Derek Jarman’s film Wittgenstein, produced in 1993, might have met with the liking of some as a work of art. As an outline of Wittgenstein’s life, and as an introduction to his philosophy, it was certainly a failure, especially when compared to the original Terry Eagleton script. This outcome was not inevitable. Of Wittgenstein it has often been said that he would make an ideal literary figure, and one can, with equal justification, maintain that he is almost destined to be a film character. His life was eventful; his philosophy is formulated in so many pointed aphorisms, a philosophy certainly not boring even when merely ‘told’; and to present the person and his work as a unity is, in Wittgenstein’s case, by no means a hopeless goal. ‘Movies’, in particular, played quite an essential part both in Wittgenstein’s life and in his later philosophical arguments. It is striking that he regularly used the film metaphor to illustrate philosophical points, in particular points where the relation of the signified to signs belonging to ‘more than one media’ was at issue. When analyzing those metaphors in context, Wittgenstein’s later philosophy appears in a new light. This is what he seems to suggest: the carrier of uncorrupted meaning is spoken language; ‘if we leave the rein to written language, philosophical problems will arise’.