Wenders rejects removing Kinski's nude scene in 'Falsche Bewegung', actress threatens lawsuit

The origin of the conflict and the judicial clock

The film "Falsche Bewegung," released in 1975, revolves around the writer Wilhelm, who embarks on a journey through Germany. The scene in dispute shows Kinski, then a 13-year-old adolescent, topless in the context of a story in which her character is the victim of a sexual encounter with a much older man. The actress had stated a few days earlier in an interview with the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" that, although she didn't know much at 13, she already perceived that the situation "nicht in Ordnung war."

Kinski and her lawyer have been demanding financial compensation and the modification or elimination of the scene since 2016. In her most recent statements, the actress assured: "Es war nun mal der erste Film, er war mein erster Regisseur und er hat mich nicht beschützt." With Wenders, Kinski also filmed the road movie "Paris, Texas."

Wenders calls for debate instead of cuts

The most recent trigger for the conflict was Wim Wenders' speech at the Deutscher Filmpreis gala, held on Friday, May 29, where he received an honorary award. In his speech, the filmmaker acknowledged: "Das würde ich heute nie mehr so machen." "Wir leben in einer völlig anderen Welt als vor 50 Jahren. Dem jungen Mann von damals kann ich keinen Vorwurf machen, auch wenn ich weiß: Das würde ich nie mehr so tun," he added.

However, Wenders did not agree to remove the scene and posed a question to the industry: "Kann man einen Film im Nachhinein kürzen?" The director raised the question of whether a scene should and can be cut when it harms an actress, "die ich sehr verehrt habe und verehre," and requested the Deutsche Filmakademie to organize a debate on how to manage film heritage. "Ich möchte es diskutieren und ich möchte da nicht alleine bleiben," he concluded.

Kinski's legal response

Kinski's lawyer's reaction was swift. Schertz called Wenders' speech an attempt to evade personal responsibility. "Tatsächlich hat er damit erneut keine Verantwortung übernommen, nur er allein kann das Problem lösen," he stated. According to the lawyer, Wenders has refused for years to have a personal conversation with Kinski about the scene, which has prompted the move to legal channels.

The lawyer added that this is not a case of censorship or "cancel culture," as the filmmaker suggested in his speech. In his argument, Schertz maintained: "Es geht darum, dass er als Regisseur damals eine Schauspielerin mit 13 Jahren halbnackt gefilmt hat und auch so im Film zeigt, die Opfer einer sexuellen Begegnung mit einem sehr viel älteren Mann ist, und dass dies heute undenkbar wäre. Und diese Szene auch herausgeschnitten werden kann, ohne dass der Film in irgendeiner Weise verfremdet würde."

Precedents in film history

The case is reminiscent of other similar episodes in film history. In 2022, actors Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting, stars of the 1968 adaptation of "Romeo and Juliet," took legal action. The film "The Blue Lagoon" (1980), in which Brooke Shields appeared nude for much of the footage, also generated comparable controversy. Schertz also confirmed that in the case of the "Tatort: Reifezeugnis" (1977) episode, directed by Wolfgang Petersen, an agreement was reached with NDR.

Wenders mentioned the precedent of Steven Spielberg in his speech, who modified a scene in "E.T." and later regretted it. In a new version released for the film's 20th anniversary in 2002, the American director replaced weapons with walkie-talkies. Years later, Spielberg stated that no film should be reviewed "durch die Brille, durch die wir heute schauen, egal ob freiwillig oder gezwungenermaßen."

The 83-year-old feminist Alice Schwarzer publicly joined Kinski's demand through the magazine "Emma," which she founded. In a message addressed directly to Wenders, she wrote: "Wim: Höre auf zu reden – und handle! Schneide endlich diese verdammten zwei Minuten raus aus deinem Film!"

Reactions from the industry and the press

The response from the German film industry has been largely critical of Wenders' stance. Actress Karoline Herfurth commented on Instagram, in response to a post by her colleague Clemens Schick: "Es wäre so groß gewesen, wenn ein so großer Mann einmal öffentlich gesagt hätte: Ich habe einen Fehler gemacht. Ich habe es versäumt, ein ungeschütztes 13-jähriges Kind zu schützen." Actress Rosalie Thomass called the director's speech "zum Schämen."

The German press also reacted harshly. Michael Hanfeld wrote in the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung" that Wenders' behavior represents a "Wegducken eines sich nachdenklich gebenden Regisseurs." The "FAZ" stated directly: "Das war 1974 falsch, und das wäre heute falsch." Claudia Tieschky, in the "Süddeutsche Zeitung," accused Wenders of portraying himself as a victim of alleged coercion by the zeitgeist.

Academic view: preservation and contextualization

From the academic field, film specialist Annette Brauerhoch described Wenders' argument as "richtig raffiniert eingefädelt." In statements to Deutschlandfunk, the researcher explained: "Denn die Verantwortung, die eigentlich bei ihm liegt, hat er mit diesem Appell an das Publikum und die Akademie auf Tausende verteilt." Brauerhoch considered the question of whether films can be re-edited as "eine sehr grundsätzliche Frage," which touches on everything called "Cancel Culture" or "Political Correctness."

However, Brauerhoch warned: "aber auf keinen Fall sollte man versuchen, die Geschichte zu korrigieren, denn das sind ja auch wichtige Dokumente." The expert argued that film heritage needs preservation, research, and careful mediation: "Filmerbe braucht Bewahrung, Forschung und sorgfältige Vermittlung." She proposed that when historical films are shown, introductions, discussions, texts, or curatorial notes should be included to contextualize their production conditions and reception history, "besonders dann, wenn Werke aus heutiger Perspektive Fragen nach Machtverhältnissen, Repräsentation oder verletzenden Darstellungen aufwerfen."

Director Julia von Heinz suggested in an Instagram post that the scene should be contextualized rather than eliminated. She suggested that all institutions that still distribute or archive old films should be able to offer supplementary material. However, she also acknowledged that symbolically removing the scene from the master copy would be "eine einfache und klare Geste. Und würde Filmgeschichte schreiben!"

The Deutsche Filmakademie, to which Wenders directed his request for debate, has not yet commented on the proposal or the content of his speech. Meanwhile, time is running out: lawyer Schertz has given Wenders until the end of this week to confirm the removal of the scene. Otherwise, the lawsuit for the violation of Kinski's personality rights as a minor will proceed, in a case that could set a significant precedent for how German cinema—and that of other countries—manages its own past.

Kinski's case illustrates how the treatment of nude scenes in the film industry has changed radically since the 1970s. The actress herself, in her interview with the "Süddeutsche Zeitung," summarized the sentiment of many retrospective victims: "Manchmal guckt man auf sein Leben zurück und stellt fest, da sind Dinge passiert, die waren schlicht nicht in Ordnung, die möchte ich korrigiert wissen." A sentence that summarizes the heart of a debate that transcends a single director and a single film.