Rating: 
Summary: If it's not in frame, it doesn't exist...
Review: Shadow of the Vampire is definitely one of my all time favorite movies. Willem Dafoe & John Malkovich are amazing actors in this ... and the script is witty and so funny! I found Willem Dafoe's character, 'Max Schreck' to be totally adorable. Yes, he kills people by drinking their blood, but there is something about him that almost makes you feel sorry for him. I mean, he did have to live out all those years, alone, probably bored... and hungry... and then the movie crew came along, and he was very friendly with them. Well, friendly with some, feasting on others. ;) I would like some makeup. Well you don't get any! (My favorite part of the movie). This movie just cracks me up, but it's definitely got a serious undertone, especially apparent in the ending. Which by the way, endings usually make or break the movie for me... in this case, the end made the movie, I thought. It was just so good. I'm sure not everyone will see the humor in it... but I think most people (especially those with a more sarcastic sense of humor) will appreciate this great film. The DVD is quite good as well. It's amazing ... the transformation Willem Dafoe goes through when they apply the makeup for Max. Very good acting... very good dialogue... very humorous... very easy to watch. Can you tell I love this movie?? If you like more Indie-themed movies (I personally feel they are usually more creative and better than Hollywood-mainstream movies, but that of course is just my opinion), or you like Mr.Burns from the Simpsons, like myself (So Max Schreck kind of reminds me of Mr.Burns (do I have weird taste in guys or what? haha) then you should definitely take a chance on this movie!!
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting twist on vampire flicks...
Review: This film is a fictionalized version of the making of the classic film, "Nosferatu." I say fictionalized because there is a plot twist toward the end of the film that makes this movie hard to believe. Hard to believe, but interesting nonetheless. Willem Dafoe is Max Schreck, a method actor who has agreed to play the vampire in F.W. Murnau's film, "Nosferatu." The cast and crew are stunned by his appearence and habits, but the man holds a darker secret that must be seen to be believed. John Malkovich, an excellent actor, plays Murnau flamboyantly and keeps him obsessed with his art. But it is Dafoe that steals the show, even getting an Oscar nomination for his part. The buildup to the dramatic climax is excellent, but the film runs out of fuel a little too early and the viewer is left with a half-full cup of a movie experience.
Rating:
Summary: Good Parts...But "Out of Frame"...
Review: John Malkovich...essaying "madman" Director F. W. Murnau... proclaims at the "maximum snuff"climax of his Monster-from-the-Id production NOSFERATU: "If it's not in the frame...it doesn't exist!" This is my assessment. Director Merhige has filmed MIRAGE not a movie. His effort is, indeed, a shadow. Sometimes less is not more. Reviewers applaud fine acting; eerie sets;and tremendously effective art direction. The meld-seque photography...with interspersed frames of the silent film classic....is often startling. But that's also the point. SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE is a consummate example of PM Deconstructionist Self-indulgence/Self-homage. Startling is the intention of pornography...not art.In my estimate SHADOW is intellectual pornography. The hedonism clip in the film's opening does nothing revealing or surprising in the vein...if you'll permit... of character development. It does, however, hint of perverse TWISTs for the sake of perversity that are coming, and thoroughly characterize a movie that is provocative for all the wrong reasons. The masturbatory/drug swoon sequence (of Catherine McCormack's "Greta")summarizes everything WRONG, irrelevant, and annoying about a film pretending to be about one thing and reveling in another. "LIFE is not a cabaret!" old chums. And A SHADOW is neither about Vampires or an allegedly great eccentric director. It is about "nosferatu"...if you accept its translation as "the diseased". The film has good parts. ((The "Interview with the Vampire" scene is funny and hip)) But the entire project is an "out-of-frame" celebration of decadence proposed as substitute for Life and Art. To me this is PM-BS. Remember how pathetic characters in the film...deluding themselves about what was going on...seemed embracing evil; and imagining they're in control of "entertainment" that proved to be such deadly folly.....
Rating:
Summary: "Shadow" is sure to be a classic
Review: I made the very wise decision to watch "Nosferatu" before going to see this film in the theater. It enhanced (if that's possible) my experience ten-fold, as it explained some of the interesting and multifacete turns this movie took. John Malkovich is (as always) terrific as the eccentric and obsessed director and Willem Dafoe is amazing as Count Orlock. Several times throughout the movie, I kept reminding myself that I was watching an actor and this wasn't a real person! I am truly in awe of his incredible talent, especially in this role. The DVD has some great features. There is a version of the movie with director Elias Merhige commentating that is very interesting and explains many aspects of the film and the dedication of the actors and crew. The only thing I found disturbing with the film were the two scenes of drug abuse.
Rating: 
Summary: Return of The Vampire...
Review: Was the vampire Max Schrek portrayed in the original `Nosferatu' an actual demon of darkness? That is the premise of this film, with the mysterious aura of Schreck haunting the celluloid frame. The characterization of Count Orlock {John Malkovich} is excellent , playing an actual vampire who hailed from a family of vampires in Hungarycoaxed to play the role with the promise of the director's wife as a reward. The director turns out to be the true villain with the streak of madness bourne of obsession for his profession - "Scientists in the creation and preservation of memories." Indeed.
The cinematography contains an eerie quality to it, runming from full color to sepia, to black and white, gracefully transitioning to preserve the arcane quality, in effect placing the viewer in that era with the excellent element of realism. Bit by bit - fist a cameraman, then a writer, begin disappearing and turning up dead, husks drained of blood, which frustrates Murnau, for it causes delays as he must replace each one. Finally, they must travel to Heligoland for the final scene, of which the Count is reluctant, which is a trait of the Vampire, that of preferring to remain one native soil and one's preferred created environment {ergo, the legendary home soil in the coffin}, yet he agrees to travel for the fair neck of the actress, which he does eventually savor, after abstaining for far too long. Unfortunately, the Count is betrayed by Murnauand ends up evaporating in that famous ending scene.
The legend that has been attached to this film since the beginning was a brilliant ploy to gather controversy and viewers, not unlike the gimmick created around The Blaire Witch Project.
Nosferatu preceeded the Bela Lugosi Dracula, which was actually the original intent, but Murnau could not secure permission with Bram Stoker's wife; It was `Dracula' which began the suave, romantic depiction of The Vampire, whereas Nosferatu focused more on the original monster , a grotesque emaciated corpse, but who is not without his own charms. In one notable moment while Orlock was cpnversing with two actors, he suddenly takes up a rat scurrying by, and forthwith begins partaking of its blood with a slurp as sort of a late night snack. The crew believes him to be an eccentric character actor whom none will see out of `costume'.
Overall, the archetypal Vampire takes his rightful due, but is betrayed by an unscrupulous mortal in the ende.
Rating:
Summary: Satisfying, but not a good stand-in for the original
Review: This film is candy for film lovers, especially for those like myself who can't get enough of the early silent cinema. An imaginative and creative reconstruction of the filming of the film classic "Nosferatu," the film is very entertaining and inventive, and shouldn't disappoint any viewer. But I don't think it would hold the same level of fascination for someone who hadn't already been captivated by the original.
My only complaint, made with the understanding that not every film can satisfy every expectation, and that the film works well enough within its own plan, is that by portraying Max Schreck as a "real" vampire, we don't get to see anything about the "real" Max Schreck who I imagine to be fascinating in his own right. The film also does not shed much light on the question why this film is horrifying on its own, at least for the time in which it was made, because it feels the need to set up the scariness of the film for a contemporary audience by portraying Mr. Schreck as if he really were a strange and scary character in "real" life, i.e. as if he weren't a good actor, who happened to have found a role for which he was ideal. Now to say he is a good actor may surprise some who find his performance over the top -- but his performance really was a powerful one for the day in which it was made. It is the slow deliberateness, and singularity of purpose, that is frightening; today as film goers we tend to lack the imagination required to find this performance powerful, and want instead violence and sudden movements.
What I find most interesting about older films like Nosferatu one is that they achieve their effects using very different techniques than are used in contemporary horror films -- but that if you put yourself in the right frame of mind you can discover yourself feeling something like what one might expect a contemporary of the film to have felt. While "Shadow" succeeds on one level, as a contemporary film that replaces horror with gleeful campiness, it manages to keep the viewer at a distance from the horror of the original.
Rating:
Summary: sure...
Review: When you put Willem Dafoe, John Malkovich, and Eddie Izzard all in one movie, it's bound to be good. And this film does not dissapoint. Its a little like watching something on the History Channel in it's mockumentary style story- a serious spoof of sorts- presenting the behind the scenes story of the great classic German film Nosferatu. Although a little show moving, I just enjoyed watching these great actors do what they do. (Plus vampiric content always gives bonus points in my book.)
Overall, a light look at early filmmaking and an entertaining conspiracy peopled with fabulous performances.
Rating:
Summary: Definitely my Favorite vampire movie!
Review: What a great idea for a screenplay: What if the slightly mad German director of a legendary vampire film insisted on casting a real bloodsucker for the lead role? Sadly, the director has limited skills, and the supporting cast is just so-so. But, Willem Dafoe more than makes up for these flaws with an astonishing portrayal of an ancient, cranky vampire who is vain enough to want to be a movie star, and ordinary enough to be willing to suck the blood out of ferrets in return for being the center of attention on a movie set. Is Dafoe's performance Oscar-worthy? I think so. It certainly is better than some of the mediocre performances that have won of late. The script is strong, as well, and the cinematography is beautiful at times.
|
