Rating: 
Summary: Pleasantly surprised, greatly impressed...
Review: There are very few films about vampires, much less about Dracula, that I enjoy or will endorse. 1922's Nosferatu is ground-breaking and stunning for its time, and Werner Herzog's 1979 remake is simply the best of the genre. I heard about the film "Shadow Of The Vampire, but basically ignored it, thinking it was just another sad attempt at cashing in on a far too trite genre. However a while later, I took a chance and purchased "Shadow Of The Vampire" on video, brought it home and watched it. Needless to say, I was impressed and amazed how good this film is! How could there yet be another film about Nosferatu that is original and worth watching, I kept saying to myself? Well, this movie prooves that there is, as well as how there can be."Shadow Of The Vampire" is a film within a film; a story within a story. It is a film about the crew and director and players who made the original 1922 Nosferatu--but it is not a docu-drama. It is an orginal story of fiction that touches on non-fiction. The movie is full of grace, elegance, atmosphere, wit, and refinement. The acting performances, particularly by Willem Dafoe and John Malkovich, are superb and brilliant. The musical score is tasteful and effective. "Shadow Of The Vampire" isn't a particular scary film, but it certainly does get creepy at times, and can be quite disturbing. It is the great sense of wit and unintentional (at least in appearance!) humour finely woven throughout this film that keeps it from becoming the usual Vampire fodder; not to mention the clever story with its twist after twist. Brilliant.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Being John Malkovich
Review: As one who would rather pick through dusty attics than the *New Arrivals!* section of Blockbuster for a film to watch, this for me was a rare treat. I thoroughly enjoyed sitting in a theatre with other people who had seen, or at least heard of, FF Murnau's wonderfully creepy film. With the double whammy of being black and white and silent, the film might be at Blockbuster, maybe one copy, but probably a cheap one, badly reproduced, just reinforcing people's stereotyping of silent films. I hope Shadow of the Vampire keeps rental copies of Nosferatu hopping. And it just may, because it's a great film. Max Shreck, the actor playing the Nosferatu, is a real vampire. FF Murnau is a symbolic bloodsucker, slurping his actors dry, thinking only of the film. In addition to being a great vampire film, this is a great period piece. Sometimes 21st century audiences need reminding that even though Nosferatu is set in Victorian times, it was made in the 1920's. I assume the Victorian atmosphere is well done, just because I don't see any evidence of 1922. At any rate, an era that is viewed as innocent by both us in 2001, and the cast of the film in 1922 is recreated. This is important, because the 20's themselves were a not-so-innocent time. So we have a period piece within a period piece, smooth and fascinating. The atmospheric effect of the film is so good, I wish the cameraman would give lessons. The color of the film is wonderful. Although gore is restrained, the entire film looks as though it was shot through a vial of blood. There is a creepiness, but not the sort that you feel at a space alien or slasher movie, waiting for the moment that the monster is finally shown in full view. The creepiness here is the kind you get when you make a wrong turn and find yourself in a strange neighborhood, where people dress oddly, the buildings are in an unfamiliar style, and the more you try to find your way, the more lost you become. The performances are superb, and this is all around a film worth watching, even for people who don't like horror films.
Rating:
Summary: Shadow of the Vampire... a comedic film noir
Review: Take the early days of film making... take a director obsessed with making the perfect vampire movie... add in a real vampire to the mix and you got "Shadow of the Vampire"...nominated for 2 Academy Awards, this darkly humorous movie, exposes the inside behind the scenes look of the creation of the Silent Film Masterpiece... "Nosferatu"... Great performances from John Malkovich as the director and Willem Defoe as the Vampire, makes this movie a keeper!!!
Rating:
Summary: "The birth of the first difficult film star"
Review: I wasn't sure what to make of "Shadow of the Vampire" after my first viewing. I bought it on a whim on Halloween night, to scare my girlfriend with a "Nosferatu" double-feature. When the World Series game ran long, we ended up watching neither. I finally got to "Shadow" two weeks later and came away unsettled. This is more a movie about scary notions -- about shadows -- than a scary movie itself. Why did the film begin and end with 5-minute-long title sequences? Why was the ending so suddenly downbeat? However, I was still fascinated, so came back to watch a second time and was quite impressed. Now I wasn't expecting Technicolor gore (most of the deaths are alluded to, not shown), and got to enjoy more fully the electric dialogue between stars Malkovich and Dafoe. I wanted to cheer when Cary Elwes swashbuckled onto the screen late in the picture. I enjoyed Eddie Izzard's portrayal of Z-grade silent film star Von Wangenheim -- Izzard's manic gesticulations reminded me of Jay Leno in his more bizarre character bits. But it all comes down to John Malkovich in the mad-scientist goggles and Willem Dafoe munching on a bat. These are expert actors and we should all clearly be more like them in our daily lives. I want those goggles. The DVD extras are worth your time. The video interviews with Merhige, star Willem Dafoe, and producer Nicolas Cage (who's very *freaky*, bug-eyed and fidgety) are short, and do more than just mimic the director commentary. Izzard has a great line on the making-of featurette. Watch for two hidden trailers in the "Recommendations" section. Merhige's commentary track is mostly a winner. It's weighty stuff, be warned; Merhige is in full-on film school professor mode, discussing abstract notions, technical details, and Goethe. The commentary for "The Last Temptation of Toxie" this isn't. He does occasionally go overboard, talking his way through the endless opening titles, going orgasmic while comparing his "Nosferatu" recreations to the original, and rambling a sort of Oscar acceptance speech at the end. On the whole it's a good commentary track and if you choose to watch the movie more than once, this is a good use of 85 minutes.
Rating:
Summary: More than meets the eye
Review: Beyond being a film about vampires, and even a historiographic movie about Murnau, "Shadow of the Vampire" is a film about the film medium itself as a canvas for recording human memory as well as transfiguring human identity. And it is interesting that Murnau's "Nosferatu" was acclaimed as an influential piece that has left its mark in the work of filmmakers as recent as Tim Burton ("Nightmare Before Christmas"), when a simulationist film applying the filming process of "Nosferatu" looks BACK on what film is really all about. There have been many films that can mess with your mind, but this one comes in near tops for me, simply because it is hauntingly beautiful.
Rating:
Summary: Slow, but definately worthwhile.
Review: Unlike a lot of other reviewers on these pages, I didn't have a problem with the story. It was easy enough to follow, and a great idea to start with However, the film does have one major problem-the editing. That's why it does feel slow quite often, and why many scenes seem to end with the characters trailing anti-climactically off the set. The jump cuts are annoying, and completely throw off the film's pacing.
That aside, however, there's also a great many things to enjoy in Shadow of the Vampire. One of its best features is the blend of comedy and drama, the pathos of the vampire contrasted with his enjoyably theatrical snarling. I've never seen a vampire who was more lovable than Max Schreck. The gleam in his eye when he whispers, "I don't think we need the writer any longer," is absolutely priceless, while the loneliness in his voice when he says he is unable to create other vampires is touching. Probably shouldn't be, but is. Murnau comes accross as much more monstrous in many scenes, although he is strangely appealing too. So the film gets full marks for taking a buch of characters who should be thoroughly detestable, and making them interesting and likeable. The cast deserves credit for this, from Malkovich's intense and insane Murnau and Dafoe's wonderful Schreck, to supporting characters like Udo Kier's gentle, sympathetic Albin, and Ronan Vibert's beleaguered cameraman Wolf.
Meanwhile, the recreations of scenes from the original Nosferatu are fascinating. I haven't seen the original, although I definately will now, but whether or not these scenes capture Nosferatu's brilliance, they certainly market it well. Seeing Count Orlock grinning horribly up through the coffin lid was terrifying-and, like the rest of the movie, funny in a dark and twisted way.
Rating:
Summary: A great addition to the Nosferatu trilogy
Review: I mention that this is a great addition to the Nosferatu trilogy. Let me clarify that statement. Everyone is familiar with the original 1922 Nosferatu original by F.W. Murnau. I have a copy of it, and I agree with many of the critics, it is one of the scariest movies of all time. Several shots from that film of Max Schreck as the infamous Count Orlock or Count Dracula stand out in my mind as among as the scariest scenes in film history along with The Exorcist and the original Alien as well as Hitchcock's The Birds. I also have a copy of the second film in the trilogy, Werner Herzog's 1979 remake of Nosferatu with Klaus Kinski playing the infamous Count Orlock. It is a fantastic remake with political overtones for me, because I have always interpreted the original Nosferatu as a subliminal warning against Hitler as a blood sucker. In Herzog's remake, the evil is not completely defeated as if to suggest that evil can never be completely defeated. Surely history since 1979 has borne this out. Now to Shadow of the Vampire which I think is a an homage to the original Nosferatu. I rewatched Shadow of the Vampire the other night and then rewatched the 1922 and then the 1979 Nosferatu. Both sequels really honor the original in theme, tone, and style. In fact, I don't think a person can truly appreciate Shadow of the Vampire without watching the original Nosferatu first because of all the inside references to that film. Perhaps that is why so many people who have never watched the original Nosferatu might have been disappointed with Shadow of the Vampire. Remember, Shadow of the Vampire is an homage film, an "art house" film in the tradition of Hearts of Darkness which is a documentary about the making of Apocalypse Now. People watching Shadow of the Vampire expecting to see a graphic horrific film will be disappointed. Shadow of the Vampire is about how art affects people, and what people will do for art. It is more of a thinking film than anything else, but the end, for those who are patient, should certainly satisfy those who watch the film hoping for a climatic, violent ending. There certainly is a climax which is violent and to me, is chilling. What is this film about? What people will do for art, and fame, and what films are about and what they do to the actors as well as the audience. The last movie that made me think like this about watching something horrific and not being able to do anything about it is David Lynch's Blue Velvet. I put Shadow of the Vampire in the same category. A thinking man's nightmare.
Rating: 
Summary: compellingly strange film
Review: ***1/2 "Shadow of the Vampire" is a brilliantly conceived dissertation on the fine line that exists between art and reality, between creative genius and obsessive/compulsive madness. Lovers of film will get a particular kick out of this production since it uses as its kernel of historic truth the making of F.W. Murnau's 1922 silent horror classic "Nosferatu," a film that predated the American version of "Dracula" by almost a decade. Writer Steven Katz and director E. Elias Merhige have envisioned the famed actor Max Schreck (who portrayed the original vampire in Murnau's film) as an ACTUAL vampire, hired by Murnau to achieve the highest degree of realism possible. However, as Murnau soon discovers, it isn't always easy to keep a real vampire down on the set - and, as a number of his crew members start to fall victim to this ultimate in "method actors," the completion of the film itself becomes ever more doubtful. Walking a fine line between muted suspense and dark comedy, the film makes certain that we never quite forget the parallels that exist between the vampire, who yearns to make a victim of the beautiful starlet assigned to play the lead female role, and the director, who will sacrifice his own cast and crew to achieve his artistic ends. The film provides a fascinating duel of wills as both vampire and director confront one another with threats, recriminations and broken promises, only vaguely aware that they are really playing at the same game. As Schreck, Willem DaFoe brings a strange sensitivity to the man behind the makeup. We actually feel for this creature who has obviously fallen from the pinnacle of wealth and fine living in his "previous" life into this nocturnal pit where his only companions are bats and rats he is forced to devour for his own survival. One of the most poignant moments in the film comes when Schreck, alone on a deserted set, watches in mournful fascination a clip of film showing nothing more amazing or profound than a simple summer sunrise. John Malkovich gives his usual superb performance as Murnau, a man who becomes so absorbed in bringing his own make believe world to artistic fulfillment that he eventually cannot distinguish between what is real and what is illusory, eventually calling on his film crew to complete the final scene, totally unaware that they all lie dead at his feet, victims of his own obsessive madness. As Murnau tells his suddenly uncooperative leading man/vampire about the nature of film and, by extension, life, "If it happens outside the frame, it isn't happening." On a technical level, "Shadow of the Vampire" is an astonishing achievement in the art of filmic recreation. Many of the film-within-a-film scenes capture the quintessence of Murnau's original work almost to a tee. Although DeFoe's image doesn't quite reach the grotesque level of Schreck's original, the sets and general appearance of the recreated shots often fool us into believing we are seeing the real thing. Also, the filmmakers capture well the atmosphere of decadence that defined much of the artistic community in that postwar German era. "Shadow of the Vampire" is a highly unique and innovative creation. In a way, it honors the endurance of the original "Nosferatu" in showing that you really cannot keep a good vampire - or a good vampire movie - buried forever.
Rating:
Summary: Different..I liked it...
Review: Good horror movie..It is different,from other films out there...Great acting from William Dafoe and John Malcovich...Good DVD too.This might not be liked by all,but it is cool..Buy this for something diff...Freaky vampire,you'll see!! The END......
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointed
Review: I thought John Malkovich was good enough to save any film, but not this one, although he is good. I tried twice to see it to the end and always fell asleep before the middle. Willem Defoe as the Vampire got no fascination, no appeal whatsoever, you wonder how come a man like Murnau goes crackers over this snickering, handrubbing parody of a creep. Poor Max Schreck, who was REALLY frightening. He hasn't deserved this.
|
