Rating: 
Summary: Insanely Scary, Even More So In Its Silence!
Review: This movie is undoubtedly one of the most important (and I dare say one of the scariest as well) horror films ever created. First seen on the silver screen in 1922, when movies were still in their infancy, this movie can still evoke shivers with each viewing! I can only imagine how terrified those people who were lucky enough to be amongst the first to see this movie were. It might be a little difficult for your average slasher film fan to sit down and digest this one but any true fan of horror movies will seek this movie out! It's effect is even more ominous in the fact that the film is silent save for the few interjections of music here and there. I can't fully explain why this movie is so great but it has something to do with our childhood fear of monsters. Max Schreck's grotesque vampire is every bit the embodiment of what I'd imagine the Boogeyman to look like! His lurking motion, his furtive glances and piercing eyes could belong to that proverbial stranger who is always out to offer our children dangerous candy. Trust me on this one, if you understand any of the film conventions of the early 1920's you will appreciate the groundbreaking achievement this film is. And when you try to go to sleep after watching this, and you think you hear something creeping up the stairs; you'll know what it looks like and you will pray for dawn!
Rating: 
Summary: We are not thinking of the music, rather the FILM!
Review: I want to refer to some of the other people who wrote reviews for this: While I realize that the music is part of the movie, it is NOT the focal point! It is the visual stimuli that the movie gives off. There is a movie coming out in 2000 that is a takeoff of this, I reccommend the movie for halloween parties and to get frightened. Josh
Rating:
Summary: The first and last horror movie
Review: After eight decades, this movie does more than hold its own. Murnau's direction brings out every single element of eeriness. But the horror is all suggestive and the evil represented through use of shadows which amplify the effect. Schreck's vampire is archetypal not because Tobe Hooper's Salem's Lot tipped its hat to it but because it exemplifies all that the Universal and Hammer representations were not. Gone are the overtly erotic, suave and debonair trappings of the black cape and v-shaped hairline, enter the truly demonic, satanic look which Bram Stoker had envisioned. Bran Castle is equally decrepit. But you can tell that the ruins are genuine and not some prefabrication of a studio team. The archaic crags and convoluted layout of the vampire's residence is augmented by the direction all the way through the first 1/3rd to 1/2 of the film. The 63 minute version (it may say 80 minute on the outside jacket) is the original one and it's chock full of shudders. The important thing to do is to forget about the academics of the movie (like Harker's being representative of the young Aryan being sent to his doom)and sit back and let its imagery spill all over you. You have to watch this about twice to 3 three times before the true significance of this first Dracula adaptation can sink in with you. Future versions can't hold a candle to it (except for Herzog's 1979 remake). My only gripe would be with von Wangenheim's portrayal of Harker (Hutter) as he is never really vampirised in the 2nd half of the film. I'd say the best way to discover this movie is on your own. Don't listen to anyone before you see it otherwise you may end up with false expectations. It's a great film but you need to find that out on your own. I'm only writing this to guide prospective takers on the correctness of their choice. Save watching it for late night weekend viewing because it really has the potential to haunt you. The fact that it's a silent adds to the terror in that the characters are deadened by a grainy, shadow-poisoned, black-and-white bubble. Well worth it on all counts, especially for generation Xers to stumble upon. Our great-grandparents' generation had it sussed with scare cinema.
Rating:
Summary: best vampire movie ever made
Review: i watched this movie home alone on a program off-beat cinema. never have i been so frightened in all my life. the music, which doesnt really fit the movie too well makes it especially eerie. trying to sleep after this one with all the lights off is a feat of its own. a must see on or near halloween, or slumber parties. THE movie to own if you love horror and/or vampire movies.
Rating: 
Summary: Great film-bad music track
Review: The music track of this version is made up of various romantic symphonies and overtures. At first the effect seems quite pleasing. Then you realize that no attempt has been made to match the mood of the visuals with the music, so you end up with things like a light-hearted scherzo during the first appearance of the vampire, or Dvorak's "New World" symphony over the arrival of the vampire in Bremen. The music track eventually becomes an unbearable distraction and the only thing to do is to hit the mute button.
Rating: 
Summary: The Base for all Dracula Movies
Review: Nosferatu, the first vampire film based on the story of Dracula. The plot is simple. Harker is sent away from his wife Nina, to conduct business with an interesting client. On his trip he is fed stories of Nosferatu to insight fear into him. Despite the peoples warning, he still proceeds onward. After arriving at Graf Orlock's Castle, Harkers mind is changed and soon turns fearful of his new client. The story heightens after Graf moves to Harkers town and people start turning up dead. Nina, despite her husbands' warnings, reads the book of vampires and discovers her unfortunate key to stopping the deaths. The film does not compare to current horror movies, but for it's time it was fairly decent. The camera shots were well done, considering the equipment they had to work with. It had nice long shots to show the wonderful on-site scenes. For example the goodbye scene that is shown early in the film, when Harker leaves is wife. Unfortunately, the cameras' back then could not shoot in the dark so the night scenes were shot during the day. The Director did use some good shots of thick clouds to represent darkness for a good effect. Also having good use of shadows, such as the shadowy figure of Nosferatu overhanging his victims' body before he attacks. The acting was one of the film's downfalls. Many scenes were often over acted. The actors would often move too erratic, showing more then enough excitement. Nosferatu, on the other hand, would move around very slowly. Perhaps the director tried to use this to show how his victims were paralyzed with fright, and could not escape despite how slow they were being attacked. Their dialogue was decent for what you could expect from a silent film, if you had too much dialogue it would have only taken away from the scenes. Nosferatu had a good balance of mixing the scenes with the dialogue. The movie definitely had more good point then bad. It had good effect for the time it was made and was using a timeless story. The only downfall was the actors and the directors' inability to control them. Overall, Nosferatu was a great rendition of the Dracula story considering when it was done.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best films ever made.
Review: This is one of my all time favorite movies. It's a million times more atmospheric (scary and eerie) than anything they can make now. 1921 may be a very long time ago, but this is still one of the best films ever made. Period. -In any genre !. It holds up today, and it always will, I'm sure. It never seem to lose any of its power; in fact it only gains with time. In many ways, the movie is very much like a vampire itself. -It may look worn, but it never dies. Just think what we would've missed, had they really destroyed all the copies back then. By the way, why is this version only 64 minutes long, when there's also a 90 minute German version in existence ?.
Rating:
Summary: A Great Piece In Vampire Film History
Review: This is the first known Dracula story put on film. A silent film, it is not for mainstream audiences anymore, but for those that are either interest in film history, or vampire in film history.There are tons of extras here. The commentary track is pretty informative. One thing I have noticed on these reviews here is that Amazon.com has integrated the reviews of the VHS release of this movie, which had a Type O Negative soundtrack. Please be aware that this DVD has no such soundtrack. It is the original. Overall a good DVD since I am one of those whom likes to follow vampires in film and in literature.
Rating:
Summary: Very Impressive DVD treatment
Review: I have been intrigued and fascinated by this seminal vampire movie for many years, so when I discovered its release on DVD, I was excited, to say the least. I was not disappointed. The original primary colored camera filter effects are restored, as well as the organ soundtrack (newly recorded), as opposed to the head-scratching Type O-Negative death-metal soundtrack used with the VHS release. An unbelievably creepy film that retains its power to this day. Also, this DVD boasts an impressive array of bonus features so lacking in many DVD releases. A must-see for fans of the bizarre.
Rating:
Summary: 1922 and is still the most terrifing
Review: The best vampire film ever made. Honestly amazing, how the first vampire movie put on film is still the best to this day.
|
