Le tournage de Nosferatu (1922) est entravé par sa star Max Schreck, qui prend le rôle d'un vampire beaucoup plus au sérieux qu'il ne semble humainement possible.Le tournage de Nosferatu (1922) est entravé par sa star Max Schreck, qui prend le rôle d'un vampire beaucoup plus au sérieux qu'il ne semble humainement possible.Le tournage de Nosferatu (1922) est entravé par sa star Max Schreck, qui prend le rôle d'un vampire beaucoup plus au sérieux qu'il ne semble humainement possible.
- Réalisation
- Scénariste
- Vedettes
- Nommé pour 2 oscars
- 16 victoires et 30 nominations au total
- Henrik Galeen
- (as John Aden Gillet)
- Paul - Camera Assistant
- (as Nicholas Elliot)
- Innkeeper
- (as Milos Hlavak)
- Drunken Woman
- (as Sacha Ley)
- Old Woman
- (as Marie Paule Van Roesgen)
Avis en vedette
Dafoe is da man.
I've never really been a big fan of Nosferatu nor a particular admirer of Willem Dafoe, but this bizarre little movie has made me appreciate both much more. A fictionalised account of the making of F.W. Murnau's 1922 silent horror classic, Shadow of the Vampire toys with the notion that Nosferatu's star Max Schreck (played here by Dafoe) was actually a bona fide member of the undead.
This fanciful idea plays out a little too slowly, perhaps, but offers plenty of opportunity for dark humour, the cast delivering suitably offbeat performances that prove strangely intoxicating, with Dafoe's mesmerising turn as Shreck being the film's strongest suit, the actor's mannerisms and expressions played to perfection.
Casual movie fans who haven't seen Murnau's classic will probably wonder what the hell is going on, so I recommend seeing Nosferatu beforehand, just so that one can fully appreciate the magic of certain scenes and the brilliance of Dafoe's performance.
Heavy and difficult for the general public, it will surely please the connoisseurs.
Well made the `who is the real monster' thing works really well
This is an inventive film that looks at how far art will go to create. The director Murnau seems as driven by the creative process as Shreck is by his lust for blood. This comparison is carried through the whole film until the inevitable showdown between the two drives. The setup itself is fascinating but the comparison between the two men makes it even better.
The film is well shot and uses the different cameras well. It looks really good and mixes bright shots with shadowy darkness really well. It also benefits from a good cast. Malkovich is excellent as the driven director who easily becomes a monster himself but Dafoe is even better. Despite being almost unrecognisable under the make up, Dafoe manages to bring humanity to his monster he also brings some humour without making his a comedy role. Elwes is underused, but Izzard is great as a bad 1920's actor!
Overall this may not inspire interest in everyone but it has a great cast and a good central story. The comparisons drawn between Murnau and Shreck only improve what is already a very enjoyable film.
Absolutely stunning and fascinating !
This theme makes it of course a must for the ancient horror fans. Lots of footage and trivia of the 1922 masterpiece are shown and that's a real extra value for true cinema buffs ! But of course, this movie reaches far above average thanks to the brilliant performances. A totally disguised Willem Dafoe is absolutely amazing in his role of Max Shreck. It's like looking at the real Schrek...the resemblance is terrific. His appearance (especially the long nails) give you the creeps whenever he's on screen and his voice haunts your head every time he says something. Dafoe never gives away a bad performance but this one is extraordinary. And of course,the same can be said about John Malkovich...his portrayal of director F.W. Murnau is extremely realistic and believable. He plays Murnau as the man who slowly goes insane because he tries to be too perfect. An amazing performance !!
There aren't many shock effects to detect in this movie but that's rather normal, right ? After all, it's more like a costume-drama than it is horror. The lack of exiting scenes is made up by the constant presence of tension and an extremely appropriate atmosphere. Also, a perfect image of Eastern Europe in the 1920's is presented to the audience. All these aspects make a much better movie then just some ordinary slashing and slicing throats. A must see !!
A Contagious Conceit
This is a beautiful film with sumptuous cinematography, wardrobe, and sets. The performances range from static to sensational with an unrecognizable Willem Dafoe stealing the show. Although, there is a lot left to embrace even when he leaves the frame.
It is an offbeat movie to say the least and will be a tough swallow for some. It does wallow in its own craziness but not to the point of distraction. There are some rough inconsistencies to the story but are swept away in the fun and creepiness of it all.
For those willing to imagine the absurd this is quite a conceit to behold. It is all believable in a world gone mad sort of way and it is presented in such a reverential and dutiful way that it can't help but be admired.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesBased in part upon a legend that Max Schreck was in reality a vampire which is why he played the role of Orlok/Dracula so well. Some variations of the legend suggest that Nosferatu le vampire (1922) was the only film Schreck made, though in reality he was already a stage and screen veteran by the time Nosferatu was shot, and would appear in many non-vampiric roles before his death in 1936.
- GaffesThere is a reflection of Count Orlock's head in the mirror moments after a big deal was made about the fact that he cast no reflection in the same mirror (although this is possibly a deliberate nod to Nosferatu le vampire (1922) in which a similar error was made).
- Citations
[Asked what he thought of the book, Dracula]
Max Schreck: It made me sad.
Albin: Why sad?
Max Schreck: Because Dracula had no servants.
Albin: I think you missed the point of the book, Count Orlock.
Max Schreck: Dracula hasn't had servants in 400 years and then a man comes to his ancestral home, and he must convince him that he... that he is like the man. He has to feed him, when he himself hasn't eaten food in centuries. Can he even remember how to buy bread? How to select cheese and wine? And then he remembers the rest of it. How to prepare a meal, how to make a bed. He remembers his first glory, his armies, his retainers, and what he is reduced to. The loneliest part of the book comes... when the man accidentally sees Dracula setting his table.
- Générique farfeluCredits end with the sounds of the camera filming and of the phonograph which set the mood for the actors.
- ConnexionsEdited from Nosferatu le vampire (1922)
Meilleurs choix
- How long is Shadow of the Vampire?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Shadow of the Vampire
- Lieux de tournage
- Vianden, Luxembourg(Castle interior scenes)
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 8 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 8 293 784 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 150 171 $ US
- 1 janv. 2001
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 11 155 214 $ US
- Durée
- 1h 32m(92 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1






