, there is so much good material in this movie, but all of the ideas aren’t well-executed and it’s not a very fun watch aside from the beautiful cinematography. It’s the only 5-hour movie I’ve ever seen that still didn’t feel fully fleshed-out.

  67. I finally got to see the full version last month, and what a treat it was! I had the seen the cut version and enjoyed it, but it’s not at all the same film. If you get a chance to watch the full restored version definitely do so!

  68. I saw this on screen when it came out in 1991 at the Cheri in Boston. My first “Art House Movie,” and it was like a whole new world opened up to me. Creativity outside of a corporate structure! It became immediately one of my AT Top 5 favorite movies. On The Road in The Future! Saw the 5 hour projection at the Brattle, Cambridge, and it was like going back to see your old friend after so many years – NOT dirtier and older, but seeing how they’ve grown, and what they’ve done since you last caught up. The longer version is more poetic and poignant, and has a more obviously tender and positive spirit, more uplifting and hopeful about the future, despite the entropic exteriors. As with all great art, the message is love!

  74. I saw a screening of the full version of it at the Egyptian Theater/American Cinematheque in Hollywood in January 2001. It *felt* shorter than the “short” version because more of the story was there and it played better. Wim Wenders was there which was cool!

    There isn’t any video that I can find from that screening but Wenders’ intro and Q&A from a DGA screening about a month later is on YouTube.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfZSmOIJev8

  75. The 4K version Criterion streams is stunning. It is a shaggy, rough story, but having watched it more than any movie since its original theatrical release, I’ll stake it and Winders amongst the greatest movies and directors of the 20th century. A masterpiece.

  88. Talking Heads recorded the track “Sax and Violins” for the film, and it was to be used in a video on screen. David Byrne insisted that since the film was set in the near-future, he’d be given makeup to make him look older.

  89. Wow. I LOVE this movie, but did not know there was a new director’s cut! I absolutely will seek it out. I must say, though, I like the “Reader’s Digest” version so well, I’m a bit skeptical how 100 extra minutes could make it better.

  95. I saw it and had a casette of the soundtrack growing up…I bought a copy of the film on DVD a couple of years back… Both the soundtrack and film stuck with me. Thanks for sharing! ❤️❤️❤️

  98. Saw the long version in a cinema in Sydney, presented by Wenders himself. The reels weren’t getting loaded properly by the projectionist so there were lots of breaks, during which time the 20 or so of us there were able to chat with Wenders about it. A great experience, of a great film. At least one of the cast was there. Maybe more.

  100. Sam Neill, William Hurt, Solveig Dommartin – all gone….unforgettable movie, bought the full length version on DVD years ago. The soundtrack: don’t forget Peter Gabriel’s “Blood of Eden”, with the scene of the plane slowly gliding over the Australian desert.

  103. This is one of my favorite movies–the 5-hour version. I saw it twice in Hollywood at special screenings where Wim Wenders would share his extended version with film buffs. And if you search hard enough, you just might find a copy of it online. 😉

  104. I saw this when it first came out, being a big Wim Wenders fan since seeing Wings of Desire. I also bought the soundtrack, which I still have. Now I’ll have to find and watch the director’s cut!

  110. Its surprising how well it depicts the future given when it was made. It’s one of my favourite films and I remember going to extremes to get the Italian dvd set which was the first long version .

    It’s reminds me a lot of what it feels like to travel extensively to new places on your own .

  115. I marvel looking back at the film that they didn’t have a more Syd Mead visual futurist designing it – all the ‘laptops’ are so hilariously luggable and seem silly designs – the internet was 5 years away and they barely predicted it other than the detectives search programs which seemed more like hacking credit card companies. The lack of flatscreens even simulated anywhere – 2,000 gigabytes transferred over whatever Arpanet could have evolved into sans CERN and Lee to invent http for browsers now seems a little laughable. The computers ‘submerged’ in tanks was funny and cool looking, but not realistic. And the “tech” of recording vision was less elegant than the cooler Trumbull written and directed “BRAINSTORM” stuff from 1981 – also a good version of what Doctor Farber ‘invents’.

    Still even at 4hrs 47min the film doesn’t bore me and I have lost track of how many times I played the shorter version for years – decades now. The photography is so beautiful as is Claire. I remember what it was like to imagine the world could end in 1999 which still seemed so far off in 1991 – and funny no one was worried that all the computers would go crazy anyway when the calendar flipped over to Jan 1 2000!

    The thought of waiting for the radiation was also familiar from having read “On The Beach” also set in Australia as a boy around 1970. Funny in the film no one mentions that as they wait seeming to expect to die of radiation cancer. And all the principal actors would die of cancer, but then most people do.

    Reduced to typewriters I also chuckled that everyone seemed well supplied with months of coffee and cigarettes in the ‘apocalypse’. Must remember now to lay in a stockpile for the coming Trump one! And the talk that they had seen the Rolling Stones ‘farewell’ concert in 1995 as a throwaway line that turned out not to be – and that the Stones still exist 30 years after that fictional concert made me laugh and laugh.

    I’m reminded of the line about scifi from Futurama when Fry discovers in the 30th century that Star Trek is banned and mention of it is culturally verboten. Fry insists they should still be watching it because it gives people hope about the future and Lela drolly points out it’s set 700 in her current past.

    And it’s funny to watch other scifi like 2001 or Blade Runner set in 2019 and this film and realize their ‘futures’ are firmly set in the past too.

    It’s so hard to predict ‘future’ tech. As a child we used to fret about HAL9000 artificial brains would go berserk and here we are with a new generation just gaga about AI like it’s the greatest thing ever.

    If there’s one thing scifi points out we imagine future horrors and then the masses embrace them. I’m sure when the time comes people will climb into Matrix pods and dream their lives away willingly and it won’t take Terminators to herd them into them!

    I’m now older than Max Von Sydow was when he played Dr Farber which is sobering too. He still seems ancient in the film and was only 90 when he died in 2020.

    This and other now ‘passed’ prediction films will at best have small cult audiences or fade completely into cinema oblivion. And if you’ve ever watched old black and white scifi or read now passed years in scifi literature it all probably bores younger people to tears.

    But there’s still a lesson in how terrible we are always going to be at imagining the future because we never get it right and never bet on the right stuff. And that’s instructive about what we hope for as well as fear.

    That’s ALWAYS a good perspective to have.

  117. Fantastic movie. Visonary. Still valid, still futuristic. And I loved the inspiration on the “Where in the world is Carmen SanDiego” early computer games. I have a copy of the Criterion Collection version, and I was lucky to see the whole 287min on the big screen during a film festival in Mexico City in 1992, if I remember correctly.

  123. One of my all-time favorite films. I’m pretty sure I saw a longer version at an art theater in the Boston area when it came out. It’s also one of my all-time favorite soundtracks as well!
    Years later I realized it’s the perfect movie to watch on a cross-country flight, heh.

  127. I was blessed with stumbling upon Wim Wenders one night in Paris, 30 meters and 30 years away from the small cinema where I fell in love with his masterpiece!!!

    Ans now dream scanners are almost real.

  133. I can’t remember if I’ve seen the extended version, but I recall what I saw being interesting in the first half, less interesting in the second half, and feeling generally like they were two disconnected films.

  138. I saw the Reader’s Digest version in the theater and just didn’t connect with it. Years later I ordered Road to Salinas and instead received the director’s cut of this film. I contacted the seller and they asked if I’d like to return it. I thought, “weeeeell I saw it once and wasn’t impressed… but live his other films… maybe I’ll watch it once and return it.” Never returned it. The long version makes perfect sense! Whoever cut it for time is a #$%&@ idiot!

  141. Truly a pinnacle of filmmaking. When it was released I went to the theatre three nights in a row. One of the most prescient films ever made. And objectively as beautiful at times as anything in the amazing Wenders library.

  142. I have not seen the full cut, if there really is one in circulation, but the “standard” version is well worth the watch and the music is great. Also love ‘Wings of Desire’. You can watch it casually or with full intrigue and it is a great film.

Copyright Anywhere But Hollywood. All rights reserved.