The original title of the film is Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht. Also known as 1. Nosferatu: Phantom of the Night.
Herzog's masterpiece. The truth is that the mise-en-scéne in the film is very powerful and has a choice of very daring shots that manages to disturb and even terrify the viewer. However, in my opinion, the soundtrack is not memorable and perhaps it detracts a little from the final result, but it is a personal opinion. On the other hand, this film is not entirely faithful to Bram Stoker's book and that can be seen it in some points of the story, where it is somewhat more abstract and personal. Another point I see where the story is weak is in supposed Chekhov's weapon, at the beginning of the film: When Jonathan arrives in Transylvania, at the inn he is given a Bible and a cross, however, Dracula manages to bite him even with the cross around his neck.
In short, I have enjoyed this film as much as the original 1922
Those who find "Nosferatu" from 1922 quite interesting but can't get into silent films should be happy with the 1979 remake. It is at least as artistically valuable but provides a more traditional viewing experience. Of course, the whole thing is still not mainstream; after all, Werner Herzog is the director of this film. He stages the whole thing at a leisurely pace and with beautiful images. Partly, he takes over entire sequences from the original by F. W. Murnau. All of this worked very well for me.
The actors are also great, especially Klaus Kinski as Count Dracula. Kinski was already a creepy guy, but with the Nosferatu makeup, it's even more intense. Also strong is Isabelle Adjani as Lucy Harker. With her Snow White look, she embodies the "woman of pure heart" who wants to bring Dracula down. Meanwhile, Herzog sticks to the original plot, with the exception of the ending, which he changed. And that's what finally lifts the film to another level for me.
Renfield looks like John Belushi. Acting is so bad sounds like they barely acted before or spoke English at all. And it isn't dubbed they are actually saying it in English I think. Music is kinda cool like a RPG game when you at a town or something resting. And did his wife give him the fucking salute when he left? Germany c'mon man it's 1979. At least the colors are cool, not too bold and bright but not too dark and colorless. And why when he said Dracula's castle that everyone looked at him like a soap opera or comedy bruh 3.8 my ass. If this was made in 2018 or something I bet you it'd be rated 3.1 or something. The shots are cool I guess but still kinda boring.
The shots, the color, and the quality are great especially for the time without digital 8k cameras and stuff. But the acting and the weird pacing is such a shame, only Nosferatu himself got any good acting at least physical acting not voice, but everyone else is like a b-movie actor or c-movie actor or something. And the clocks are cool. If this movie was silent maybe it would be way better. The choir music reminds me of Zelda :3
It appears that I'm watching the English version, idk if that means dubbed or they spoke actual English on set but I'll put the voice acting aside, hopefully on a rewatch I can see the original German version. The colors are very vivid especially in the third act, the best one so far. Maybe I was harsh on the acting but it is based on a silent German film from 1922 and that is based on a 1890s book so it's probably meant to be that way in a creepy way and not a bad acting way? Also it's German and the only other German movie I've seen is the original and Vampyr so maybe that's just how acting is there or something.
Review by Matthew Luke BradyBlockedParent2020-10-21T23:39:03Z
I never thought a remake would be on the same level of greatness and get that same uncomfortable feeling as the original. Both films should hold up today and that's the best thing ever.
Remakes (to me) can turn out in many different way's if you look at it's history of films. There are remakes that are known as classic and way better than the original. Films like John Carpenter's "The Thing" and the 1986 film "The Fly" that has been kept in everybody's hearts as one of the greats. But whenever there's good there's always bad. Remakes seem to everywhere now if it's horror, Sci-Fi, action or drama you can't escape of what I like to call it, "The Curse of the Remade".
But Nosferatu the Vampyre (in my opinion) is the best remake I've seen.
The atmosphere and it's slow build up of suspense is the top key things that made this movie kind of chilling at times. I was glued me to screen with those two supporting the film. That's what makes a great horror movie; no stupid and annoying jump scars, and no mindless blood and gore. Just a creepy setting and the atmosphere around the movie really hold up the film.
Klaus Kinski who played Nosferatu did one quite a performance in this movie. He got the character so perfectly well that it's like the actor is doing a small little tribute to Max Schreck original role in the 1922 film, and an awesome tribute it was.
Overall rating: Brilliant directing, the acting from everyone was great, the cinematography was some of the best I've seen, and the set designs was just perfect in this movie.