|Page 9 of 33:||               |
|Index||327 reviews in total|
There was a Great Death in 1838 Wisborg, Germany. Real estate agent
Knock has associated himself with some kind of evil. He sends young
associate Hutter to Count Orlok in Transylvania who claims to want to
buy a house. Hutter leaves behind his scared wife Ellen as he travels
the dangerous untamed roads. When he gets to Orlok's castle, he finds
it creepy while the locals warn him of werewolves. Eventually he has
enough of Orlok and escapes. Meanwhile Orlok having purchased the house
is now coming to Wisborg.
This movie has a lot of iconic images like Max Schreck's Count Orlok. It's also throwing everything in here like the bugs and venus flytraps. The movie has set up all the basic cinematic visuals from the classic Bram Stoker novel. The effects are terrific for its time. For a silent movie, it is actually very enjoyable to watch. There is good tension and compelling drama.
It's not just a great horror movie. It's a poem of horror, a symphony of dread, a film so rapt, mysterious and weirdly lovely it haunts the mind long after it's over. A landmark motion picture. Is like standing in the same room as death itself. It is difficult to watch Nosferatu simply because it is so hard to find a decent copy of the film. His body is twisted and perverted, gnarling in on itself and constantly invading the personal space of the people around him. Still one of the scariest, most unnerving films ever made. Nosferatu is an important piece of cinema history, featuring innovative direction, remarkable make-up and a genuinely chilling atmosphere. The movie's best effect is its star...He looks every bit like an actual demonic wild-thing, retrieved from deep within the German wilderness and trotted out to perform for Murnau's camera. It is the sort of thing one could watch at midnight without its having much effect upon one's slumbering hours.
Released in 1922, 'Nosferatu' was, essentially, an unofficial
adaptation of Bram Stoker's Dracula novel. Disguising the film under
original names and details, this Dracula story portrays Count Orlok
negotiating a move to Bremen with realtor Thomas Hutter; and like the
plagued-diseased rats of history, the Nosferatu is, naturally, a
harbinger of death; bringing a great darkness with him in as he
obsessively pursues the neck of Hutter's wife.
Masterfully directed, timeless images of the nocturnal blood sucker gravitating through the shadows - as one with the dark will send chills down your spine; uninvintingly locking themselves away in the darker side of your memory. Max Schreck's Count Orlok grotesques all with his rat-like physical demeanor and extending claws; the epitome being the iconic shot of the shadow ascending the stairs. You feel a sense of unexplainable elegance to the shot; not just because of it's iconic status and cultural significance. It is pure Gothic horror; unnerving through it's sheer visual majesty. This is a vampire you won't be accustomed to seeing if you have been a regular viewer of the the shirtless escapades present in the 'Twilight' films. Nosferatu is not exactly heart-warming, buff or sexy. More, a pale stick insect which has just crawled out of a rat hole. Edward Cullen and family like transparent architecture, with their expensive, modern real estate. Nosferatu prefers his abode to be a beautifully haunting, Bavarian castle.
Their is a great charm in seeing one camera techniques pioneered. Film was still a relatively new art-form and 'Nosferatu' pushed that art forward through it's usage and merging of light, subject and camera to create truly oppressive atmosphere. Not even Francis Ford Coppola, or the great Werner Herzog, could create the same sense of mysticism. Could it suggest the invention of sound recording has been a detraction of quality? No, but I certainly can't see how dialogue would have improved the film. It just shows how great Murnau's grasp of the visuals are; his impressionist images effecting audiences for nearly 100 years. Coppola's and Herzog's interpretations of the Dracula myth are both great films in their own right, and there are many more Dracula stories I can watch with certain satisfaction, but non can do what this original vampire movie did: scare me. All the fabulous cinematic innovations that occupy our screens today do nothing in comparison to one inspired performance in 1922 from Max Shreck, playing the physical embodiment of all things foul. For this reason, he takes his rightful place as one of the greatest movie monsters to grace celluloid.
Stoker's heirs sued over 'Nosferatu' and the devastating ruling ordered all copies to be destroyed. But, like the movies iconic monster, it seems the film is immortal. One print survived. Because of that one print, we all have the privilege of indulging ourselves in this classical Gothic pleasure. Which many of us, to our disgrace, have not done. Unless you are a film student, forced to digest and evaluate the importance of a silent movie classic, I doubt you have been casually watching 'Nosferatu' when Halloween comes around. Time has left it behind, but thanks to the Masters of Cinema re-release and the film's triumphant return to cinema's this Halloween with the BFI's Gothic season, it can take it's place on everyone's collection shelf as, not only a historically significant piece of filmmaking, but a great, casual viewing experience that everyone can appreciate.
Go to hughesreviews.co.uk to see the original article and more reviews!
First time watch one, This is the oldest movie that I have seen now, I have been putting this off a few times as I have never seen Silent movie in full before and I not to keen on Vamps movie.
Yesterday I did try to watch this in early morning before work but I could not get into for some reason , I did turn it off about 20 minutes into the movie.
When I got back from work, I gave it another go in full this time.
For being first Vampire movie, it was really good and some very cool creepy moments in this movie. I loved those shadow scenes.
The vampire it's self was really creepy for time and for a PG movie and I didn't mind the whole reading scenes but when they were writing, I could not make some of handwriting which did bother me also I didn't like how scene were moved very slowly, It kinda of annoying.
I don't think it was intended but I found the chase near the very end very funny and the ending was okay-ish for time.
7 out of 10 it's was really good movie
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I just wouldn't be making my own stuff if it wasn't for this film and I doubt I am alone in that as it's influence is still strong all these years later. A stunning work of visual art, so glad it wasn't actually destroyed when they tried. The use of light and dark, casting shadows in particular is exceptional. Very much an excellent example of the Expressionist movement of it's day. The fact that this film is up for another release almost a century after it was made is testament to it's beauty, influence and artistry. Even with it's deviations from the plot it is still my favorite, if unofficial adaption of Dracula, and likely still my favorite vampire design with it's creepy rodent qualities adding to the unnerving feel of the entire piece.
Even after almost nine decades, F. W. Murnau's film remains a classic of horror cinema. The film contains some genuinely shocking moments, especially when Hutter (Gustav v. Wangenheim) comes to visit Graf Orlok (aka Nosferatu's) lair. Played by Max Schreck, Nosferatu is a genuinely creepy monster; with adept use of - at that time radical - cinematic techniques, director Murnau shows how he can reappear and disappear at will. No one appears to be able to resist him; his demise at the end of the film is mostly due to hubris - the belief that he is somehow indestructible. MOSFERATU also contains some memorable images: the rats moving in and around Nosferatu's coffin; the plague-ridden street, with coffins coming out of various doors; the lonely dog-cart moving slowly across a desolate landscape towards Nosferatu's castle. The version I saw had been recently restores (2010), with a new score and the original German title-cards (with English translations). Happily enough, the translations do not attempt to popularize the film by renaming Nosferatu Dracula.
Nosferatu is one of the most influential horror movies ever made, and
many movies own a lot to it, even it they don't know it.
Even if Nosferatu isn't Original (More or less stolen from Dracula), it's still worth a watch and set the less popular image of a monster vampire instead of the other often handsome vampire (who own a lot to Stoker and Bela Lugosi).
If you want a movie that still have the roots in German expressionism with out going nuts with it, this is the movie of it, there's scenes that keeps it pure, like shadows and certain camera angels, but unlike Doctor Caligari, I don't feel like it's go to the surreal.
I don't think there's any need to summarize the plot since many people above me done it before. But i want to give huge credit to Max Schreck for the role of Orlok, he and Lugosi are the best actors when it comes to Dracula. I would also want to give credit to Alexander Granach, he made Renfield / Knock feel very alive, even 91 years later.
If you watch this movie, turn down the lights, grab a drink, and just relax and let this creepy movie eat you, i would recommend watching many different editions of this movie, since the different musical scores give a different exercise.
An unofficial adaptation of Bram Stoker's Dracula but the most influential among all the vampire films ever made, Nosferatu is an eerie, creepy, Gothic & haunting masterpiece that may not look frightening from today's standards but its chilling atmosphere can still rival the best of what modern film industry has to offer. A silent horror that benefits greatly from a brilliantly written screenplay that was then superbly executed on screen by its classy direction, brilliant use of expressionism from its cast, especially Max Schreck as vampire Count Orlok, innovative cinematography & editing, exceptionally haunting music as well as beautiful use of its uncanny locations. Almost a century has passed since this film first came out & it holding strong even today is a result of strong cult following, strength & visual appeal of this motion picture. On an overall scale, Nosferatu is one of the finest work of art & probably one of the most important events in cinema history that commenced the effective horror genre while also slightly altering the legacy of vampire myths.
due to the lack of availability of this film it took me ten years to find it.. so after a long wait, I watched it and I liked it particularly the music, now watching the American cousin-- Dracula 1st I noticed that some of what was in 1931 Dracula was not in 1922 nosferatu. I don't know quite how to asses this. the 31 version seems more complete but yet in 1922 a lot of what was available 9 years later had an input,, yea I could follow the story,, it seemed like certain scenes parts were left out.. or was it that Dracula added scenes.. hard to tell,, this version I feel is darker than the American cousin. the music definitely better. I feel that if I watch this one again I will like it more and upgrade my 8 to a 10 i'm sure of that.. being from Germany I didn't realize FW Morneau talent'ts for the silent film,, he did a wonderful job with this I really did enjoy the movie,, kinda wish it was available before I watched Dracula.
Iconic film character alert! Everyone knows this guy. In fact, after a
night on the tiles, some of us have woken up looking like Nosferatu
(and indeed walking like him too, if curry was involved). To be honest
though, after seeing clips of this and all the parodies and homages and
what not, I wasn't even sure if I had seen the film or not, but I've
watched it now and am glad to say that even though it's roughly a
couple of hundred years old, it's great!
Johnathon Harker, estate agent, is sent by his boss Renfield to Transalvania, where he's to sell a house to Count Dracula (in the version I had anyway). He's only taken so far by the locals, who leave him outside the 'land of phantoms'. Not before long a creepy carriage picks him up and drops him outside of the castle, where the Count reads over a letter from Renfield, and then tries to drink his blood when Harker cuts his finger.
Harker's a bit confused by this, and even more confused when he wakes up in the morning with a sore neck, but shrugs it off (the guy playing him is a bit goofy, at least for the first half of the film). Thanks to a handy 'Vampires for idiots' book that he's found, Harker discovers that the guy who sleeps all day, likes blood, and remarked about how Harker's wife had a lovely neck is actually a vampire! And he was hiding it so well! Worse still, Harker's now trapped in the castle and Dracula (or Nosferatu or Orlock) is bound for Bremen in boat full of soon to be dead sailors. Can Harker make it back in time?
Apart from the phrase "German Expressionism" I know nothing about German Expressionism, but if that means loads of mood, shadows, Gothic atmosphere, long fingernails, swooning, images of coffins being carried through the streets, then I'm all for it. This film was a blast from start to finish, with nary a moment wasted. If I had a time machine I'd back to 1922 and say 'mad props' to Max Schreck, whatever that means.
|Page 9 of 33:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||Newsgroup reviews||External reviews|
|Parents Guide||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|