I saw this as part of a double feature with Aguirre: The Wrath of God. Needless to say, it wasn't an evening of giggles. This is a film from beginning to end about pestilence. There is the actual plague. There are characters who are walking demonstrations of pestilence. There is the sad, defeated, Count who, as we all know, is not happy with his condition, but is programmed to steep himself in blood. The characters of Kinski and Adjani are on a collision course. Only through human sacrifice and lust can this demon be destroyed. It's a gray, striking film, full of sadness and despair. Kinski is visually stunning as the vampire. He is remindful of count Orlock in the Murnau film. There is more sensuality in this film (there are less limitations). Still, like its predecessor, the star of the show is death and the scenes with the rats and the people dancing away their last days, the coffins carried through the streets, are as striking as any performance. Herzog brings out the weight of human despair.
243 Reviews
the real standout is the cinematography...but it's painfully slow.
planktonrules25 August 2005
I would like to heap strong praise on the cinematographer in his ability to make a color film that looks almost black and white. These muted colors and use of dull blues and lots of grays REALLY enhance the film and give it a beautiful moodiness and creepiness. This is by far the best aspect of the movie.
As for the acting and writing, I was less enthusiastic. In addition to the stark lighting and cinematography, the acting itself was VERY stark and way too subdued. The moody scenery was good--the moodiness of the acting was NOT. While the movie should not have been high energy, at times it felt like it had almost none and tended to bore me from time to time. With a SMALL does of adrenaline, it would have been a lot better. The slowness of the film just seemed too much and the film would have improved by just speeding up the filming, as there are just too many long and deliberate scenes. Some see this as artistry--I see it as just too over-indulgent.
Although very dated, I still think the original is the better movie of the two. Unlike NOSFERATU (1979), it was unique and not just some come lately remake. And, and many ways, the original silent version is more haunting and terrifying.
As for the acting and writing, I was less enthusiastic. In addition to the stark lighting and cinematography, the acting itself was VERY stark and way too subdued. The moody scenery was good--the moodiness of the acting was NOT. While the movie should not have been high energy, at times it felt like it had almost none and tended to bore me from time to time. With a SMALL does of adrenaline, it would have been a lot better. The slowness of the film just seemed too much and the film would have improved by just speeding up the filming, as there are just too many long and deliberate scenes. Some see this as artistry--I see it as just too over-indulgent.
Although very dated, I still think the original is the better movie of the two. Unlike NOSFERATU (1979), it was unique and not just some come lately remake. And, and many ways, the original silent version is more haunting and terrifying.
Atmospheric Remake of a Classic
claudio_carvalho20 April 2012
In Wismar, Germany, Lucy (Isabelle Adjani) and the real state agent Jonathan Harker (Bruno Ganz) is a happily married couple. Jonathan's boss Renfield (Roland Topor) sends him to Transylvania to sell an old house in Wismar to Count Dracula (Klaus Kinski). Jonathan is advised by the locals of a village to return since the count is a vampire, but he does not give up of his intent.
Jonathan visits Count Dracula and when he sees the photograph of Lucy, he immediately buys the real estate. He drinks the blood of Jonathan and navigates to Wismar, carrying coffins with the soil of his land, rats and plague in the ship. Along the voyage, Count Dracula kills the crew-members and a ghost vessel arrives in Wismar. Meanwhile Jonathan rides to his homeland to save Lucy from the vampire.
"Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" is a wonderful and atmospheric remake of F. W. Murnau's classic film based on Bram Stoker's novel (but uncredited). Herzog has also changed the ending of the novel and uses wonderful cinematography supported by magnificent performances in his version. Klaus Kinski is one of the scariest Dracula of cinema history. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "Nosferatu - O Vampiro da Noite" ("Nosferatu – The Vampire of the Night")
Jonathan visits Count Dracula and when he sees the photograph of Lucy, he immediately buys the real estate. He drinks the blood of Jonathan and navigates to Wismar, carrying coffins with the soil of his land, rats and plague in the ship. Along the voyage, Count Dracula kills the crew-members and a ghost vessel arrives in Wismar. Meanwhile Jonathan rides to his homeland to save Lucy from the vampire.
"Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" is a wonderful and atmospheric remake of F. W. Murnau's classic film based on Bram Stoker's novel (but uncredited). Herzog has also changed the ending of the novel and uses wonderful cinematography supported by magnificent performances in his version. Klaus Kinski is one of the scariest Dracula of cinema history. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "Nosferatu - O Vampiro da Noite" ("Nosferatu – The Vampire of the Night")
The Most Complete of Vampire Films
kilgres_bloodmoon11 February 2001
The vampire genre has seen its share of lackluster films. Indeed, the centerpiece of the grand tradition, the Dracula legend, has seen so many remakes and revisionist attempts that one would be hard pressed to find a version of the tale that is original in its telling. Dracula, like it or not, is a cornerstone of Western society. And it is wholly unfortunate that Bela Lugosi is considered THE Dracula (although Hammer fans may contend that Christopher Lee holds the title since he played the good Count over twenty times).
With Werner Herzog's "Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" (also known as "Nosferatu: The Vampyre"), the old Hollywood rules seem to have been thrown out the window in favor of F.W. Murnau's striking silent film, the 1922 masterpiece "Nosferatu: Eine Symphonie der Grauens" ("Nosferatu: A Symphony of Terror"). While many purists of the genre balk at the idea of favoring the Nosferatu tale over the time-tested Tod Browning and Terence Fisher entries, one must realize that the cape-clad widow's peak Count has been sullied by a thousand parodies over time, and is simply not a frightening entity any longer. This was a matter much pondered by Francis Ford Coppola when considering his adaptation. While Gary Oldman's portrayal was serviceable and definitely different, something key was lacking from the tale.
This is what Herzog and his long-time "trouble and strife" lead man Klaus Kinski found when they ventured upon the "Nosferatu" remake. Herzog shifted the attention of the viewer away from the plot, which acts mostly as a backdrop for the imagery, and made it so the primary intake becomes a visual one. Kinski's Dracula is not the scowling insect of the Murnau film. He portrays the Count in a way that no other actor has quite grasped. In this film, Dracula is a suffering being, loathing every moment of his curse's continuation. Of course, as the good Count himself states, "Young men. You are like the villagers. and cannot place yourself in the soul of the hunter." The vampyre is trapped by his instincts, and Kinski's eyes betray harrowing madness (as they did in "Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes"), spiteful malice, and a sorrow so bottomless it defies description. It is as if the beast wishes to weep, but has forgotten how.
Filming on location in Germany, Herzog uses the same dreamlike camera angles, mixing them with a rich color palette and masterful lighting. There is a certain uneasiness that filters outward from the screen as you watch. As Jonathan Harker explores his surroundings during his lodging at Castle Dracula, there is inexplicably a young gypsy boy incessantly playing a scratchy violin under the archway. The surreality of the picture is only matched by its attention to the dark magic of the vampire. Like its predecessor, it actually seems to believe in the creatures, and respects them. It holds the legend, the plight of the people of Wismar, and the plight of the Count himself in deep reverence.
What can be extracted from the dialogue and plot is that this is not your average bloodsuckers extravaganza. In fact, the good Count only sets his fangs to the throat of the living once on screen, and when that occurs, it lends more of a feeling of sacrifice and sorrow than of terror. Indeed, the tone of the film is driven toward tragedy, and does not shift its course. One of the film's more telling moments is when Dracula, alone with Harker's beloved Lucy, ventures to plead with the beautiful lady, "Will you come to me. become my ally? Bring salvation to your husband. and to me. The absence of love. is the most abject pain." When she refuses, he does not lash out or decide to make a meal of her then and there. He instead moans with the intonation of a wounded animal and slinks off into the night.
"Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" is the most complete of vampire films, and towers over the genre. It could be considered a pity that the only film that sits upon its coattails is its predecessor of the same name. Under Herzog's direction (wisely choosing to avoid remaking classic shots), we get an entirely different film that exudes an entirely different feeling. It not only maintains the eerie horror that the genre deserves, but also achieves a beauty and mystique that has been lost over the years. A must-see.
With Werner Herzog's "Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" (also known as "Nosferatu: The Vampyre"), the old Hollywood rules seem to have been thrown out the window in favor of F.W. Murnau's striking silent film, the 1922 masterpiece "Nosferatu: Eine Symphonie der Grauens" ("Nosferatu: A Symphony of Terror"). While many purists of the genre balk at the idea of favoring the Nosferatu tale over the time-tested Tod Browning and Terence Fisher entries, one must realize that the cape-clad widow's peak Count has been sullied by a thousand parodies over time, and is simply not a frightening entity any longer. This was a matter much pondered by Francis Ford Coppola when considering his adaptation. While Gary Oldman's portrayal was serviceable and definitely different, something key was lacking from the tale.
This is what Herzog and his long-time "trouble and strife" lead man Klaus Kinski found when they ventured upon the "Nosferatu" remake. Herzog shifted the attention of the viewer away from the plot, which acts mostly as a backdrop for the imagery, and made it so the primary intake becomes a visual one. Kinski's Dracula is not the scowling insect of the Murnau film. He portrays the Count in a way that no other actor has quite grasped. In this film, Dracula is a suffering being, loathing every moment of his curse's continuation. Of course, as the good Count himself states, "Young men. You are like the villagers. and cannot place yourself in the soul of the hunter." The vampyre is trapped by his instincts, and Kinski's eyes betray harrowing madness (as they did in "Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes"), spiteful malice, and a sorrow so bottomless it defies description. It is as if the beast wishes to weep, but has forgotten how.
Filming on location in Germany, Herzog uses the same dreamlike camera angles, mixing them with a rich color palette and masterful lighting. There is a certain uneasiness that filters outward from the screen as you watch. As Jonathan Harker explores his surroundings during his lodging at Castle Dracula, there is inexplicably a young gypsy boy incessantly playing a scratchy violin under the archway. The surreality of the picture is only matched by its attention to the dark magic of the vampire. Like its predecessor, it actually seems to believe in the creatures, and respects them. It holds the legend, the plight of the people of Wismar, and the plight of the Count himself in deep reverence.
What can be extracted from the dialogue and plot is that this is not your average bloodsuckers extravaganza. In fact, the good Count only sets his fangs to the throat of the living once on screen, and when that occurs, it lends more of a feeling of sacrifice and sorrow than of terror. Indeed, the tone of the film is driven toward tragedy, and does not shift its course. One of the film's more telling moments is when Dracula, alone with Harker's beloved Lucy, ventures to plead with the beautiful lady, "Will you come to me. become my ally? Bring salvation to your husband. and to me. The absence of love. is the most abject pain." When she refuses, he does not lash out or decide to make a meal of her then and there. He instead moans with the intonation of a wounded animal and slinks off into the night.
"Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" is the most complete of vampire films, and towers over the genre. It could be considered a pity that the only film that sits upon its coattails is its predecessor of the same name. Under Herzog's direction (wisely choosing to avoid remaking classic shots), we get an entirely different film that exudes an entirely different feeling. It not only maintains the eerie horror that the genre deserves, but also achieves a beauty and mystique that has been lost over the years. A must-see.
Atmospheric, creepy and gorgeous
mstomaso28 September 2005
Another classic collaboration of Werner Herzog and Klaus Kinski, Nosferatu is not just a remake of the F. W. Murnau silent classic, but an extension of it. Herzog not only develops the Stoker story more directly than the original did, but even reintroduces the original characters - Orlok becomes Dracula, and the Hutters become the Harkers.
Like many of the films involving Herzog and Kinski, Nosferatu is a period piece and creates the context of its plot through beautiful cinematography and a relentless but unhasty pace, not through the script. ThoughKinski dominates the screen just as he always does in these collaborations, the performances of fellow greats Isabelle Adjani and Bruno Ganz are also worthy of mention. Ganz's Jonathan Harker is certainly the most sympathetic character in the film, and Adjani's Lucy is beautiful, spooky, and just odd enough to fit the role perfectly.
Nosferatu is a retelling of the Dracula tale. Unlike its generally inferior competitors, Nosferatu - both the 1922 and 1979 versions - sticks very close to Bram Stoker's text - neither elaborating the focus on bloodsucking (obsessed upon by most American interpretations of Dracula), nor revising Jonathan Harker and Dr. Van Helsing as heroic characters, nor adding erotic or romantic elements to the depravity of the original concept. If you know what Stoker was about, you will thrill to the often forgotten aspects of Stoker's novel which are redeemed here - the plague rats, the gypsies, etc.
Kinki's intensity allows him to become a perfect Dracula. He understands his role perfectly and never once slips out of 'the hunter'. This is another very important aspect of the Stoker legend which has been sadly contorted by the popularization of the Dracula legend. Nosferatu's Count Dracula is not a charming eastern European gentleman with a quirky bloodsucking habit and a lovesick soul, he is a wily, terrifying, soulless, inhuman, obsessive, predator. And he has absolutely no concern for the affairs of Homo sapiens sapiens.
The film is mostly shot in Amsterdam's old city, which fits the mood of the film well. Other locations are in Germany, and Dracula's castle, for once, is an actual castle - even the interior shots! The wonderfully eerie and disorienting Popul Vuh soundtrack compliments the typically Herzogian picture-perfect visuals.
This is a great film for those seeking an accessible introduction to film-as-art, and the legendary collaborations of Herzog and Kinski. It will likely annoy those who think of Dracula as a good looking romantic guy with a nasty habit, but is highly recommended for fans of Stoker's original work.
.
Like many of the films involving Herzog and Kinski, Nosferatu is a period piece and creates the context of its plot through beautiful cinematography and a relentless but unhasty pace, not through the script. ThoughKinski dominates the screen just as he always does in these collaborations, the performances of fellow greats Isabelle Adjani and Bruno Ganz are also worthy of mention. Ganz's Jonathan Harker is certainly the most sympathetic character in the film, and Adjani's Lucy is beautiful, spooky, and just odd enough to fit the role perfectly.
Nosferatu is a retelling of the Dracula tale. Unlike its generally inferior competitors, Nosferatu - both the 1922 and 1979 versions - sticks very close to Bram Stoker's text - neither elaborating the focus on bloodsucking (obsessed upon by most American interpretations of Dracula), nor revising Jonathan Harker and Dr. Van Helsing as heroic characters, nor adding erotic or romantic elements to the depravity of the original concept. If you know what Stoker was about, you will thrill to the often forgotten aspects of Stoker's novel which are redeemed here - the plague rats, the gypsies, etc.
Kinki's intensity allows him to become a perfect Dracula. He understands his role perfectly and never once slips out of 'the hunter'. This is another very important aspect of the Stoker legend which has been sadly contorted by the popularization of the Dracula legend. Nosferatu's Count Dracula is not a charming eastern European gentleman with a quirky bloodsucking habit and a lovesick soul, he is a wily, terrifying, soulless, inhuman, obsessive, predator. And he has absolutely no concern for the affairs of Homo sapiens sapiens.
The film is mostly shot in Amsterdam's old city, which fits the mood of the film well. Other locations are in Germany, and Dracula's castle, for once, is an actual castle - even the interior shots! The wonderfully eerie and disorienting Popul Vuh soundtrack compliments the typically Herzogian picture-perfect visuals.
This is a great film for those seeking an accessible introduction to film-as-art, and the legendary collaborations of Herzog and Kinski. It will likely annoy those who think of Dracula as a good looking romantic guy with a nasty habit, but is highly recommended for fans of Stoker's original work.
.
Hypnotic and exquisitely photographed
kilgore-719 February 1999
Werner Herzog's version of Murnau's classic NOSFERATU is a captivating experience. Klaus Kinski is perfect as Count Dracula. He brilliantly conveys the loneliness and sadness of a creature who longs to be human. Count Dracula is the victim in this film, he does not enjoy his immortality and wants only to live, love and die like a human. Isabelle Adjani's ethereal beauty punctuates her ghostlike performance as Lucy, and Bruno Ganz turns in another solid performance as Jonathan.
Like other Herzog films, NOSFERATU THE VAMPYRE is exquisitely photographed, eliciting an almost transcendental experience. Jonathan's journey to Dracula's castle, the dancing of the plague-ridden townsfolk, and the final scene are prime examples.
Once again, using the compositions of Popol Vuh and Wagner, Herzog creates an effective amalgamation of images an music.
One drawback to the film is that it is so beautiful to look at, it is not especially frightening. This may discourage some Dracula fans, but to those who want a hypnotic, smart vampire film, this is the one to see.
Like other Herzog films, NOSFERATU THE VAMPYRE is exquisitely photographed, eliciting an almost transcendental experience. Jonathan's journey to Dracula's castle, the dancing of the plague-ridden townsfolk, and the final scene are prime examples.
Once again, using the compositions of Popol Vuh and Wagner, Herzog creates an effective amalgamation of images an music.
One drawback to the film is that it is so beautiful to look at, it is not especially frightening. This may discourage some Dracula fans, but to those who want a hypnotic, smart vampire film, this is the one to see.
Kount Kinski.
BA_Harrison12 May 2021
Werner Herzog's 1979 remake of F. W. Murnau's Nosferatu (1922) isn't a bad film, per se: it's just lacking in originality. Not only does Herzog base the look of his Dracula on Murnau's vampire, but he copies scenes verbatim from the silent horror classic, sometimes the only difference being the addition of colour. I might not be a fan of Francis Ford Coppola's 1992 take on Bram Stoker's story, but at least he gave it his own style.
That said, Klaus Kinski was definitely made for the role of the rat-toothed bloodsucker performed by Max Schreck seventy-seven years earlier - the controversial star is his usual weird and wonderful self, playing the character as a tortured creature longing for death. Isabelle Adjani looks every inch like a silent movie star as Lucy, but is given very little to do, and Roland Topor as Renfield is quite irritating. White rats dyed grey stand in for real grey rats, but still look like white rats (the rodents apparently started to lick the dye off as soon as it was applied).
Herzog achieves a brooding sense of menace and funereal foreboding, largely thanks to his effective use of chiaroscuro and the excellently eerie score by Florian Fricke and Popol Vuh; the director also introduces the interesting idea that Dracula inhabits another plane of existence in Transylvania, his castle appearing as ruins to the villagers, but undamaged when Jonathan Harker (Bruno Ganz) arrives at its door.
If you're a fan of all things Dracula, this version is worth checking out to see how Murnau's film might have looked if the technology had been available-just expect it all to feel very familiar.
5.5/10, rounded up to 6 for IMDb.
That said, Klaus Kinski was definitely made for the role of the rat-toothed bloodsucker performed by Max Schreck seventy-seven years earlier - the controversial star is his usual weird and wonderful self, playing the character as a tortured creature longing for death. Isabelle Adjani looks every inch like a silent movie star as Lucy, but is given very little to do, and Roland Topor as Renfield is quite irritating. White rats dyed grey stand in for real grey rats, but still look like white rats (the rodents apparently started to lick the dye off as soon as it was applied).
Herzog achieves a brooding sense of menace and funereal foreboding, largely thanks to his effective use of chiaroscuro and the excellently eerie score by Florian Fricke and Popol Vuh; the director also introduces the interesting idea that Dracula inhabits another plane of existence in Transylvania, his castle appearing as ruins to the villagers, but undamaged when Jonathan Harker (Bruno Ganz) arrives at its door.
If you're a fan of all things Dracula, this version is worth checking out to see how Murnau's film might have looked if the technology had been available-just expect it all to feel very familiar.
5.5/10, rounded up to 6 for IMDb.
Beautiful
Gafke11 December 2003
Werner Herzog's remake of F. W. Murnau's classic film (the story for which Murnau stole without permission from Bram Stoker) is, thus far, my absolute favorite vampire film. I've only ever met one other person who made this claim. Everyone else said they were so bored by it that they either gave up on it or fell asleep in front of the TV.
I can understand this, even if I don't like it. Herzog's film moves at the pace of a fever dream, lingering long on shots of misty mountains and majestic rivers that some (like myself) will find breathtakingly beautiful, and others will find stunningly dull. This is a shame, but in these days of ten car chases, eight explosions and five sweaty sex scenes per film, I guess no one wants to appreciate the scenery as a main character anymore. Herzog has always had a knack for this, as anyone who has seen "Aguirre, the Wrath of God" well knows.
But, I digress. This version of Nosferatu, in places almost a frame for frame remake, is a masterpiece of homage. The slow, somewhat exaggerated reactions of his characters brilliantly echo the performances given by the silent actors in the original film. The landscape is moody and lovely and the sets are gorgeous, especially the phantom castle of The Count, haunted by memories and the strange ghost of a violin playing child. Lovely, ice-white Isabelle Adjani is here as the good and virtuous Lucy (the name reversal of the female characters is rather inexplicable, but it doesn't really matter) floating through the film like a beautiful dream and never once weakening in her faith, even in the face of ultimate horror. Bruno Ganz is somewhat stiff and unemotional, and one has to wonder why Lucy goes to such lengths to save this man who, for some reason, she loves with all her heart. Only in his moments of sickness and fear does Ganz emerge from his emotional void. But it is Klaus Kinski's incredible shadow that stretches over this film and swallows it whole.
Kinski plays his rat-faced, bald headed vampire with perfection. Yes, he complains about the loneliness of being undead, he laments his existence outside the realm of love and humanity, but he does it with a shrug instead of a whine, as if to say: "Yeah, I'm pretty much screwed, but what're ya gonna do?" He brings to his role of Vampire what very few actors (aside from Gary Oldman) have been able to: sympathy. He may hate what he has become, but he never apologizes for it. He is the ultimate scavenger, feeding off the dead and hiding in the darkness. Kinski's Count cannot even seduce. He simply takes. But his one scene with Isabelle is simply devastating, as he at long last reaches out to someone, hoping for love and salvation, and then quickly withdraws, the pain quite clear on his face, as he is sternly rejected.
The ending seems rather rushed and not very well thought-out; a true downer which basically nullifies the film. But the rest of the film is more than worth it, from the opening scenes of rotting mummies and bats flying in slow motion through to the muted spectacle of plague ridden madness as the dying dance in the streets to mournful background music. If you're expecting lots of splattering blood and half dressed girls writhing on their beds, then forget about appreciating this movie. You won't. But if you have a taste for grown-up fairy tales and stunning visuals, see this film.
I can understand this, even if I don't like it. Herzog's film moves at the pace of a fever dream, lingering long on shots of misty mountains and majestic rivers that some (like myself) will find breathtakingly beautiful, and others will find stunningly dull. This is a shame, but in these days of ten car chases, eight explosions and five sweaty sex scenes per film, I guess no one wants to appreciate the scenery as a main character anymore. Herzog has always had a knack for this, as anyone who has seen "Aguirre, the Wrath of God" well knows.
But, I digress. This version of Nosferatu, in places almost a frame for frame remake, is a masterpiece of homage. The slow, somewhat exaggerated reactions of his characters brilliantly echo the performances given by the silent actors in the original film. The landscape is moody and lovely and the sets are gorgeous, especially the phantom castle of The Count, haunted by memories and the strange ghost of a violin playing child. Lovely, ice-white Isabelle Adjani is here as the good and virtuous Lucy (the name reversal of the female characters is rather inexplicable, but it doesn't really matter) floating through the film like a beautiful dream and never once weakening in her faith, even in the face of ultimate horror. Bruno Ganz is somewhat stiff and unemotional, and one has to wonder why Lucy goes to such lengths to save this man who, for some reason, she loves with all her heart. Only in his moments of sickness and fear does Ganz emerge from his emotional void. But it is Klaus Kinski's incredible shadow that stretches over this film and swallows it whole.
Kinski plays his rat-faced, bald headed vampire with perfection. Yes, he complains about the loneliness of being undead, he laments his existence outside the realm of love and humanity, but he does it with a shrug instead of a whine, as if to say: "Yeah, I'm pretty much screwed, but what're ya gonna do?" He brings to his role of Vampire what very few actors (aside from Gary Oldman) have been able to: sympathy. He may hate what he has become, but he never apologizes for it. He is the ultimate scavenger, feeding off the dead and hiding in the darkness. Kinski's Count cannot even seduce. He simply takes. But his one scene with Isabelle is simply devastating, as he at long last reaches out to someone, hoping for love and salvation, and then quickly withdraws, the pain quite clear on his face, as he is sternly rejected.
The ending seems rather rushed and not very well thought-out; a true downer which basically nullifies the film. But the rest of the film is more than worth it, from the opening scenes of rotting mummies and bats flying in slow motion through to the muted spectacle of plague ridden madness as the dying dance in the streets to mournful background music. If you're expecting lots of splattering blood and half dressed girls writhing on their beds, then forget about appreciating this movie. You won't. But if you have a taste for grown-up fairy tales and stunning visuals, see this film.
Pretty As A Picture
loganx-218 June 2008
It's taken me awhile to feel like I "get" Werner Herzog movies, I often find myself arguing with myself during his stuff. Half the time is, what a pretentious hack God when will this s**t be over, the other half is my God that's beautiful, he really is a mad genius...and by the end I usually don't know what to think.
I've never watched a movie by Herzog where the plot really amounted to much, the scenarios are set up, and they follow their natural courses, but it's the moments along the way, the journey itself, and not the prize at the end, that makes his film's worth watching.
Herzog makes images, often of people being surrounded and enveloped by nature and the world around them, but images I can safely say I'd never seen before anywhere.
Whether photographing a beach, a horde of plague rats, or a man wandering through mountains, there's a photorealism and dreaminess to everything that goes hand in hand, and that it's that kind of paradox that seems at the heart of Herzog, if it sounds like too much or not enough, just get out now.
Nosferatu is the Dracula story most people are familiar with, no Romance here though, just craven greed and lust. But the directors skills transform it into something else...However I would be lying if I said I knew what, because it's not really the point, were given the images and the framework of the story and either we find something beautiful or true or we don't.
I paused this movie quite a few times just to look at it, and that's the best endorsement I can give to this, and a lot of the Herzog stuff that I end up liking(Aguire:The Wrath Of God, Heart Of Glass, Even Dwarfs Started Small, Strosvek, etc). Beautiful, unique, and challenging, but not for everyone.
I've never watched a movie by Herzog where the plot really amounted to much, the scenarios are set up, and they follow their natural courses, but it's the moments along the way, the journey itself, and not the prize at the end, that makes his film's worth watching.
Herzog makes images, often of people being surrounded and enveloped by nature and the world around them, but images I can safely say I'd never seen before anywhere.
Whether photographing a beach, a horde of plague rats, or a man wandering through mountains, there's a photorealism and dreaminess to everything that goes hand in hand, and that it's that kind of paradox that seems at the heart of Herzog, if it sounds like too much or not enough, just get out now.
Nosferatu is the Dracula story most people are familiar with, no Romance here though, just craven greed and lust. But the directors skills transform it into something else...However I would be lying if I said I knew what, because it's not really the point, were given the images and the framework of the story and either we find something beautiful or true or we don't.
I paused this movie quite a few times just to look at it, and that's the best endorsement I can give to this, and a lot of the Herzog stuff that I end up liking(Aguire:The Wrath Of God, Heart Of Glass, Even Dwarfs Started Small, Strosvek, etc). Beautiful, unique, and challenging, but not for everyone.
Dracula Herzog style
spacemonkey_fg14 August 2006
It was only recently that I finally got to experience a Werner Herzog film. And I say experience because you don't just watch a Werner Herzog film, you experience it. Otherwordly images will appear on the screen whisking you away to strange unusual worlds. When I first saw Fitzcarraldo and Aguirre: The Wrath of God I was spellbound. I was astounded at how much Herzog could evoke while relying solely on the grandness of his visuals. So when I decided to finally see Werner Herzogs remake of F.W. Murnaus classic silent film Nosferatu, I knew I was in for something special. And I was. Simply put, this is one of the finest vampire movies ever made.
The story is one every horror fan is familiar with. Count Dracula is interested in purchasing a new home in England, so Jonathan Harker a real estate agent is sent to Draculas castle high in the Carpathian mountains to sign the legal documents that will seal the deal. Of course what Harker isn't ready for is the fact that Count Dracula is actually a vampire, a man who sold his soul to Satan and now walks the earth as an undead bloodsucker. Dracula falls for Harkers girl and tries to take her from him, you know the drill.
From the small synopsis I typed on that last paragraph you think, yeah, seen one Dracula you seen em all. Right? Wrong! Though this movie does have the same plot line that we have seen hundreds of times in different vampire films, this one certainly has something that makes it different. First and foremost, this film was directed by Werner Herzog and it isn't going to be your regular ordinary vampire movie. There's a certain visual splendor that goes with all of Herzogs films and its evidently present in this film.
What I admire most about Herzog is that he doesn't rely on special effects to make his movies visually interesting. The guy goes to a mountain deep in the middle of nowhere, he looks for the most beautiful and exotic location possible and then shoots his film there. He did it in Aguirre and Fitzcarraldo and he did it again here. Herzogs special effects depend on nature itself. When Jonathan Harker embarks on his journey towards Draculas castle you'll be swept away on a journey that takes you to misty mountains and forceful rivers. So be ready for a film that takes you to some of the most beautiful and exotic places on this earth.
This really isn't a full remake of Murnaus film because what this film really does is mix both Murnaus film and Bram Stokers novel. Instead of Count Orlock we get Dracula. So its sort of a mix of both sources.
Then of course we have the second strongest point in many of Herzogs films. Actor Klaus Kinsky. This guy completely devours the Dracula character and brings him to life in a way that no other actor has ever done. This Dracula isn't a sexy, well dressed lady killer. This guy is animalistic in nature, a creature hunting for his pray, a tortured soul yes, almost disgusted at who he is but at the same time accepting it fully. So much is conveyed through Kinskys performance, his eyes, his hands and pointy nails, and his whispering voice. A very creepy Dracula if you ask me.
A thing that makes this film standout as well is its realism. There's not a single special effect on this movie save for Klaus Kinskys Dracula make up. Everything else is as real as it gets. Draculas castle isn't a miniature or computer generated image, its a real castle. Its not even a set! Its a real freaking castle! When Dracula sucks blood he doesn't go into a bloodbath dripping blood all over the place, he sucks the blood with great care and precision not to spill a single drop. Almost like a baby sucking on his mothers breast. When the sun hits a vampire, its not a visual effects spectacle, the vampire just dies and falls in the floor when the sun hits him. When Dracula transforms into a bat, Herzog shows a real life bat in slow motion in all its natural beauty. Its like everything is done in the most realistic way possible. Nothing is an exaggeration. And when Draculas shadow moves along as if having a life of its own, its an effect done for real. On camera with lights and shadows. Kind of reminded me of Gary Shermans Poltergeist III in that sense.
A warning though, this movie is not fast paced. Its deliberately paced to be creepy and dreamlike. Herzog will stay focused on things for long periods of time so you can really transport yourself to the moment. Well at least thats the way I saw it, I'm sure many people out there might find the movie extremely slow or boring. But not me. To me, this movie was extremely creepy and realistic. Extremely well acted on Kinskys part and just an extremely cool visual trip.
If you're one of those persons that needs explosions and gunshots every five minutes steer clear away from this one, but in the other hand if you have an artistic side that can appreciate a beautiful film like this one then I highly recommended you check Nosferatu: The Vampire right away and experience the visual splendor of a Werner Herzog film.
Rating: 5 out of 5
The story is one every horror fan is familiar with. Count Dracula is interested in purchasing a new home in England, so Jonathan Harker a real estate agent is sent to Draculas castle high in the Carpathian mountains to sign the legal documents that will seal the deal. Of course what Harker isn't ready for is the fact that Count Dracula is actually a vampire, a man who sold his soul to Satan and now walks the earth as an undead bloodsucker. Dracula falls for Harkers girl and tries to take her from him, you know the drill.
From the small synopsis I typed on that last paragraph you think, yeah, seen one Dracula you seen em all. Right? Wrong! Though this movie does have the same plot line that we have seen hundreds of times in different vampire films, this one certainly has something that makes it different. First and foremost, this film was directed by Werner Herzog and it isn't going to be your regular ordinary vampire movie. There's a certain visual splendor that goes with all of Herzogs films and its evidently present in this film.
What I admire most about Herzog is that he doesn't rely on special effects to make his movies visually interesting. The guy goes to a mountain deep in the middle of nowhere, he looks for the most beautiful and exotic location possible and then shoots his film there. He did it in Aguirre and Fitzcarraldo and he did it again here. Herzogs special effects depend on nature itself. When Jonathan Harker embarks on his journey towards Draculas castle you'll be swept away on a journey that takes you to misty mountains and forceful rivers. So be ready for a film that takes you to some of the most beautiful and exotic places on this earth.
This really isn't a full remake of Murnaus film because what this film really does is mix both Murnaus film and Bram Stokers novel. Instead of Count Orlock we get Dracula. So its sort of a mix of both sources.
Then of course we have the second strongest point in many of Herzogs films. Actor Klaus Kinsky. This guy completely devours the Dracula character and brings him to life in a way that no other actor has ever done. This Dracula isn't a sexy, well dressed lady killer. This guy is animalistic in nature, a creature hunting for his pray, a tortured soul yes, almost disgusted at who he is but at the same time accepting it fully. So much is conveyed through Kinskys performance, his eyes, his hands and pointy nails, and his whispering voice. A very creepy Dracula if you ask me.
A thing that makes this film standout as well is its realism. There's not a single special effect on this movie save for Klaus Kinskys Dracula make up. Everything else is as real as it gets. Draculas castle isn't a miniature or computer generated image, its a real castle. Its not even a set! Its a real freaking castle! When Dracula sucks blood he doesn't go into a bloodbath dripping blood all over the place, he sucks the blood with great care and precision not to spill a single drop. Almost like a baby sucking on his mothers breast. When the sun hits a vampire, its not a visual effects spectacle, the vampire just dies and falls in the floor when the sun hits him. When Dracula transforms into a bat, Herzog shows a real life bat in slow motion in all its natural beauty. Its like everything is done in the most realistic way possible. Nothing is an exaggeration. And when Draculas shadow moves along as if having a life of its own, its an effect done for real. On camera with lights and shadows. Kind of reminded me of Gary Shermans Poltergeist III in that sense.
A warning though, this movie is not fast paced. Its deliberately paced to be creepy and dreamlike. Herzog will stay focused on things for long periods of time so you can really transport yourself to the moment. Well at least thats the way I saw it, I'm sure many people out there might find the movie extremely slow or boring. But not me. To me, this movie was extremely creepy and realistic. Extremely well acted on Kinskys part and just an extremely cool visual trip.
If you're one of those persons that needs explosions and gunshots every five minutes steer clear away from this one, but in the other hand if you have an artistic side that can appreciate a beautiful film like this one then I highly recommended you check Nosferatu: The Vampire right away and experience the visual splendor of a Werner Herzog film.
Rating: 5 out of 5
Great Finger Work Poor Homage
SilkTork24 February 2005
I am fascinated by the vampire legend. It is a rich vein for artists to draw upon. The first vampire film, and quite possibly the best, is Murnau's Nosferatu. Bram Stoker's Dracula is laid before us in all but name. But the stunning visual imagery of Murnau's Expressionist film has not been taken up by other film-makers doing their versions of the Count. Except here. Herzog is clearly doing a re-make of Murnau's film rather than another vampire/Dracula interpretation.
As such Herzog concentrates on the visual. Dialogue is reduced - simple lines that would look good on a silent film dialogue card. Mood and atmosphere and pace are the key elements he is exploring. The effect is much like a minor classical piece of music or a Dutch landscape painting. There is much to admire but little to excite - and flaws are obvious.
Some scenes are stunning - the ship docking by itself with the dead captain tied to the wheel; Lucy's view through the mirror of the shadow of the count arriving in her bedroom; lines of coffins moving slowly through the streets of Wismar. Yet, despite these moments of visual splendor, and an interesting performance of the fingers by Kinski, this film does invite comparison with the original and fails badly.
As such Herzog concentrates on the visual. Dialogue is reduced - simple lines that would look good on a silent film dialogue card. Mood and atmosphere and pace are the key elements he is exploring. The effect is much like a minor classical piece of music or a Dutch landscape painting. There is much to admire but little to excite - and flaws are obvious.
Some scenes are stunning - the ship docking by itself with the dead captain tied to the wheel; Lucy's view through the mirror of the shadow of the count arriving in her bedroom; lines of coffins moving slowly through the streets of Wismar. Yet, despite these moments of visual splendor, and an interesting performance of the fingers by Kinski, this film does invite comparison with the original and fails badly.
Bloodsucking of the breathtakingly grand.
lost-in-limbo16 October 2007
What artistic brilliance upon Werner Herzog's behalf, but Klaus Kiniski and Isabelle Adjani stamp their lasting marks as well. Never have I been so caught up, amazed and blown away from such profound positioning, poetically creative imagery and mesmerizing performances. I found it incredibly hard to take my eyes off the screen, even though the story has been done to death. Each vividly lush and fairy-tale engraved set piece is set-up, and I hungrily waited to analyse and soak-up this magnificent art form of symbolic and superstitious embellishment. Atmospheric, old fashion chills of the subtle, but still blood-curdling kind fill Herzog's stunningly protracted direction. The story is there, but it's the little details that sets this canvas in motion. The gloomy tone of the film is powerfully brooding from the air of growing despair, loneliness to the smothering stench of dark, lingering death. Kiniski sensationally emit's a sullen, heart-felt turn where he's shadowy exterior creeps up upon you and causes goose bumps. His make-up and body movement is simply trance-like, and stares you down. He's a scavenger, which goes after what he wants and not under any sort seductive appeal. A soulful Adjani is awe-inspiring, and gracefully evokes a versatile performance that also demands your attention. A quite dry Bruno Gaz does well, and an unforgettable Roland Topor as Dracula's loyal servant totally cackles like an on edge hyena. Picturesque cinematography with unique camera-shots, and a forlornly dreamy orchestral music score set the tone. I pretty much agree with others when they say it's a hard one to put into clear and concise words. Just see it.
A chilling and sad portrayal of the immortal vampire with extraordinary performance from Kinski
ma-cortes16 August 2021
Nice version about Nosferatu with the unforgettable rodent face Klaus Kinski who copies the vintage acting from Max Schrenk considered to be the most horrifying of all screen in the silent classic Nosferatu (1922) by Murnau , the expressionist German milestone also titled Nosferatu-Eine Symphonie Des Grauens -Nosferatu a Symphony of Horror- . This vampire masterpiece is remade in 1979 titled ¨Nosferatu the Vampyre¨ by Werner Herzog with good cast as Klaus Kinski , Bruno Ganz , Isabelle Adjnani , Topor , Dan Van Husen , among others . Klaus plays an outlandish Count Dracula who receives in his castle at the Carpathian Mountains to Jonathan Harker (Bruno Ganz) to arrange for the Count's purchase of a house . Later on , he moves from Transylvania to Wismar, spreading the Black Plague across the land and only a woman pure of heart : Isabelle Adjani , can bring an end to his kingdom of terror .
This Werner Herzog film (1979) is a remake to German all time classic silent horror-movie from 1922 , being a captivating and eerie experience with creepy images , imaginative sets and exciting touches . Here Nosferatu does not enjoy his immortality and wants only to live , love and die like a human , this version of Nosferatu, in places almost a frame for frame remake , it results to be an enjoyable homage and Herzog pays an agreeable tribute to the old rendition .Klaus Kinski is perfect as Nosferatu with his rat face , long nails , pointed ears and skeletal frame . The story brilliantly conveys the loneliness , despair and sadness of the characters . The landscape is moody and lovely and the sets are gorgeous as well as creepy , especially the phantom castle of The Count , the ship and the ghost town of Wismar (Deft) . The slow, somewhat exaggerated reactions of his characters brilliantly echo the performances given by the previous silent actors . Kinski performance as the bald, bat-eared, close fanged Nosferatu remains one of the most frightening film characters in history . Werner Herzog's relationship with Klaus Kinski reached thunderous walks . Being five the Werner Herzog/Klaus Kinski collaborations, the first was : ¨Aguirre, Warth of God¨ (1972) this was the start of an extremely stormy, and sometimes violent, professional relationship with Herzog that lasted 15 years , from now on , a violent, intense , love-hate relationship was born ; the four remaining and essentially combative relationships were the following ones : ¨Nosferatu, the vampyre¨ (1979) ¨Woyzeck¨ (1979) and ¨Fitzcarraldo¨(1982) , while this interesting documentary ¨My Best Fiend¨ (1999) depicts the tumultuous relations between them . This Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht (1979) contains a mysterious and esoteric musical score by Popol Vuh , Herzog's regular . As well as evocative and picturesque cinematography shot on location in Delft, Zuid-Holland, Netherlands , Guanajuato, Mexico : footage of mummies , High Tatras, Slovakia , Pernstejn Castle, Nedvedice pod Perstejnem, Czech Republic , Schiedam, Zuid-Holland, Netherlands, Bavaria, Germany , Lübeck, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.
This brilliantly eerie motion picture was originally and compellingly directed by Werner Herzog . Followed by ¨Nosferatu in Venice¨ by Augusto Caminito and Mario Caiano with Christopher Plummer , Donald Pleasence and also with Klaus Kinski . Furthermore ¨Shadow of the Vampire¨ with Willem Defoe and John Malkovich ; it is a film about the making and production of Nosferatu ; it had to deal with a lot of strange things , some crew members disappeared, some died, this movie focuses on the Max Schrenk character.
This Werner Herzog film (1979) is a remake to German all time classic silent horror-movie from 1922 , being a captivating and eerie experience with creepy images , imaginative sets and exciting touches . Here Nosferatu does not enjoy his immortality and wants only to live , love and die like a human , this version of Nosferatu, in places almost a frame for frame remake , it results to be an enjoyable homage and Herzog pays an agreeable tribute to the old rendition .Klaus Kinski is perfect as Nosferatu with his rat face , long nails , pointed ears and skeletal frame . The story brilliantly conveys the loneliness , despair and sadness of the characters . The landscape is moody and lovely and the sets are gorgeous as well as creepy , especially the phantom castle of The Count , the ship and the ghost town of Wismar (Deft) . The slow, somewhat exaggerated reactions of his characters brilliantly echo the performances given by the previous silent actors . Kinski performance as the bald, bat-eared, close fanged Nosferatu remains one of the most frightening film characters in history . Werner Herzog's relationship with Klaus Kinski reached thunderous walks . Being five the Werner Herzog/Klaus Kinski collaborations, the first was : ¨Aguirre, Warth of God¨ (1972) this was the start of an extremely stormy, and sometimes violent, professional relationship with Herzog that lasted 15 years , from now on , a violent, intense , love-hate relationship was born ; the four remaining and essentially combative relationships were the following ones : ¨Nosferatu, the vampyre¨ (1979) ¨Woyzeck¨ (1979) and ¨Fitzcarraldo¨(1982) , while this interesting documentary ¨My Best Fiend¨ (1999) depicts the tumultuous relations between them . This Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht (1979) contains a mysterious and esoteric musical score by Popol Vuh , Herzog's regular . As well as evocative and picturesque cinematography shot on location in Delft, Zuid-Holland, Netherlands , Guanajuato, Mexico : footage of mummies , High Tatras, Slovakia , Pernstejn Castle, Nedvedice pod Perstejnem, Czech Republic , Schiedam, Zuid-Holland, Netherlands, Bavaria, Germany , Lübeck, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.
This brilliantly eerie motion picture was originally and compellingly directed by Werner Herzog . Followed by ¨Nosferatu in Venice¨ by Augusto Caminito and Mario Caiano with Christopher Plummer , Donald Pleasence and also with Klaus Kinski . Furthermore ¨Shadow of the Vampire¨ with Willem Defoe and John Malkovich ; it is a film about the making and production of Nosferatu ; it had to deal with a lot of strange things , some crew members disappeared, some died, this movie focuses on the Max Schrenk character.
From Schreck to Schlock
EagleSpit30 September 2022
Grainy, flatly lit scenes shot with a jerky hand held camera in touristy locations devoid of atmosphere fail to create any illusion or suspension of disbelief. Herzog's insistence on realism falls flat, because ironically everything looks fake. It's just actors in costumes and makeup(they couldn't even be bothered to extend KInski's white face paint onto his neck). The constant continuity errors add to the sense of amateurish ineptitude. There are one or two good scenes, but overall it's just banal and dull. It has none of the austere, mystical beauty of Dryer or Murnau, none of the opulence and humor of Coppola. I've always held Herzog in awe, but this is just bad.
A pretty fine go at "Dracula"
HenryHextonEsq17 November 2001
This Herzog adaptation of the Dracula story, filtered through the memory in particular of Murnau's "Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horrors", is largely a successful film. It is great in parts and in aspects, but doesn't quite amount to a whole that approaches superlative status. Klaus Kinski is rather good, but not quite spellbinding, in the much-donned cape of the old Count. He is not quite up to the vastly contrasting interpretations I have seen - Schreck and Lugosi. Isabelle Adjani? Hers is far from a terrible performance, as one commentator has said; she is, indeed, reasonable in a role often lacking embellishment in other adaptations. Of course, her striking good looks are certainly far from unwelcome. The chap playing Renfield (the madman, so amusingly and vividly portrayed by Dwight Frye in the 1931 Universal "Dracula") is effective in portraying an outright giggling madman - his laugh is one of *the* most absurd and insane sounds I have heard in film...! The use of music is wonderful, as is Herzog's visual direction - the plague scenes leave quite an impression on the mind, and most scenes are accorded impressive backdrops and appropriate visual textures. Popol Vuh's musical textures are dreamily beguiling, setting just the right tone for Herzog's imagery. The film's downside has to be in the dramatics really; the dialogue and subsequent delivery of, are far from great, perhaps owing to the fact that most of the performers' native tongues are not English, and here they have to speak just that language. There is never quite enough dramatic tension induced by the script or the acting; at times the Renfield chap and Kinski are compelling, but only fitfully.
Having said all this, it is a fine rendition on film of a rather old and, frankly, enduring story. Herzog must take the credit for its effective atmosphere, but perhaps also the blame for the lacking dramatics. Certainly an enjoyable, generally impressive film.
Rating:- ****/*****
Having said all this, it is a fine rendition on film of a rather old and, frankly, enduring story. Herzog must take the credit for its effective atmosphere, but perhaps also the blame for the lacking dramatics. Certainly an enjoyable, generally impressive film.
Rating:- ****/*****
A work of art in motion
Jonny_Numb18 December 2006
If anybody ever founds a Vampire Museum (and who knows, somebody somewhere probably already has), it would be unjust to devote anything less than a wing to Werner Herzog's "Nosferatu," one of the most stunningly beautiful 'horror' films I've ever seen. While I place 'horror' in quotes, it is not because of a default urge to pigeonhole something into a genre to which it barely qualifies--no, it's because "Nosferatu" is like watching an exquisite painting magically put in motion. There is fear and eerie atmosphere aplenty (much of which is provided by a recurring classical music cue), mixed with a rat fixation that becomes oddly symbolic. Unlike F.W. Murnau's 1922 version, this 1979 remake is as much about the existential despair of the undead condition rather than simply the plight of a blood-sucking vampire; while many scenes are recreated shot-for-shot, Herzog is no plagiarist, and actually improves on many of the technical shortcomings that hindered Murnau's film decades before ('night' no longer looks like mid-day, for instance). The film's supernatural love triangle remains intact, and again hinges on Lucy Harker (Isabelle Adjani), who steals the movie from the none-too-modest talents of Klaus Kinski (Count Dracula) and Bruno Ganz (Jonathan Harker). While some may find it slow and ponderous, this "Nosferatu" is one of the best vampire films ever made (besting even Murnau's version), a moody character piece with visual ingenuity to spare.
Stunning!!
twltzone3 November 1999
I just purchased this on DVD and its easily one of my favorite new disks. Included in the DVD masterpiece are: the English Version, the German Version with English subtitles, audio commentary by director Werner Herzog, 2 different US theatrical trailers, 1 Spanish theatrical trailer and even a making of the movie mini-feature!!! Very worth the money!!!
This is not an average movie by any means!!! It also appears to be a salute to the great German Expressionist films of the early 1900's. The story line is very intelligent and compassionate. The dialogue is spoken very soft and slowly. There is not very much action in the film, but the performances and cinematography are nothing short of breathtaking!!
Klaus Kinski plays a very convincing Dracula in this 1979 classic. His slow movements are almost hypnotizing!!! Just watch how he moves his hands!! They move so slow and very mysterious!! The guy who played the "nut case" was great!! The images of coffins, crucifixes, rats, and how rumors of the plague were spreading were brilliantly executed.
If you liked this film, you might want to check out 1992's "The Cronos" for another example of a compassionate and intelligent story about Vampires, but set in Mexico. Both films explore the "humanistic" internal conflict in vampires.
This is not an average movie by any means!!! It also appears to be a salute to the great German Expressionist films of the early 1900's. The story line is very intelligent and compassionate. The dialogue is spoken very soft and slowly. There is not very much action in the film, but the performances and cinematography are nothing short of breathtaking!!
Klaus Kinski plays a very convincing Dracula in this 1979 classic. His slow movements are almost hypnotizing!!! Just watch how he moves his hands!! They move so slow and very mysterious!! The guy who played the "nut case" was great!! The images of coffins, crucifixes, rats, and how rumors of the plague were spreading were brilliantly executed.
If you liked this film, you might want to check out 1992's "The Cronos" for another example of a compassionate and intelligent story about Vampires, but set in Mexico. Both films explore the "humanistic" internal conflict in vampires.
An Alternative Solution
mdefranc18 December 2004
I remember seeing this movie about twenty years ago, feeling scared by the sinister looks of Klaus Kinsky in this alternative interpretation of Bram Stoker's immortal novel.
I have asked myself why Harker's wife's name is Lucy instead of Mina, or Wilhelmina, Harker, just like in the novel and in the other Dracula motion pictures. I say it is alternative because of Herzog's choices of names, location and plot, which swerves a bit from the original story. For instance, Wismar was never the city where Jonathan Harker and his fiancée lived but rather London and the book certainly didn't portray Harker adventuring himself through the Carpatians on a horse. I must say though that it was entertaining, I dare say that its different plot structure was capturing, probably because I have seeing Christopher Lee and Gary Oldman playing as the Count, following Stoker's lines as much as possible.
Photography was OK and music appropriate. Costumes were very realistic and, although I haven't seen Isabelle Adjani and Bruno Ganz act in any other movie, I feel at ease saying that they both played the "unusual" Harkers well. Let's keep in mind though that Nosferatu may not be understood well by viewers today.
I have asked myself why Harker's wife's name is Lucy instead of Mina, or Wilhelmina, Harker, just like in the novel and in the other Dracula motion pictures. I say it is alternative because of Herzog's choices of names, location and plot, which swerves a bit from the original story. For instance, Wismar was never the city where Jonathan Harker and his fiancée lived but rather London and the book certainly didn't portray Harker adventuring himself through the Carpatians on a horse. I must say though that it was entertaining, I dare say that its different plot structure was capturing, probably because I have seeing Christopher Lee and Gary Oldman playing as the Count, following Stoker's lines as much as possible.
Photography was OK and music appropriate. Costumes were very realistic and, although I haven't seen Isabelle Adjani and Bruno Ganz act in any other movie, I feel at ease saying that they both played the "unusual" Harkers well. Let's keep in mind though that Nosferatu may not be understood well by viewers today.
Beautiful
BonsterT2 January 2006
Herzog deserves hats off, any academy award for best director. A film so beautiful should be more well known. The atmosphere is stuck with you from the beginning with the chants and the screams. The characters fit the film perfectly, besides the librarian guy. The colors were great, the shots were planned out great. The simplicity of a shadow was made so mesmerizing. I felt chills all around my body after watching this film. It had a touch with all those shadows and the shot with the vampires hand going down. Not only the best vampire movie EVER but a fantastic film, period. All I can say is Herzog did a wonderful job with this one.
With the Friend Like Klaus....
Galina_movie_fan1 September 2005
Fifty seven years after F.W. Murnau, Herzog resurrected the Dracula's legend with this film in which his favorite actor/best friend/worst enemy Klaus Kinski played the title role as a very tired, very quiet, very lonely Count Dracula who looked like he literally had not slept for centuries. The film is undeniably Herzog's and has many of his signature signs the stunning views, the slow deliberate pace, the eerie music, the dreamlike atmosphere, the admiration by the nature and its indifferent to the human's worries power and remote beauty; even the story of the ship with all crew members dead as the result of the horrible mystery. Breathtakingly beautiful Isabelle Adjani plays an object of Dracula's obsession and the contrast between his ugliness and her divine beauty is simply mesmerizing. In this film, the purehearted and brave woman takes it upon herself to face off the undead evil. By the time, Dr. Van Helsing arrives with the stake and hammer, his services are not required.
7.5/10
7.5/10
Terrific version of a classic
Red-Barracuda12 December 2008
This is Werner Herzog's adaptation of F.W. Murnau's silent classic Nosferatu. It's easily one of the best film remakes I have seen.
Nosferatu the Vampyre is tragic, mysterious and surreal. It merges beauty and horror. The pace is deliberate. Emphasis is put on atmosphere and, as Herzog did in Aguirre and Fitzcarraldo, a great deal of importance is invested in capturing the setting. The landscape is almost a character itself.
Perhaps unsurprisingly from a film that takes its source from a silent classic, Nosferatu the Vampyre derives its strength through its images not its dramatics. The dialogue is fairly sparse and exposition scenes are brief and to the point. The movie is, however, a visual tour de force. Right from the offset we are presented with close-up shots of mummies followed by the recurring slow motion bat dream. From hereon in Herzog presents the viewer with a variety of striking images ranging from sweeping shots of a sailing ship to shaky hand-held close-ups of dancing plague victims, there are haunting shots of mountain landscape, majestic rivers and hordes of rats. In homage to the original, shadows are also presented very artistically. The hypnotic score from Popul Vuh is also well worth mentioning. Its sinister dreamlike ambiance is perfect here.
As Herzog/Kinski collaborations go, this is arguably the best. Like the others it is a period piece that effectively uses indigenous non-actors, in this case gypsies, alongside the mercurial leading man. Although, acting-wise, the film belongs to Klaus Kinski; he delivers a subhuman rat-like performance that ranks alongside Max Shreck in the original. Kinski's count, however, is a haunted, tragic figure. A victim and reluctant predator trapped by his irrepressible killer instinct 'the hunter'. He is still a ruthless killer but he derives very little satisfaction from it. He is a far-cry from the suave aristocrat seen in most Dracula films. It's an excellent portrayal from one of the great European actors. The lack of dramatics doesn't allow for anyone else in the picture to really stand out, although Isabelle Adjani does well with the role she has and is in possession of an ethereal beauty that is perfect for her character.
This is one of the very few remakes that stands proudly alongside the original.
Nosferatu the Vampyre is tragic, mysterious and surreal. It merges beauty and horror. The pace is deliberate. Emphasis is put on atmosphere and, as Herzog did in Aguirre and Fitzcarraldo, a great deal of importance is invested in capturing the setting. The landscape is almost a character itself.
Perhaps unsurprisingly from a film that takes its source from a silent classic, Nosferatu the Vampyre derives its strength through its images not its dramatics. The dialogue is fairly sparse and exposition scenes are brief and to the point. The movie is, however, a visual tour de force. Right from the offset we are presented with close-up shots of mummies followed by the recurring slow motion bat dream. From hereon in Herzog presents the viewer with a variety of striking images ranging from sweeping shots of a sailing ship to shaky hand-held close-ups of dancing plague victims, there are haunting shots of mountain landscape, majestic rivers and hordes of rats. In homage to the original, shadows are also presented very artistically. The hypnotic score from Popul Vuh is also well worth mentioning. Its sinister dreamlike ambiance is perfect here.
As Herzog/Kinski collaborations go, this is arguably the best. Like the others it is a period piece that effectively uses indigenous non-actors, in this case gypsies, alongside the mercurial leading man. Although, acting-wise, the film belongs to Klaus Kinski; he delivers a subhuman rat-like performance that ranks alongside Max Shreck in the original. Kinski's count, however, is a haunted, tragic figure. A victim and reluctant predator trapped by his irrepressible killer instinct 'the hunter'. He is still a ruthless killer but he derives very little satisfaction from it. He is a far-cry from the suave aristocrat seen in most Dracula films. It's an excellent portrayal from one of the great European actors. The lack of dramatics doesn't allow for anyone else in the picture to really stand out, although Isabelle Adjani does well with the role she has and is in possession of an ethereal beauty that is perfect for her character.
This is one of the very few remakes that stands proudly alongside the original.
I do like the original better
frankde-jong2 November 2021
It takes courage to remake such an all time classic as Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau's "Nosferatu" (1922).
The film from Murnau was based on Bram Stokers Dracula, but changes were made to evade copy rights. Werner Herzog maintains the changes in the story line but restores the original name of his main character. To make things a little bit confusing, Nosferatu is still part of the title of the film regardless of the different name of the main character.
Where Herzog follows the storyline of "Nosferatu" quite faithfully, he does put other accents regarding the personality of his main characters. His Dracula (Klaus Kinski) is a much more tragic and lonely figure than Murnau's Nosferatu. Lucy Harker (Isabelle Adjani) on the other hand is much more active. In her relation with Deacula she is not solely a victim but takes the lead and seduces Dracula in an attempt to entrap him.
In summary, Werner Herzog has made a good film in which he puts certain accents differently, but all in all the changes are not drastic enough to justify a remake. I do like the original better.
The film from Murnau was based on Bram Stokers Dracula, but changes were made to evade copy rights. Werner Herzog maintains the changes in the story line but restores the original name of his main character. To make things a little bit confusing, Nosferatu is still part of the title of the film regardless of the different name of the main character.
Where Herzog follows the storyline of "Nosferatu" quite faithfully, he does put other accents regarding the personality of his main characters. His Dracula (Klaus Kinski) is a much more tragic and lonely figure than Murnau's Nosferatu. Lucy Harker (Isabelle Adjani) on the other hand is much more active. In her relation with Deacula she is not solely a victim but takes the lead and seduces Dracula in an attempt to entrap him.
In summary, Werner Herzog has made a good film in which he puts certain accents differently, but all in all the changes are not drastic enough to justify a remake. I do like the original better.
Herzog's Homage to Murnau
zardoz-1324 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
"Fitzcarraldo" director Werner Herzog "Nosferatu the Vampyre" pays tribute to F.W. Murnau's classic chiller, but this 107-minute, color masterpiece departs from the original in several respects. Essentially, the narrative doesn't deviate drastically until the second half after Count Dracula bids the ruins of his castle farewell and travels by ship to Varna. Of course, the names have been changed since Herzog didn't have to worry about the issue of copyright infringement. Although "Nosferatu the Vampyre" ranks as a brilliant film and a reverential remake, Herzog's production creeps along at a glacial pace, but the sets are for the most part genuine. Produced for under a million dollars, this atmospheric chiller doesn't generate the degree of horror that the Hammer "Dracula" franchise or even the Universal franchise boasted. Indeed, the film remains virtually bloodless. You aren't going to suffer nightmares from watching this painstakingly lensed film.
Unlike the traditional Bela Lugosi and Christopher Lee Dracula, the eponymous villain here is a hideous Dracula. He is bald, cadaverous, with long fingernails and two viper-like fangs at the front of his mouth. Mind you, Klaus Kinski delivers a spellbinding performance, but he doesn't eclipse the portrait of pestilent evil that Max Schreck exuded in the unforgettable 1922 silent film. Nevertheless, Kinski's Dracula differs in more respects from the Schreck incarnation. Schreck epitomized unadulterated evil, while Kinski evokes a measure of sympathy. The Kinski vampire qualifies as a post-modern vampire because he emerges as a hopelessly tragic figure. At one point in the subtitled German language version, the Kinski Dracula confides in the heroine that "Cruel is when you can't die even if you want to die." Like the Murnau original, vampires are susceptible to the damning rays of sunlight. Unlike the Schreck vampire, Kinski's vampire doesn't dissolve when the sunlight strikes him. He plunges into convulsions and wallows around on the floor until Dr. Van Helsing hammers a stake into him.
The major departures in "Nosferatu the Vampyre" occur after Dracula forsakes his castle. The scenes aboard the ship remain intact with the crew dying, but you don't see anybody diving off the ship. Whereas Murnau showed several rats in his film, Herzog displays no restrain. He bought eleven-thousand white rats from a laboratory and painted them gray. According to Herzog on the Anchor Bay commentary track, the production company didn't lose a single rodent, but the sight of the rats made a customs official faint. Furthermore, Herzog took elaborate precautions on the set to ensure that none of the rodents escaped. The co-commentator observed that Herzog also neutered the rats so none could reproduce. Not since either version of "Willard" have so many rats appeared on camera. One striking scene involving the rodents occurs toward the end of the story. A group of plague-infected friends attempt to prolong their happiness by dining on one final meal before they die. They are surrounded by literally hundreds of rats. Murnau's film cannot compete with the vast horde of rats that Herzog used. If the sight of rats is terrifying, you might have a problem with this film.
Bruno Ganz doesn't play Jonathan Harker with the same gusto that Gustav von Wangenheim imbued Hutter with in the silent epic. Harker travels to the remote mountains of Transylvania on a mission similar to Hutter's. Indeed, Renfield (Roland Topor) dispatches him with the same promise that he might lose some blood. Harker slices his thumb up while carving bread during his dinner, and Count Dracula assaults him. Far away, Lucy Harker (Isabelle Adjani of "The Story of Adele H") reacts to the vampire's attack on her husband. Later, Harker watches as Dracula loads up coffins (more than Schreck loaded) and departs from the castle by a horse-drawn wagon. Interestingly enough, Ganz's Harker has to walk on foot from the inn, where he rode by horse, to reach the rendezvous point with Count Dracula's carriage. More importantly, Harker is bitten by Dracula, escapes from the castle, spends time in a church hospital, but returns to Varna. Unlike Hutter, Harker is slowly turning into a vampire.
At this point, the character of Lucy assumes greater significance than her counterpart in the Murnau film. Isabelle Adjani's Lucy is a real combatant. She has a scene in her bedroom where she confronts Dracula and spurns him. Of course, she is wearing a crucifix, but she makes it blatantly clear that she wants nothing to do with him. She claims that she is prepared to spurn the Lord, too. After Harker returns but fails to recognize her, Lucy dredges up the book of vampires from his belongings and reads about the fiends. She approaches Dr. Van Helsing, but he dismisses her warnings about the real plague in the town. When Mina (Martje Grohmann) dies, the town officials say that she died from the plague. Herzog doesn't have a drum-beating official reading a warning to the town. Instead, he shows black-clad, top-hatted officials carrying coffins on their shoulders by the dozens. Anyway, Lucy exemplifies female empowerment. She crumbles up sacred crackers to keep her husband at bay and seduces the unwitting Dracula so that he will sup from her neck and forget about the dawn that destroys him.
Herzog doesn't rely on any special effects in his version of "Dracula." All the effects were produced in camera. The scene when Dracula entered Lucy's bedroom while she stared into the mirror and watched the door swing open and a shadow appear is an example. Indeed, Herzog made the most of his budget. This period piece is steeped in atmosphere. "Nosferatu the Vampyre" isn't a scary movie. It amounts to more of a literary exercise. The environment creates a genuine sense of dread as does Herzog's use of the original music by Popol Vuh. Herzog does some amazing things with his camera, and he doesn't rely on the usual snap editing so that "Nosferatu the Vampyre" is a film of remarkable cohesion.
Unlike the traditional Bela Lugosi and Christopher Lee Dracula, the eponymous villain here is a hideous Dracula. He is bald, cadaverous, with long fingernails and two viper-like fangs at the front of his mouth. Mind you, Klaus Kinski delivers a spellbinding performance, but he doesn't eclipse the portrait of pestilent evil that Max Schreck exuded in the unforgettable 1922 silent film. Nevertheless, Kinski's Dracula differs in more respects from the Schreck incarnation. Schreck epitomized unadulterated evil, while Kinski evokes a measure of sympathy. The Kinski vampire qualifies as a post-modern vampire because he emerges as a hopelessly tragic figure. At one point in the subtitled German language version, the Kinski Dracula confides in the heroine that "Cruel is when you can't die even if you want to die." Like the Murnau original, vampires are susceptible to the damning rays of sunlight. Unlike the Schreck vampire, Kinski's vampire doesn't dissolve when the sunlight strikes him. He plunges into convulsions and wallows around on the floor until Dr. Van Helsing hammers a stake into him.
The major departures in "Nosferatu the Vampyre" occur after Dracula forsakes his castle. The scenes aboard the ship remain intact with the crew dying, but you don't see anybody diving off the ship. Whereas Murnau showed several rats in his film, Herzog displays no restrain. He bought eleven-thousand white rats from a laboratory and painted them gray. According to Herzog on the Anchor Bay commentary track, the production company didn't lose a single rodent, but the sight of the rats made a customs official faint. Furthermore, Herzog took elaborate precautions on the set to ensure that none of the rodents escaped. The co-commentator observed that Herzog also neutered the rats so none could reproduce. Not since either version of "Willard" have so many rats appeared on camera. One striking scene involving the rodents occurs toward the end of the story. A group of plague-infected friends attempt to prolong their happiness by dining on one final meal before they die. They are surrounded by literally hundreds of rats. Murnau's film cannot compete with the vast horde of rats that Herzog used. If the sight of rats is terrifying, you might have a problem with this film.
Bruno Ganz doesn't play Jonathan Harker with the same gusto that Gustav von Wangenheim imbued Hutter with in the silent epic. Harker travels to the remote mountains of Transylvania on a mission similar to Hutter's. Indeed, Renfield (Roland Topor) dispatches him with the same promise that he might lose some blood. Harker slices his thumb up while carving bread during his dinner, and Count Dracula assaults him. Far away, Lucy Harker (Isabelle Adjani of "The Story of Adele H") reacts to the vampire's attack on her husband. Later, Harker watches as Dracula loads up coffins (more than Schreck loaded) and departs from the castle by a horse-drawn wagon. Interestingly enough, Ganz's Harker has to walk on foot from the inn, where he rode by horse, to reach the rendezvous point with Count Dracula's carriage. More importantly, Harker is bitten by Dracula, escapes from the castle, spends time in a church hospital, but returns to Varna. Unlike Hutter, Harker is slowly turning into a vampire.
At this point, the character of Lucy assumes greater significance than her counterpart in the Murnau film. Isabelle Adjani's Lucy is a real combatant. She has a scene in her bedroom where she confronts Dracula and spurns him. Of course, she is wearing a crucifix, but she makes it blatantly clear that she wants nothing to do with him. She claims that she is prepared to spurn the Lord, too. After Harker returns but fails to recognize her, Lucy dredges up the book of vampires from his belongings and reads about the fiends. She approaches Dr. Van Helsing, but he dismisses her warnings about the real plague in the town. When Mina (Martje Grohmann) dies, the town officials say that she died from the plague. Herzog doesn't have a drum-beating official reading a warning to the town. Instead, he shows black-clad, top-hatted officials carrying coffins on their shoulders by the dozens. Anyway, Lucy exemplifies female empowerment. She crumbles up sacred crackers to keep her husband at bay and seduces the unwitting Dracula so that he will sup from her neck and forget about the dawn that destroys him.
Herzog doesn't rely on any special effects in his version of "Dracula." All the effects were produced in camera. The scene when Dracula entered Lucy's bedroom while she stared into the mirror and watched the door swing open and a shadow appear is an example. Indeed, Herzog made the most of his budget. This period piece is steeped in atmosphere. "Nosferatu the Vampyre" isn't a scary movie. It amounts to more of a literary exercise. The environment creates a genuine sense of dread as does Herzog's use of the original music by Popol Vuh. Herzog does some amazing things with his camera, and he doesn't rely on the usual snap editing so that "Nosferatu the Vampyre" is a film of remarkable cohesion.
Mixed Feelings
ccamp8913 May 2016
I found this film to be a bit of a mixed bag. It has many strengths - thick atmosphere, haunting score, great cinematography, fantastic locations and great set design. Most of all, Klaus Kinski is mesmerizing as Count Dracula. He has such a strong screen presence and everything about him - the way he moves, speaks, stares - it all just works and feels very compelling. He steals every scene he is in to the point where many of the scenes without him feel dull by comparison.
And I hate to use that word - dull - but for some reason I couldn't shake it from my mind for some sections of this movie. The pace is slow and brooding, which is something that I tend to like. A lot of my favorite horror films are slow and deliberate, The Shining chief among them. But it's all in the execution, and here I found the slowness to be a bit burdensome. The movie can come off as wooden at times. Apart from Klaus, the acting can be a bit questionable as well, especially with Lucy's character. I'm sure she is just following direction from Herzog, but I found her to be a little blank and unconvincing, which is a pretty major issue considering she is meant to carry essentially the entire second half of the film.
There are also some moments that play as hokey: all the members of a bar turn in unison and gasp at the mention of Dracula, characters read aloud about vampires from a book when no one is around etc. However, the scenes that work, absolutely work (and they uniformly involve Klaus). It's worth seeing for those scenes and the nice atmosphere, but I don't think it's a film that I'll be hurriedly returning to any time soon.
And I hate to use that word - dull - but for some reason I couldn't shake it from my mind for some sections of this movie. The pace is slow and brooding, which is something that I tend to like. A lot of my favorite horror films are slow and deliberate, The Shining chief among them. But it's all in the execution, and here I found the slowness to be a bit burdensome. The movie can come off as wooden at times. Apart from Klaus, the acting can be a bit questionable as well, especially with Lucy's character. I'm sure she is just following direction from Herzog, but I found her to be a little blank and unconvincing, which is a pretty major issue considering she is meant to carry essentially the entire second half of the film.
There are also some moments that play as hokey: all the members of a bar turn in unison and gasp at the mention of Dracula, characters read aloud about vampires from a book when no one is around etc. However, the scenes that work, absolutely work (and they uniformly involve Klaus). It's worth seeing for those scenes and the nice atmosphere, but I don't think it's a film that I'll be hurriedly returning to any time soon.
Did I see the same film as everyone else?
IMDbKeepsDeletingMyReviews31 January 2022
In this quite tedious, amateurish film with a few redeeming factors, Klaus Kinski is probably the highlight, followed by some of the scenery and choice of film stock, giving the film a grainy, desaturated and grim quality.
The rest, I'm afraid to say, has left me quite bedazzled as to why so many respectable film critics deem this piece so masterful.
The camera work is decent at times, atrocious at other times. Shots out of focus, camera shadows, visibly artificial light that sometimes moves within the shot - all that makes the presentation amateurish and sloppy.
The acting was mostly wooden, and to have German actors speak English with that accent was unintentionally funny. Add a thin story with poor dialogue and artificial behaviour by most of the cast (some of which even look at the camera a few times), and you have a pretty poor result.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just unable to see the great genius of this remake, but I'll take the 1922 original over this here any time of the day.
The rest, I'm afraid to say, has left me quite bedazzled as to why so many respectable film critics deem this piece so masterful.
The camera work is decent at times, atrocious at other times. Shots out of focus, camera shadows, visibly artificial light that sometimes moves within the shot - all that makes the presentation amateurish and sloppy.
The acting was mostly wooden, and to have German actors speak English with that accent was unintentionally funny. Add a thin story with poor dialogue and artificial behaviour by most of the cast (some of which even look at the camera a few times), and you have a pretty poor result.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just unable to see the great genius of this remake, but I'll take the 1922 original over this here any time of the day.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
