Nosferatu the Vampyre

Rating:
Summary: Stylistically Faithful Remake of Murnau's Masterpiece.
Review: "Nosferatu the Vampyre" is director Werner Herzog's tribute to F. W. Murnau, whom he considers to be Germany's greatest filmmaker, as well as a haunting gothic horror tale in its own right. It is a remake of Murnau's 1922 film "Nosferatu", which is the earliest surviving cinematic adaptation of Bram Stoker's novel "Dracula". Herzog has combined ideas from Murnau's film, Bram Stoker's novel, and his own imagination in creating a film that is, if anything, even more expressionistic and romanticist than the 1922 masterpiece. It is also more languid and pathetic than other "Dracula" adaptations.

This version of the Dracula tale, like 1922's "Nosferatu", takes place in Germany and Transylvania. Jonathan Harker (Bruno Ganz) is a real estate agent employed by a madman named Renfield (Roland Topor) to deliver a contract to Count Dracula in Transylvania, who wishes to purchase property in Wismar, Germany. When he reaches his destination, Jonathan finds a hideous, predatory Count Dracula (Klaus Kinski) eager to sign the deed to his new home. Several days later, ill and traumatized by horrors that he experienced at Dracula's castle, Jonathan understands that his young wife Lucy (Isabelle Adjani) will be in grave danger if Dracula reaches Wismar and sets out to save her. Count Dracula's arrival in Wismar coincides with the Plague. The city is overrun with rats and its population decimated by disease. Only Lucy comprehends the nature of the evil that has befallen the city and understands what she must do to stop it.

"Nosferatu the Vampyre" adheres pretty closely to Murnau's storyline, rather than Stoker's, except for the ending. The characters and actions have been embellished, however, sometimes with inspiration from the "Dracula" novel. Herzog's film moves slowly but steadily and spends more time with the characters than any previous "Dracula" adaptation. Count Dracula closely resembles Murnau's vampire but is even more grotesque and the least aristocratic of any cinematic Dracula. He is rodent-like and closely associated with rats and the Plague. But he departs from other Dracula interpretations in lamenting his permanent un-dead existence without light or love for centuries, which makes him a slightly tragic character. Although Count Dracula is the force that drives the narrative, the first half of the film is about Jonathan, and the second half concentrates on Lucy. Lucy Harker takes much inspiration from the character of Mina Harker in the novel "Dracula". The film's Lucy is more mystical and less methodical than the book's Mina. But, like Mina, she is stronger and smarter than the characters who surround her, and she tries her best to save everyone in spite of their blindness. Isabelle Adjani's Lucy Harker is the strongest heroine of any "Dracula" film.

Like Murnau's 1922 film, "Nosferatu the Vampyre" is visually expressionistic and romanticist. More of the film takes place outdoors than in other adaptations. There are lots of wide open spaces which are brightly lit, lending the outdoor scenes an airy feel, while scenes indoors tend to be dark and oppressive. This is clearly taken from the Murnau film, with its seaside scenes and bright sunshine. But the color cinematography and superior technology creates a sense of space that Murnau's film doesn't have. Colored lighting is lifted directly from Murnau's film, however. 1922's "Nosferatu" was filmed in black-and-white and tinted several colors to communicate time and mood. "Nosferatu the Vampyre"'s night scenes are bathed in blue light, and the inside of Dracula's castle is close to sepia, producing much the same effects as Murnau's toning.

English and German versions of "Nosferatu the Vampyre" were filmed concurrently. Werner Herzog shot the scenes with dialogue twice -once in German, once in English. The two versions differ by only seconds in length, but they are edited slightly differently. Whichever one you see, "Nosferatu the Vampyre" is one of the most interesting adaptations of Bram Stoker's "Dracula", even if it is an indirect adaptation. It is also the slowest paced and highly expressionistic, which somewhat narrow its appeal.

Rating:
Summary: Vamps that don't suck
Review: "Nosferatu the Vampyre" is the 1979 remake of the 1929 silent film classic. I have read a lot of reviews comparing the two, but I can't; I never saw the original. It is basicly Bram Stoker's book "Dracula" with a few twists. Dracula (who's face looks like a rat without hair) comes to western Europe (he goes to Amsterdam instead of London) and spreads a new Bubonic Plauge with rats around town. The only person who knows what's going on is Lucy. As you can see, there are a few changes to the book. Mina and Lucy trade positions. Professor Van Helsing is more or less useless, and dosn't even show up until the end. Renfield is Harkers boss and sends him to Dracula. And while we're on the subject, how did Renfield become entrances to the Count if the two never met before? The montage scenes with Harker going across the Carpathian Mountains are beautifully shot, the waterfalls and grassy pastures are magnificent, makes me wish I could go there. The movie is in German with English subtitles. But if you get this DVD, there is also a second disk that is dubbed in English, which isn't bad, as far as dubbing goes. I think both versions are equal. And then there is the suprise at the end, I thought that was a actually a stroke of inspiration. The movie is rated PG, so it isn't very bloody at all. Suitable for most anyone.

Rating:
Summary: I saw the English version.
Review: Although there are some great atmospheric shots in Nosferatu, as well as major creepiness any time the vampire himself comes onto the screen, there are long periods when the film just seems to stutter and die. This is not simply due to the generally slow pace of the film, although that does play a part sometimes. Rather, there are just too many minor annoyances that pile up. There is far too much "moralizing", especially towards the end of the film. The trouble is that these moralizing speeches come across sounding like the characters who are speaking them are utterly uninterested in what they are saying; ex. when Mary says to Dracula "salvation must come from within ourselves", she says it so matter-of-factly that any effect that the statement might have had on the viewer completely dissappears. And on and on.

Perhaps these scenes sound better in the German version; I don't know.

Also, for such a serious movie it's quite hard to take some of the actors in it seriously; the madman who joins Dracula when he comes to London has a laugh that is so ridiculous by the end of the film that it's just not possible to not crack up laughing at his acting (probably not what Herzog had intended). I was also quite dissappointed with Van Helsing's character in this movie, who during half of his time on the set rambles on about how Science (with a capital S) has DISPROVED everything supernatural (which, apart from being completely at odds with his character in the original book, is also a very stupid statement).
Scenes that were important in the original movie (such as the ship's journey to England) are given short shrift here.
Also, Herzog doesn't seem to mind introducing continuity problems for the sake of atmosphere. For example, when Jonathan is in Dracula's castle there is a young Gypsy boy who stands in the daytime near the castle, alone, and plays (really badly) a strange melody on a fiddle. Why anyone would want to stand beneath Dracula's castle and play on a fiddle is not answered.

There ARE some redeeming factors to the film. For example, the introduction to this film is marvellously creepy and unnerving, showing us statues of dead and decomposing bodies. I also really liked how Herzog handled the plague that came to London (although why one vampire would want to kill hundreds of people each night is beyond me...); there is one extended scene in particular where the camera takes a stroll through the sickened city, where those who pay attention to detail will be able to find all sort of gruesome and disturbing events that happen, perfectly choreographed.

Overall, though, this does not seem to me to be the classic that many here are making it out to be. I've heard that the German version is superior, so perhaps I've judged the film too early.

Rating:
Summary: The Classic Art-House Version of Dracula
Review: For our second outing between Kinski and Herzog we find that the director has chosen to remake, or rather retell, his favorite film of all time - `Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens' by F.W. Murnau (1922), while at the same time adapting more of the original Stoker novel into the remake, using the original name of Count Dracula (Kinski) instead of Orlok and injecting his own take on the story of Dracula (in German), which for all intensive purposes is a story about `tragedy' and Herzog has correctly identified this main theme that would help levitate this entry to one of the all time great art-house horror films with images of Kinski's vampire often filling many film magazine pages and posters. In fact, it is Herzog's most commercial and accessible film to date. It was this telling of the Dracula story that influenced Coppola to remake the Stoker novel entirely into a film. It was not the first time Coppola had been influenced by Herzog. Coppola learned from Kinski and Herzog in "Aguirre: Wraith of God" that guerilla film making while going up a jungle river would be just what he needed for his version of Conrad's "Hearts of Darkness" (Apocalypse Now).

The usual Kinski/Herzog display of frustration is more subtle in this film than all the others probably because the beautiful Isabelle Adjani keeps Kinski distracted long enough for him not get angry with Herzog's cruel daily shoots to `get it right' and deliberately making the actors and actresses angry for their performances. Here everyone just looks deathly sick and move extremely slowly. Even Adjani looks paler than Kinski at times. For some reason this has given Herzog a more controlled approach to this film with certainly less improvisation and `on the spot' acting than any of his other collaborations with Kinski. Here we see a mix of Herzog's favorite - Tarkovsky's slow shooting style while cutting in shots of water (Herzog uses a bat in slow motion) and some sort of strange cinematic art house presence that we would see in many of Andy Warhol's productions. Herzog also gets the lighting just right and the cinematography is sublime - watching Kinski materialize from the darkness is again some of the most memorable images in art house cinema ever. Herzog also brings coffins en masse for display. Black coffins play a major role in the design throughout the film. Later on during a plague thousands of rats covering a city become central to Herzog's eye for capturing horror (a formal dinner takes place among hundreds of rats because the diners have the plague and wish to make the best of it before they die) - again extremely visionary and talented. Adjani puts on an amazing performance while remaining stunning under all the white. In one classic scene where she is confronted by Kinski she looks and acts more scary than Kinski almost performing him off the screen. The ending is an erotic take on the original film with Kinski touching Adjani all over, but the acting is excellent. The final twist comes as a shocker and is a bit funny. The end scene is like something out of a great Western and looks spectacular. Also the strange atmosphere of holiness is found throughout this film more than in any other Herzog/Kinski collaboration. The use of Orchestral sounds makes it all the more eerie while at the same time retaining that spirited electric connection to the presentation of madness that Herzog and Kinski are so well noted for.

'Nosferatu the Vampyre' is probably one of the most original art house horror films ever made even though the subject matter has been beaten to death, however it still ranks up there as one of the best versions of Dracula you can see. The DVD transfer is good and crisp. The aspect ratio is 1.85:1 and there are a lot of extras including director's commentary. By the way you can get the Kinski/Herzog box set of 6 films for a few quid extra than this stand alone DVD. Go look for it.

Rating:
Summary: One of the most boring, overrated horror films
Review: Hello? Doctor I have insomnia. Could you help me? Yes, watch Herzog's Nosferatu. I was cured and now I am able to get a good night's sleep. The pace of this film is tedious. The scenery is nice. So what? So is the scenery on National Geographic Explorer. One of my problems with Herzog is that he doesn't so much make films as much as he simply puts pretty pictures and scenes on film. This is not what cinema is all about. Herzog's Nosferatu fails the litmus test. Watch Psycho or Bride of Frankenstein or Halloween, then try to put this on. The inferiority of Nosferatu in comparison to those films is startling. If I want pretty pictures I'll go to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. I can't believe that people watch this and are entertained. Films are supposed to be gripping, enthralling, emotional. Horror films especially should be filled with suspense and a degree of the unknown. Nosferatu falls flat on all accounts.

Rating:
Summary: Now here is a great adaptation!
Review: Herzog blows the breath of life into this tale - kind of a dedication to another great German director - Murnau. This is filmed with a gorgeous detatched feel - common to Herzog's best films. This one also boasts the talents of Bruno Ganz - who you may recognize as the star of 'Wings of Desire' and 'The American Friend'. Herzog gives the tale his own interpretation of the tale - wisely avoiding the remake approach - and throwing his own insight onto this almost tortured looking count dracula - played by Kinski - who is, as always, really into the role. This ranks as one of Herzog's best - and certainly one of the best of the genre of horror films!

Rating:
Summary: Stop The Black Coffins
Review: I think the best thing about this film is that there are NO SPECIAL EFFECTS. it's all pacing and lighting. although you get both versions in the set, the German version is much better.

Rating:
Summary: The one that bit the cow.
Review: I will be honest. When I first began this film, upon seeing the first ten minutes, I was frightened. Not because there was anything to be frightened about, but because of the low-grade production value that was very clear. The cheap sets, the cheesy actors with horrible English dubbing, coupled with a soundtrack that could easily raise the dead, I was ready to watch this film crash and burn. Oddly, this only happened within the first ten minutes, once Harker gets to Dracula's castle, we are handed huge portions of the meat and potatoes of this film. Nosferatu transforms right in front of your eyes from a cheesy horror flick to a mind-bending horror classic that deserves the cult following it has obtained. This was one of those films that you should sit and enjoy throughout the entire film, and do not judge it on just the first few minutes. Get into the story, and I think you will be impressed.

There were two parts that stuck out the most in my mind. These were two scenes that proved to me that I was in fact witnessing cinema in its rawest form. The first is when Dracula is running down the streets of Virna seemingly random, but imaginatively pure. He is searching for the woman he dreams about, Lucy Harker. He has the expression of a kid in a candy store for the very first time. This is classic avant-garde filmmaking at its best. You could tell that money was tight for this production, but somehow the masterful eye of director Werner Herzog kept it all together. His scenes were, to say the least, brilliant. There were some very starchy moments, but all together he kept a very vivacious spirit alive in this film. Again, it just took about ten minutes to get into the full package of Nosferatu.

The second favorite scene of mine is the stoic Last Supper scene that confused me at first, but after finishing the film made much more sense. The plague was infesting this little town, and the citizens knew they were going to die ... immorality was a desire of only one person, Dracula, so why not celebrate in the best way possible. I know there are other ways to see this scene, but I just saw a hopeless class of people living life for the possible last time. It was visionary and beautiful all at the same time.

While these scenes really helped create the aura of the film, it was purely the work of the actors that kept my mind focused on the screen. My favorite of all the characters presented was Roland Topor's portrayal of Renfield. His sinister, yet uncontrolled, laughter spooked me. His face was goofy, and believable. He embodied the sense of insanity and used it well for his character. Second, was Kinski as Dracula. Where did they find this guy? I do not believe that vanity was anywhere included in his vision of Dracula. He was scary, curious, and insatiable all at the same time. His portrayal of Dracula beats Gary Oldman any day (I have not seen the 1922 version with Shrek ... so I stand to what I say ... for now). Overall, everyone from Lucy Harker to a very unused Van Helsing was superb and really carried this film off the ground.

The only disappointing aspect of this film was the DVD. Normally, I can look past horrible reproductions of film as they gradually make it to digital format, but this was uncalled for. Here we have a beautiful film with some very good acting and direction, and all we have is a Chapters menu and Start Film. I was sad to see this. I wanted some more history on this film and to know more about these actors. I was a first time viewer that desired more knowledge. Secondly, the sound mixing was off. Perhaps it was off the entire film, but the actors at times seemed to be saying one thing with their lips, and out came something completely different from their voices. It was a very strange distraction that unfocused me from this film.

Overall, with the recent popularity of the Hollywood lack-luster Van Helsing, it was sheer enjoyment to go back to the classics and see where Van Helsing found his start. This was a beautiful film that should be viewed by everyone, but waited until another version is released on DVD. This just didn't make the grade for me.

Grade: **** out of *****

Rating:
Summary: "The best Nosferatu ever!"
Review: It's widescreen, but that usually never matters to me. This movie is the best since F.W. Marnau's older version of the film. Although a few things have changed, the wives of Harker and Westenra were switched around and the vampire's name is Dracula instead of Graf Orlock. But I don't care, it's the same vampire that has the black cloak, long fingers, bald head, and pointed ears. That's probably the scariest version of Dracula that there will ever be. I just started reading the novel by Bram Stoker, and I'm so far impressed. One day I hope to find this video in a non-widescreen format, as it gets a little irritating after a while. This movie should actually get a difinate PG-13 for the scenes at the beginning that included all those desmembered corpses and victims of the vampire, heck, I'd even give it an R if I had to. But oh well. Klaus Kinski does a very good job of playing Nosferatu, he's very scary. I don't recommend this film for young children, I'd suggest ages 9 and up.

Rating:
Summary: Cerebral, dream-like horror
Review: Nosferatu unfolds like a languorous, disturbing dream. The images have an hallucinogenic, archetypal quality: mummified human remains in an ancient tomb; the figure of a woman sitting on a beach studded with tombstones; a dead sea-captain lashed to the wheel of a deserted sailing ship.

Like Kubrick's The Shining, Nosferatu is less a standard genre film than a singular expression of a filmmaker's vision. Writer-director Werner Herzog began with F.W. Murnau's expressionist classic, mixed in elements from Bram Stoker's novel Dracula, then set about creating a meditation on the vampire myth. What would it really mean to live forever, and be compelled to feed on the blood of others? What of the unspeakable boredom? The longing for companionship? For normalcy? For death? As played by Klaus Kinski, Herzog's Dracula has spent hundreds, if not thousands of years alone with these thoughts. He is the ultimate poster boy for German angst. If not for the skill of his performance and Herzog's direction, he might have lapsed into self-parody.

There are shots that all but reproduce moments from the silent classic - right down to the overwrought body language. But Herzog, Kinski, and the rest of the cast (including Bruno Ganz as Jonathon Harker and Isabelle Adjani as his wife Lucy) keep it in check and keep it beautifully stylized, so it all works.

Probably due to the involvement of American studio 20th-Century Fox, Nosferatu was shot in both English and German versions. Both are on this double-sided DVD; comparing them is instructive, since there are non-trivial differences in the visual construction of both films. Most critics agree (and I concur) that the German one is superior.

Finally, to get an idea of whether you will like this - or any - Werner Herzog film, take the Armageddon-Matrix test: if you hated Armageddon because it was empty and overblown, but kind of liked The Matrix because of its ideas, then you may like Nosferatu. If, on the other hand, you thought Armageddon rocked, but only kind of liked The Matrix because it was slow in places, then don't even think about it.