Robert Eggers' Nosferatu

[Dave_W]

What I wanted Orlok to look like. What we got. View attachment 747051View attachment 747052

Aaayyyyyyy Oh. Day doh. Daaay doh. Alright!

 

[Wor-Gar]

why does Eggers list his height as 6'2''? Does he look 6'2''...?

 

[Buttmunch]

While I would have preferred something closer to the original design since they are using the Nosferatu title and not ‘Dracula,’ they seem to have essentially made him Vlad the Impaler anyway. Since the stache has historically significance I can live with it. Again, just an interesting choice to go the Nosferatu route with a clear Dracula inspired look.

 

[jye4ever]

why does Eggers list his height as 6'2''? Does he look 6'2''...?


View attachment 747148

Yeah something seems off about that…

 

[jye4ever]

I’ve seen some face lifts look scarier…

 

[Wor-Gar]

Poor Meg Ryan.

 

[jye4ever]

Poor Meg Ryan.

Brit Eckland!

 

[Wor-Gar]

I was joking. Almost said Mick Jagger.

 

[histrionics]

Just got back and have to say the movie didn't do much for me. It was beautifully shot with some really great performances, particularly from the lead actress, but the story is so tired and well-worn by this point that it was hard to find any of it creepy or scary. And at times it almost seems to venture into spoof territory.

I find the core Dracula story to be almost painful to sit through now because, as you said, it is so tired and well-worn. I just want to get through it, get to the fun scary parts and get it over with, all the while hoping every new cinematic version will put some interesting spin on it, add some unexpected twists in there, or render the narrative in some new and unexpected way. The Dracula plot is not as interesting as the way a filmmaker may choose to craft it. It's almost more about the window-dressing than the plot now. The desire for accuracy to the source material is almost gone, in favour of wanting something that proposes a different but respectful treatment of the book. I do feel like Eggers' Nosferatu mostly gave us that, but also maybe not enough. He could have drove the last act harder to really push the plague narrative and the 3-night ultimatum into a deeper longer more dreadful and painful meditated experience. The last act felt more procedural, more "Hollywood" conscious (i.e. pandering to audience tolerance), when it could have been a really horrific and draining ride that tested the audience's expectations of horror cinema. Watch Herzog's Nosferatu and you'll see he slowed the film down in the last act, rather than raced through it. That's how Nosferatu should be done, as an art-house approach to the Dracula story.

The truth is... my personal truth... is that Stoker's Dracula novel is quite an awful read. It's written in a terribly pedestrian way and is really more of an adventure story than a dark Gothic horror. The thing is a real mess and I always felt dumb when reading it; always wanted to pick up the most dense piece of academic writing to cleanse my literary palette after reading Dracula.

And it really didn't help that Orlock comes across more as a creepy old man with a bushy mustache than the all powerful Prince of Darkness.

But this is Nosferatu, not the Fresh Prince of Darkness that is Dracula. It's a very different take on the Dracula concept - even the original 1922 Nosferatu was - with Orlok being a living breathing overaged piece of rotting meat who represents the plague and the idea of the "other" foreign invader and carrier of disease.

 

[Buttmunch]

Just saw this tonight. Came down with the flu on Christmas Eve so this was my first chance I felt my cough was tolerable enough to sit through a long movie. Orlok’s wheezing breathing was EXACTLY how I sounded at the worst of the flu

I actually liked Orlok’s look in this. It’s different but it all made sense in the context of the movie. I’m torn on remakes keeping the look of the original and trying something different as the different approach doesn’t always work or improve things. This tied it back more to Vlad the Impaler so it worked for me.

 

[HyperDrive]

I kinda want to rewatch it this week before they remove the Dolby showings. Lovely film.

 

[davejames]

But this is Nosferatu, not the Fresh Prince of Darkness that is Dracula. It's a very different take on the Dracula concept - even the original 1922 Nosferatu was - with Orlok being a living breathing overaged piece of rotting meat who represents the plague and the idea of the "other" foreign invader and carrier of disease.

Perhaps, but the movie still builds him up as this all-powerful force of evil and... I just didn't feel that at all when looking at him.

 

[Buttmunch]

Perhaps, but the movie still builds him up as this all-powerful force of evil and... I just didn't feel that at all when looking at him.

Spoiler

The demon that possesses Orlok’s corpse is the all powerful evil force, not Orlok’s body. Orlok is merely the physical vessel the demon is inhabiting. It’s rotting and not in great shape, but it functions well enough to get things done. I believe (but could be mistaken) it was trying to transfer from Orlok to Ellen before the sun came up but didn’t manage that in time. Certainly a slightly different take on the typical vampire angle. So no, Orlok isn’t meant to look like the all powerful evil force. The shadows might be more it’s true form.

 

[pixletwin]

Spoiler

The demon that possesses Orlok’s corpse is the all powerful evil force, not Orlok’s body. Orlok is merely the physical vessel the demon is inhabiting. It’s rotting and not in great shape, but it functions well enough to get things done. I believe (but could be mistaken) it was trying to transfer from Orlok to Ellen before the sun came up but didn’t manage that in time. Certainly a slightly different take on the typical vampire angle. So no, Orlok isn’t meant to look like the all powerful evil force. The shadows might be more it’s true form.

A vampiric dyad in the force!

 

[ironwez20]

This is the book right?

 

[Luisenigma1]

Saw Interesting post on FB about Orlok's look in the film. "To those complaining about the vampire's mustache and hair style in Nosferatu : The warrior lords of ancient Slavic Eastern Europe were the Cossacks, famous for their distinctive hairstyle/mustaches and acumen in battle. This was the inspiration for Count Orlock's most recent design"

 

[Mandible]

Saw it. Thought it was average. Production wise, it's undeniable, a very well made film, particularly for only $50M, but the longer it went, the less interested I became.

Keeping Orlok in the shadows for as long as they did didn't help - I didn't find there was a payoff for doing so, and his total screen time would be less than 5 minutes. Saying that, Skarsgard's performance was great.

But by about the half way point, it all started to feel very one-note, stomping the same ground over and over.

Dafoe just seems to pull Nosferatu's name out of his ass; there wasn't a precursor to his conclusion - just bam - it's a demon, so it must be this ****. Really?

I know the inspiration/justification is supposed to be Vlad the Impaler and Slavic Cossacks, but we're talking about vampires, it's nonsensical fiction; make him look memorable, unique, something more than what we got. And his eyes looked young so it made it feel like it was a cheap Halloween mask.

I've seen the original, Dracula, and now this, and personally I think the original 20's version will (continue to) endure better than this or any other version because it's so unique. This will only linger in the Egger's fans circles.

 

[ZE_501]

Saw it. Thought it was average. Production wise, it's undeniable, a very well made film, particularly for only $50M, but the longer it went, the less interested I became.

Keeping Orlok in the shadows for as long as they did didn't help - I didn't find there was a payoff for doing so, and his total screen time would be less than 5 minutes. Saying that, Skarsgard's performance was great.

But by about the half way point, it all started to feel very one-note, stomping the same ground over and over.

Dafoe just seems to pull Nosferatu's name out of his ass; there wasn't a precursor to his conclusion - just bam - it's a demon, so it must be this ****. Really?

I know the inspiration/justification is supposed to be Vlad the Impaler and Slavic Cossacks, but we're talking about vampires, it's nonsensical fiction; make him look memorable, unique, something more than what we got. And his eyes looked young so it made it feel like it was a cheap Halloween mask.

I've seen the original, Dracula, and now this, and personally I think the original 20's version will (continue to) endure better than this or any other version because it's so unique. This will only linger in the Egger's fans circles.

Interesting; one of my filmmaker friends gave it basically the exact same review. Wonder how I'll feel about it.

 

[HyperDrive]

Rewatching it tonight!