Wim Wenders withdraws 1975 film Wrong Move following Nastassja Kinski's advocacy over 1975 scene featuring her as a 13-year-old
German director Wim Wenders has withdrawn his 1975 film Wrong Move from distribution after Nastassja Kinski, who was 13 at the time of filming, publicly criticized a scene in which she appeared topless. Kinski had long sought changes to the film, and her recent interview with Süddeutsche Zeitung renewed public attention. Wenders, through his foundation, apologized unreservedly and acknowledged his failure to protect her. The foundation has halted distribution and plans to engage in a broad dialogue with film institutions and Kinski to determine the film’s future. Kinski’s lawyer welcomed the decision but called it long overdue. Wenders is a renowned filmmaker known for works like Paris, Texas and Wings of Desire, while Kinski went on to a successful international career.
Both sources agree on the core facts: Wenders withdrew the film after Kinski’s public appeal, apologized, and the foundation is now controlling access. The Guardian offers a more critical and detailed narrative, emphasizing moral accountability and historical context. RTÉ adopts a more procedural and neutral tone, focusing on institutional responses and future dialogue. The most complete and contextually rich coverage is provided by The Guardian.
- ✓ Wim Wenders has withdrawn his 1975 film Wrong Move from distribution.
- ✓ The withdrawal follows public pressure and advocacy by Nastassja Kinski, who was 13 during filming and appeared topless in a scene.
- ✓ Wenders issued a public apology to Kinski through a statement on his foundation’s website.
- ✓ Kinski had previously campaigned against another film featuring her as a minor in a nude scene.
- ✓ The Wim Wenders Foundation now controls the film and has initiated a process to determine its future status.
- ✓ Kinski’s comments in Süddeutsche Zeitung were a catalyst for renewed attention on the issue.
Focus on Wenders’ initial resistance
Does not mention Wenders’ earlier remarks or the backlash, focusing instead on the apology and next steps.
Emphasizes Wenders’ prior defense of the film as a product of its time and the criticism he received, suggesting reluctance to act without pressure.
Role of public pressure
Acknowledges public pressure through Kinski’s lawyer’s comment that the decision was 'long overdue' and resulted from public scrutiny.
Implies the decision was prompted by media criticism and public figures like Julius Feldmeier.
Future of the film
Explicitly states the foundation will seek a 'broad dialogue' with film institutions and that re-release depends on a 'mutually agreed solution' including Kinski.
Does not mention any plans for future re-release or dialogue with institutions.
Kinski’s advocacy history
Mentions her advocacy but does not detail prior successes or legal agreements.
Provides detail about her successful campaign against a Wolfgang Petersen film, showing a pattern of advocacy.
The Guardian
Framing: The Guardian frames the event as a moral reckoning prompted by Nastassja Kinski’s advocacy and public pressure, emphasizing Wim Wenders’ delayed response and the ethical implications of child representation in film. The narrative centers on accountability, with Kinski positioned as a long-standing advocate for change, and Wenders as a figure defending his artistic context before yielding to criticism.
Tone: Critical and reflective, with a tone of measured disapproval toward Wenders’ initial resistance. The language conveys seriousness and moral urgency, particularly in quoting fellow filmmaker Julius Feldmeier’s open letter, which underscores the ethical weight of the issue.
Sensationalism: Headline emphasizes the topless scene and Kinski’s age (13), drawing immediate attention to the most provocative element of the story.
"Wim Wenders withdraws 1975 film featuring 13-year-old Nastassja Kinski topless"
Framing by Emphasis: Highlights Kinski’s 15-year effort to change the film and Wenders’ initial defense of the film as a product of its time, suggesting reluctance and delay in accountability.
"Nastassja Kinski, now 65, told Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper last month that she has spent 15 years unsuccessfully trying to get Wenders to change the film."
Editorializing: Includes a direct critique from Julius Feldmeier, a public figure, to amplify moral pressure on Wenders, framing the issue as one of personal responsibility.
"It’s your responsibility alone to set things right"
Balanced Reporting: Presents both Wenders’ apology and Kinski’s perspective, including her statement about the scene feeling wrong even at age 13.
"Even though I didn’t know much aged 13, I knew that that wasn’t not ok."
Comprehensive Sourcing: References Kinski’s prior successful campaign against another film, adding context about her ongoing advocacy and legal support.
"Her lawyer told news magazine Der Spiegel that they had come to an agreement over the film’s distribution with broadcaster NDR."
RTÉ
Framing: RTÉ presents the event as a developing ethical and institutional issue within the German film industry, focusing on Wenders’ apology, the foundation’s call for dialogue, and the procedural next steps. The framing is more procedural and forward-looking, emphasizing process over past failure.
Tone: Neutral and factual, with a slightly more measured and institutional tone. It avoids overt moral judgment, instead focusing on statements, reactions, and next steps.
Proper Attribution: Clearly attributes statements to Wenders, Kinski, and her lawyer, maintaining a factual tone.
"In a statement on his foundation's website, Wenders apologised to Kinski..."
Framing by Emphasis: Highlights the Wenders Foundation’s commitment to a 'broad dialogue' and future mutually agreed solutions, shifting focus from past harm to future governance.
"Only after that process has taken place... will we make the film available again"
Appeal to Emotion: Uses Kinski’s personal quote about sensing something was wrong at age 13, evoking empathy.
"Even though I didn't know all that much at 13, I picked up on the fact that something wasn't right"
Balanced Reporting: Includes both Wenders’ gratitude for public feedback and Kinski’s lawyer’s tempered welcome of the decision, acknowledging it was 'long overdue'.
"I also regret that it has only happened as [a] result of public pressure"
Comprehensive Sourcing: Quotes AFP and includes background on Kinski’s Hollywood career, adding context to her public stature.
"Nastassja Kinski is the daughter of the late German film icon Klaus Kinski..."
The Guardian
Provides the most comprehensive account, including Wenders’ initial defense, public backlash, Kinski’s long-term efforts, and specific prior advocacy. Offers richer context about the ethical debate and industry reaction.
RTÉ
Covers the core event and includes key statements and future plans, but omits Wenders’ earlier controversial remarks and the extent of public backlash. Slightly less detailed on Kinski’s advocacy history.
No related content
Director Wenders pulls 1975 film over child nude scene
Wim Wenders withdraws 1975 film featuring 13-year-old Nastassja Kinski topless
Wim Wenders withdraws early film from distribution after campaign by Nastassja Kinski