Nosferatu, The Vampire

Rating:
Summary: Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens
Review: If Todd Browning's "Dracula" is about the sound of Bela Lugosi's accented voice saying "Good Evening," then F. W. Murnau's "Nosferatu" is about the sights of Max Schreck's grostesque figure rising up out of his coffin. The fact that this is a silent film actually adds to the atmospheric tension; think of the moment when the death ship slips into the port of Bremen, carrying its cargo of death. The story is clearly Bram Stoker's "Dracula" (although the names have been changed to pretend otherwise and avoid paying the author's estate), and this 1922 film is actually more faithful than most versions of the novel, which almost invariably avoid the actual conclusion to the tale. Murnau's version ends with vampire's downfall being caused by a sacrifice based on the love of Ellen Hutter (Greta Schroder, the "Mina" character) for Thomas (Gustav von Wangenehim as the "Jonathan Harker" character). Even though Schreck's "Count Orlok" is clearly an example of German Expressionism with his gaunt countenance and immensely long talons he stalks his prey through a decidedly realistic 19th-century world, which also somehow magically adds to the film's effectiveness. Similarly, the "special effects" are nothing more than such rudimentary tricks as stop motion and double exposure, but none the less potent for their simplicity. Perhaps the greatest testament to this film is that directors who have filmed the Dracula story since "Nosferatu" have included homages to Murnau's masterpiece, from Browning (the actor playing the count is also the coachman) to Coppola (the count's terrifying shadow cast large on the wall). When released in 1922 this film was also known as "Nosferatu the Vampire," "Nosferatu, a Symphony of Horror," "Nosferatu, a Symphony of Terror," and even "Terror of Dracula." The 1998 reissue title in the United States was "Nosferatu: The First Vampire."

Rating:
Summary: The Best Dracula Movie Ever
Review: This movie is a beatifully shot and brilliantly told version of Bram Stoker's novel. Unfortunately for its makers, it was also an unofficial one, and they were sued by Stoker's widow. Maybe if she knew what some of the later Dracula movies would be like, she wouldn't have done that. I prefer "Nosferatu" to the Bela Lugosi version (which was not bad, but a bit cheesy even for an old movie), the Christopher Lee version "Horror of Dracula" (which was quite good), and the Gary Oldman version (which was weak in my opinion). "Nosferatu" is a silent film, so don't see it unless you're in the mood to read! I saw it on T.V. on Halloween, when I was recovering from surgery, and I was very impressed with the film. It's a truly different cinematic experience. The nature shots and castle shots are beatiful but eerie, and the title villian is chilling rather than corny. He's very menacing, with none of the romantic appeal often associated with Dracula but all of the sinister presence. Seeing the scene on the ship, it seems as though "Nosferatu" paved the way for the soulless killer archetype later represtented in "Halloween" (among other films). And boy, is he ugly! The scene where he looks at the guy who cut his hand is easily the scariest version of that scene ever filmed. I did find the ending a bit anticlimatic, but it is one of those endings that's anticlimatic in a somehow charming way (also similar to "Halloween," not in content but in feel). This atmospheric picture is not only a fun and spooky film to view, but it also appears to be quite influencial on the horror genre.

WARNING: The soundtrack to this movie is horrible. Remember, back in the silent era of cinema the music was added by some guy at the movie theater playing the piano, so there was never any official original soundtrack to "Nosferatu." Still, the people who restored it could have done without the tropical island music that couldn't be more out of place in a 1922 German film. They might as well have put a hip hop soundtrack to the movie. I'm serious, it's really that out of place. However, this didn't bother me too much, and it shouldn't bother you. Why? Because it's a silent film. Just MUTE the [darn] thing!

Rating:
Summary: A Gothic Feast
Review: Teutonic glory, theology, and spirituality come together in a brilliant silent black and white cinematographic feast in director F.W. Murnau's 1929 American release of Nosferatu. Thirteen minutes shorter than the original German release seven years earlier, the United States edition titillates with sexuality, political metaphors and supernatural evil.

The film parallels Bram Stoker's Dracula, a popular and provocative book released in Nineteenth Century Victorian Britain. Due to copy right concerns Henrik Galeen re-wrote the basic plot making Dracula into Count Orlok (Max Schreck) who purchases property in Wisborg, Germany, not England as in the novel.

At the time of the film's release it spooked American movie goers with sensual evil. Yet hindsight suggests that Germans were also given a political message. In post World War I the defeated country was forced to pay oppressive reparations making malnutrition, political chaos, and personal bankruptcy common. Nosferatu depicts the greed of victorious France, Britain, and the United States in the form of Count Orlok. Plague infested rats are associated with the vampire invading a "virgin" territory.

The virgin (Greta Schroder) is wife of the happy-go-lucky imbecile real estate agent (Alexander Granach) who sold the Count his property. The real estate agent's wife, whom Orlok becomes obsessed with, is a "sinless maiden." There is an implication that the marriage was never consummated. The husband represents the inept post-war German government that allowed the country to be defiled by foreign "rats." She has premonitions of the pending darkness on its way to Wisborg. There is a fatal inevitability of what must be done. She eventually martyrs herself for the greater good by submitting to the vampire's lust.

A predestination theme weaves its way throughout the film. "Do not hurry my friend," the real estate agent is told by a town official earlier as he prepares to meet Count Orlok. "No one can escape his destiny."

Do any of us actually have free choice in the final analysis? Doesn't God know all there is about our life before we are even conceived? Hence, is it a false illusion to think that choices can actually influence the final outcome? Did the martyred virgin have a choice or was it her destiny? Often we think to ourselves that "things happen for a reason" suggesting that certain things are indeed beyond our control.

Orlok's prolonged feeding on the virgin one evening makes him lose track of time. The morning sun - like the early raise of Easter Sunday - destroys him. Germany is offered a re-birth. Ironically, there is no foretelling of the new monster named Hitler that would soon arrive on Germain soil. Is death, re-birth, and death again that leads to a higher form of re-birth all necessary in the universal order of things and, hence, preordained?

Unlike Stoker's novel, there isn't an overt use of crosses, holy water, or the Eucharist to assist in killing Nosferatu. Instead, a woman's purity is used to lure and kill the creature. There is one subtle, but important religious reference. The real estate agent, prior to selling the vampire a castle, stays overnight at an inn. In his room is an icon of the Blessed Mother and a lit, hanging vigil candle before it. It's a powerful symbol that frames the entire film.

Over time, Marian images, sightings, and devotionals have increasingly interested me. In the Eastern Rite, Mary is often called upon as an intercessor of our souls. In the film there is a clear draw on the Marian cult. The film's virgin must be the intercessor for her community. Similar to Mary, the virgin, a Teutonic like Valkyrie, is both intercessor and preordained to make a sacrifice - the former her son the latter her life. This is an important theological theme, independent of eerie, stunning cinematography, that remains most memorable in the film.

Rating:
Summary: The definitive DVD version of the definitive vampire film
Review: Filmed in 1922, the director F.W. Murnau set out to film an adaptation of the Bram Stoker novel Dracula. Although he couldn't get the rights to the novel, he pursued filming it anyway, changing the names of the characters and some of the plot points in the process. Stoker's widow sued the makers of Nosferatu for copyright infringement and won. All known prints of the film were destroyed as per the settlement. The German character actor Max Schreck played the vampire (now named Count Orlok) and was ready for international stardom. Since the film didn't make it to the theaters, fame eluded him in his lifetime.

Luckily years later, a print surfaced and the reputation of Nosferatu was restored. But why does it get such acclaim? A lot of viewers today find it old and dated, without the shocks and scares of modern gore-fests you currently see in the theaters and video stores. That's a shame because Nosferatu influenced a lot of those movies.

Modern viewers are more used to a "sexy" vampire. Since illicit sex is often the theme in vampire films, it makes more sense to be seduced by an attractive, exotic vampire. Count Orlok doesn't match that description in the least. He is repulsive-looking and resembles a rat.

And yet the underlying sex theme is still there. As it's pointed out on a DVD commentary, Count Orlok is the doppelgänger of Hutter, the male lead. Both vie for the attentions of Ellen. Though she is married to Hutter, she doesn't return his affections as strongly as he gives her. But to save the town, she gives herself freely to the vampire.

Of course, others see different themes in Nosferatu. Some view Count Orlok as a precursor to Hitler and the plague to Nazism, which would come a few years later. He even seems to give a Nazi salute as he dies.

And still others point out the many viewpoints through windows and the use of forbidding shots of nature, which show an influence of 19th century German painters like Caspar David Friedrich. Not to mention the equal influences of early 20th century German Expressionism with its use of stark shadows and unlit corners.

But you don't need to see any of that at first. You can enjoy it on its own merits as a very creepy horror film. One of my earliest memories of watching horror films was watching Nosferatu one October Saturday afternoon on TV. The scene where the vampire's shadow ascends the stairs on the way to his prey gave me nightmares for weeks and lingered in my memory until I saw it again twenty years later on video.

How ironic that Nosferatu is called A Symphony of Horror, when it's a silent film. But the audio tracks offered on the DVD from Image Entertainment do embellish the film well. Hitting the audio button on your DVD while the film plays will take you to your choice of three audio tracks recorded especially for this DVD. The first is a modern, quirky score by The Silent Orchestra. The second is a more traditional organ score by Timothy Howard. The third track is an illuminating commentary of the film by Lokke Heiss.

The goodies on the DVD don't stop there. The print itself has been remastered from high quality 35mm film and is restored to its original running time, as well as to its original color tints (although I think I preferred it in just black & white). A favorite feature of mine is the photo album of the locations used in Nosferatu as they appear in the film and how they look today.

Rating:
Summary: A Masterpiece Of The Cinema.
Review: F.W. Murnau's "Nosferatu" remains the greatest of all vampire movies. It is a haunting, visually stunning experience and one of first true visual masterpieces in the history of film. Max Schreck is the best vampire I have ever seen in a movie because unlike the usual Draculas (well, here for copyright reasons it's Count Orlock), his is scary as hell. He makes Hannibal Lecter look like a sissy! Murnau presents some of the most haunting and hypnotic gothic images ever filmed and his story rarely needs the typical title card where the dialogue appears because just by looking, we know what's going on, we are drawn in and captured. It remains a creepy little gem. The only movie to even come near its effect is Werner Herzog's 1979 color remake. Murnau's film is an example of true art in the cinema, of real storytelling and building of atmosphere through sheer images. When film historians and critics look back at the beginnings of filmmaking, "Nosferatu" will forever be mentioned. It ranks among "M," "The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari" and "Metropolis" as one of the great German works, and among all movies is a giant. It deserves more than one viewing, it will draw you back for a second viewing.

Rating:
Summary: Restored?
Review: This is a great silent film, but don't expect this "restored" version to live up to Kino's edition of "Metropolis." There is quite a lot of scratches & trash, especially toward the beginning, and I wonder exactly what qualifies it as "restored," as there is no accompanying before/after feature. It's really enjoyable if you select the soundtrack by Art Zoyd.

Rating:
Summary: Not happy with this release
Review: Don't get me wrong - I've loved this movie since I saw it as a child, but this release leaves much to be desired. There are many good points of course: the commentary by Lokke Heiss, production and concept art, the restoration quality of the film, and even the design of the case, with a great Albin Grau painting of Max Schreck as Count Orlok.

On to what I didn't like about it: first, the tinting of the film. I've alwasy seen Nosferatu presented in stark black and white, and this always added to the creepy feel of the movie. However, Image Entertainment has chosen to use bright tints on the film in order to more clearly present moods, locations, times of day, etc. supposedly, this is how it was originally presented? It is quite distracting, and I feel it takes away from the quality of the video. My second issue is with the soundtrack options, of which you get two new ones. The first, by the Silent Orchestra, gets the right mood sometimes, but is too full and modern for this movie. It's very out of place. The second, an organ score by Timothy Howard, is too quiet, very bland, and adds nothing to the mood of the film. This being a silent movie, the music is a very important part, and I feel that both of these fail miserably at reflecting what is occuring on the screen.

It makes me long for earlier VHS editions I've seen, which, even though their video quality wasn't as good, were in regular B&W and had appropriate soundtracks which succeeded at mirroring the action on screen. Oh well, I can wait for another...

Rating:
Summary: let's have the guts to admit it - this is BORING
Review: I suppose only those that like this movie will check the reviews. Mostly to read about how others like the movie as well as they do. But lord, what a boring movie this is. I don't care if it's a "classic," I don't care how revered it is. Just because it's old and silent and the "first" movie about vampires/Dracula, does NOT mean that this is a good movie. I've seen plenty of silent movies, and it's true that most are boring, but some can be entertaining (I liked 1913's Cleopatra, for example). Nosferatu, on the other hand, is a bore. The mass of the story deals with people traveling, so you have tons of time wasted on someone walking, or riding a horse through vast landscapes, or having a ship drift through water. Walking and walking, riding, going places all the time - and never spending much time on the story when they actually GET THERE! It's such a terrible letdown. All this build up, and not much payoff. The director of this movie was obsessed with "filler." Filling time, wasting time, "just keep walking." Parts that were meant to be scary sometimes work. But barely. Count Orlock does look creepy (like a rat, or a bat creature, whatever...), and there are a few scenes of eerie looking shadows against walls. But that's about it. Sometimes Count Orlock looks silly, like when he's walking through town carrying a coffin as if it were light as cardboard (which it probably was). Worst of all, they took away the black and white of this movie by adding tints. So you get blues and greens and pinks. Horrible. Also, the music - well, enough people have complained about the music. It doesn't fit, especially near the beginning when it's just upbeat sounding and la-la-la happy silly and stupid. Grrr. I hated this movie. Glad I finally watched it, since it has such a reputation, but whew - what a pile. Don't buy into "this is great because it's so old" nonsense. This is boring, plain and simple. - Let the "not helpful" clicks begin!

Rating:
Summary: Nosferatu - Special Edition
Review: Nosferatu is definetly a classic film ; not only in the genre but also out of all movies.This was the first Silent film I've ever seen.And I was suprised that it actually held my attention.Count Orlock (The Vampire) was extremely chilly and haunting.The music was also well composed.I've heard there are many versions of the film so I think I've seen a very good one.It is a very dark haunting story.The castles and Carpathians add to the mood that was set for the film.I've also heard that there was a big lawsuit that Bram Stoker's wife made against the maker.This is a truly deep and intriguing movie for it's time and quality.Make sure to check it out.F.W. Murnau's German silent classic is the original--and some say most frightening--DRACULA adaptation, taking Bram Stoker's novel and turning it into a haunting, shadowy dream full of dread. Names had to be changed from the novel when Stoker's wife charged his novel was being filmed without proper permission. Running times vary depending upon versions of the film. Count Orlok, the rodentlike vampire frighteningly portrayed by Max Schreck, is perhaps the most animalistic screen portrayal of a vampire ever filmed. The design was copied by Werner Herzog in his 1979 remake and by Tobe Hooper for his telefilm of Stephen King's SALEM'S LOT that same year. NOSFERATU is an eerie, menacing film that should not be missed.

Rating:
Summary: Regarding the Alpha, Image, and Kino DVD Versions
Review: Of course this is a haunting film, certainly on everyone's short list of the greatest silent films in history. But which version to buy?

The Alpha Video DVD, like all of their silent DVDs, has an appallingly poor video transfer. You can watch it, but you wouldn't want to if you didn't have to. It seems like all of Alpha's old films are too dark on the left, and too bright on the right. When a character wanders to the left of the screen, he disappears, when he goes to the right, he is almost washed out. Intertitles can only be read clearly from the middle to the right margin. All the figures are grainy, like you need to adjust the sharpness, but can't. I could only recommend a Alpha Video silent DVD if absolutely no other option is available. I am a cheap guy who loves a good deal, but I think Amazon should seriously consider whether or not to even sell their shoddy products.

The Image Entertainment has by far the best looking cover and artwork, as I find they do for most of their products (compare their cover for The Thief of Baghdad with Kino's). But the soundtrack options are quite poor on Nosferatu, and are nearly as distracting to a proper enjoyment of the film as Alpha Video's terrible image quality.

The current winner for Nosferatu is certainly the Kino version. The image quality equals the Image Entertainment version, but the music is much better. Its not a long shot, however, as the cover art is inferior to Image's. And I still agree with the reviewer who wrote that all of these versions are running too fast. IMDB lists the running time as 94 minutes, but all of three of these versions clock in just over 80 minutes (10% too fast?).