Nadja

Rating:
Summary: "Unseen. Unforgiven. Undead." (3½ stars)
Review: "Nadja" was yet another movie that I bought on the spur of the moment because of some of its high reviews. While not a bad purchase, it was a little too artsy for me, mainly because of its overuse of pixel-vision. One moment the screen would be in black-and-white, then suddenly go grainy. It was more of an eyestrain than good artistic expression, and I wasn't quite sure what the purpose of it was, or whose viewpoint it was meant to be, if it was even supposed to be of someone's.

Belying its moody black-and-white cinematography (which is one of the movie's strengths), "Nadja" has a lot of tongue-in-cheek black humor. It's rarely scary--unless you count the bad acting and script--and should appeal to viewers who like relatively low-key, surreal vampire flicks. It's not surprising David Lynch had a hand in this movie. He even makes a two-line cameo as the morgue receptionist.

Even after just watching "Nadja" a few moments ago, I still can't recall the exact plot of it, but I'll try to summarize the events anyway. Near the beginning, Nadja's father (Count Dracula) is killed, having been staked by Van Helsing (Peter Fonda), a vampire-hunter. Nadja (Elina Löwensohn) then goes in search of her ill twin brother, Edgar (Jared Harris), who is being tended by his nurse, Cassandra (Suzy Amis), in Brooklyn. (For some reason, Nadja and Edgar don't get along. Apparently, he thinks she's pure evil.)

Before she finds him though, Nadja seduces a young woman named Lucy (Galaxy Craze--is this even her real name?) and turns her into a zombie. Lucy's husband, Jim (Martin Donovan), joins up with his uncle, the above-mentioned Van Hellsing--who is actually his father (weird "Star Wars"-esque moment here)--and they follow a hypnotized Lucy to Nadja's place. The movie then wraps up in Nadja's native land (Transylvania, who'd have guessed it) in a somewhat predictable ending.

While watching this movie, you'll probably notice how practically every character is related, from the two bastard child of Count Dracula to the mousy nurse and her vampire-hunting relatives; it was all a little too absurd. Yet vampire fans should like this one, especially considering all the attractive actors/actresses in it--it's all eye candy. Rated R for some profanity and blood-drinking (including a lesbian menstruation bit); unfortunately, the blurry pixel-vision ruins most of the graphic scenes.

Rating:
Summary: Increadible and often misunderstood film
Review: 5 stars is actually too low for this video, it is by far the best film I`ve ever seen. Ok, the first thing that everyone misses is that this is NOT a vampire film. Vampires are only used to tell a story because the film deals with dark subjects and it attempts to cover an age of a couple of hundred of years and having people who live longer and are more experienced is more effective, that`s why vampires were used.
The film itself is about being unsatisfied with one`s life and attempting to change it. What everyone seems to miss is that all the characters have one thing in common - they are all unsatisfied with their lives, they all feel that something is missing and they all desperately try to change their lives. All but Renfield, who is there to try and present the other option. He even presents himself with - My name is Renfield. I am her slave.
Nadja`s father tried to change his life through love, her brother is also not happy with his life so he tries to find his solutions, the same is with the girl Nadja meets in the bar and her father who tries to do it through religion, which is mentioned in one sentence but still adds to what the film is about. But they all fail or find solutions that are more or less conventional. Nadja is trying to do something else. What she keeps repeating is that she is free now that her father is dead. This can be related to the archetypical criticism used in literature and also in the works of Ted Hughes - such as Shakespeare and the Goddess of Complete being, and also some other writers.
This is a multy level film, it`s not easy to understand it and it needs to be seen at least a few times. Labeling it as a vampire film, a dark comedy or whatever is very wrong, it is a very serious film that deals with a very serious subject and requires a lot of reading and research in order to be understood correctly. But it is definitely worth it.

Rating:
Summary: Welcome to amateur night...
Review: A rather sorry production in just about every respect. Some of the worst acting to be seen... anywhere...
Nadja herself was decently played, the major flaw being a lack of worthwhile material for her to sink her teeth into (my little pun here far outwits anything you'll find in the film..). The others are all rather bland... no expression, no skill, no.. point. More like manequins than real living breathing people.. Peter Fonda as Van Helsing may LOOK the part, but he certainly can't play it (seems to me that someone was judging the book by its cover while casting.. oops!)
To complement and exacerbate the poor acting is the even poorer dialogue. The plot is decent, but it isn't developed in any meaningful way. How this lemon got off the ground in the first place is the only thing the viewer is really left wondering about at the end...

It seems to me that some of the other reviewers here may be the film makers' mothers, they're so positive about it! ;)

The funniest thing about this film are the comments written on the box: "The lushest film of the year!" - must have been a very slow year. "stylish, erotic thriller" umm... ???? how so? That one little psuedo-lesbian scene is one of the sadder attempts at sensualism I have ever seen. It doesn't quite come off you might say... And as for style, there isn't any to speak of. Shooting in black and white does not automatically make you stylish I'm afraid... and besides, no effort is made to take advantage of the black and white look.
"An all-out orgy of sex, blood, danger and death..." - nothing of the sort actually surfaces in this flick..
"Truly hot! Sex and moviemaking of the unsafest sort." This last one truly brings out the laughter - HA HA HA
It could not be colder, and this is beyond a shadow of a doubt AMATEUR moviemaking.

This film gives home movies a bad name.
And lets not even begin to comment on the absolutely horrible and inappropriate sound track... where did they find this nonsense?

Rating:
Summary: Existential Vampirism!
Review: Hal Hartley does the neo-gothic thing. :) I'm gonna have to find out more about this Michael Almereyda. What a masterpiece! I'm always so bummed that there's not enough real films out there these days, then I find out this gem has been kicking around for five years and I just never bothered...

Rating:
Summary: I love vampire films, I hated Nadja
Review: I gave this film two stars out of pity for the two amazing lead actresses who were stuck in this horrible film. The story is a mish mosh of cliche vampire lore extrapolated from every bad Dracula remake you've ever seen.

The black and white cinematography is wonderfully stark and gothic in some scenes only to be ruined by a cheesy (and grainy) mosaic (pixelization) effect in others. That mosaic filter invariably gets applied to the the few scenes in this movie that would otherwise be entertaining if you could actually make out just what the hell was going on. EVERY single time something climactic occurs the film becomes grainy and pixelated. A film school freshman could have done a better job here.

The male characters in this film though are it's true death knell. Not one of them brought anything to their scenes other than the type of boring machismo-laced melodrama that leaves me with an ichy fast-forwarding trigger finger. I had hope for Renfield (Yep, they have a character named Renfield... no dead horse left unbeaten here) but all he ever did was chainsmoke and pout. That left me with the annoying husband, the dull brother, and Peter Fonda who must've ended every day of filming with a quiet night spent cursing the soul of his agent for getting him this gig. The only low left for that guy after this is a role as "old dude #5" in the next Pauly Shore movie.

Yes its that bad, worse still if you're a fan of vampire films and bought this one on the strength of the positive reviews on this page. Do not believe those reviews, they lie I tell you. Lie! But seriously if you're looking for a half decent B/Indie vampire DVD you'd be better servered picking up "Razorblade Smile", which isn't too great either but is, at the very least, enjoyable. A quality "Nadja" is keenly lacking.

Rating:
Summary: Bizarre cinematography ruins potential indie classic
Review: I so wanted to love this film, there's so much in it that could make it a personal favorite, but the director's use of blurred pixelled-up images constantly took me right out of the story. There is great mood, acting, ideas and dialogue, but whenever there is conflict or eroticism brewing the screen becomes murky and thick with large squared pixels that blur action to the point where at times you cannot tell which character is doing what. The screen often remains muddled for two or three minutes and there is an important sequence at the vampire's mansion where the screen remains like this for nearly ten infuriating minutes and I began shouting at the screen. I just can't for the life of me figure out what the director was trying to accomplish by destroying the visual images of his story. A few seconds here and there to indicate the vampire's perspective--though, if anything, a vampire's senses should sharpen when blood and skin are to be revealed--would have been more than enough to make his point. I recently tried a second viewing because I really do want to love this film but ended up twice as infuriated and left wondering what statement thick black squares have to make about eroticism and violence.

Rating:
Summary: Peter Fonda As Van Helsing OH YEAH!
Review: I was recommended to watch Nadja from a professor here at my college. My roomate and watched it and felt it was quite an artsy vampire film with good acting and errie music. I also loved how it payed tribute to Bram Stokers Dracula. With character names such as Van Helsing, Lucy, and Reinfeild. It is not hard to tell how much of an influence it had if your a fan of Dracula. Also in a few flashbacks Nadja's dad is none other than Bela Lugosi. Who is the definitive Dracula and is worthy enough to have a tarantula named after him in the film. On a final note Peter Fonda looks great with long hair and carrying around a suitcase of vampire slaying goodies.

Rating:
Summary: Bloody Good
Review: I'm a huge vampire fanatic. I love just about anything that involves vampires, including Anne Rice's vampire chronicles to the original "Dracula" with Bela Lugosi in the starring role. "Nadja" is more in the vein of the original "Dracula" in a sense that the film is shot in black and white and that there was minimal special effects. I was pleasantly surprised that Peter Fonda was in this film. Elina Lowensohn gave me the creeps as Nadja, the vampire that Dr. Van Helsing (Peter Fonda) is hunting. At times I was annoyed by the oft distorted cinematography. I enjoyed the fact that there wasn't that typical dazzling special effects as seen in "Blade" and "Interview With the Vampire". It gets tiring seeing the storyline get passed over by special effects in vampire cinema. "Nadja" is a classic indie film.

Rating:
Summary: Better off with Nosferatu
Review: If I were a teenager or a vampire-wanna-be I might have liked this film. Since I am neither I found this film to be very dull. If the two female stars weren't so beautiful I doubt that I could muster any interest in this film at all. The acting is fine, the cinematography is very good, and the image quality of the VHS is sharp but what does all that matter when all you have is a film that offers nothing new on a subject that has been done to death (pun intended). By all means check out the original Nosferatu or Herzog's remake. You'll find more artistry there.

Rating:
Summary: surprisingly good
Review: Its a wild ride well worth watching. Hard work, but at the same time somehow natural in its communication. Dialogue thats beyond simple in places, in others, worth hours of contemplation. I haven't "felt" a film this much in a long time.