Nosferatu

Perhaps it was the lofty expectations or Robert Eggers' (until now, in my opinion) unbroken string of masterpieces, but Nosferatu feels like a bit of a disappointment.

All of the ingredients are there. Nosferatu deserves accolades for incredible costumes and sets, the dialog is poetic and period appropriate, and the cinematography is GORGEOUS. We've come to expect this from Eggers and cinematographer Jarin Blaschke, who has worked on all of Eggers' past films. The visuals are truly striking and memorable; the shadowy hand across the German town of Wisburg where it takes place or the image of Nicholas Hoult's Thomas walking in a snow forest.: impeccable.

The performances are - mostly - fantastic. I was struck by how likable Aaron Taylor Johnson was here; he gives perhaps the best performance of his career in this movie. Willem Dafoe, Nicholas Hoult, Ralph Ineson, Emma Corrin...are all great.

Lily Rose-Depp delivers a star making performance in this film for sure, but is she really THAT much better than Nell Tiger-Free in this year's First Omen? They do very similar things, but one movie came out in April and is a horror prequel and the other is a prestige December release from acclaimed director Robert Eggers. I wouldn't normally bring up a "comparative" performance, but given how similar these are, I can't help it.

And the reason I do that is...her character - Ellen - is not written particularly well. Rose-Depp can do a mean possession, but there isn't much to her character beyond that, as opposed to what I saw from Free in The First Omen.

I also feel mixed things about Bill Skarsgård's Count Orlock. As usual, Skarsgård is incredible from a purely performative aspect and truly melts away into the role. However, the movie's interpretation of Orlock didn't work for me at all; his goofy accent and moustache, his copious screen time, and overbearing dialog was more funny than intimidating. You can't have a character deemed "worse than evil," and have him give off Count Chocula vibes. I'm sorry. This is one scenario where less is decidedly more and the amount of time we see Orlock actively hurts the film.

But the worst thing about Nosferatu is its pacing, editing, and storytelling. The film has a nightmarish, disorienting vibe in the beginning - which makes sense - and then completely abandons this tone by the second half, becoming far more conventional. In a sense, I kind of wish this movie stuck to its weirdness a bit more; it really should've gone HARDER, but I'm fairly certain studio interference got in the way.

It also doesn't really convey information all too well, with confusing editing that puts scenes out of place and lines of - already somewhat hard to understand - dialog intended to convey MAJOR plot points. (Two scenes stick out to me: one where Ellen and Tom are arguing only for it to cut in a way that implies she's going with him to Romania, but they just go his friend's house, and another where his "night" at Count Orlock's house is just bereft of any tension or intrigue, because the shots are compiled so confusingly).

The film starts off shockingly quickly, giving us no moment to breathe and soak in the world we're seeing on screen. It hits the ground running yet feels simultaneously too long and too rushed.

We barely learn anything about our characters and as such, I struggle to see what this Nosferatu is even supposed to be about. The subject matter as presented is ripe for themes like female emancipation, sexual desire, the darker aspects of humanity (stuff that's mentioned), but the movie never gets a chance to really explore any of this.

So, while I don't think Nosferatu is a BAD movie by any means, it doesn't accede to anything beyond "just fine" to me right now. A technically brilliant, well acted, but ultimately, kind of tepid story.

This film did nothing that Coppola's 1992 Bram Stoker's Dracula didn't already do. Coppola's film both thematically, and visually broke ground (costumes, creature design, set pieces, etc.), and had a far more expository, but also sinister and apprehensive feel. Not to mention it was also far more carnal. Nosferatu on the other hand, just felt like a tamer, "nothing new to see here" re-make, with nothing remotely original in any depictions. Maybe if Nosferatu looked scarier than a bald Vlad Teppish ("The Impaler", "Dracul"), that might've helped. I give it a 5-6 with a "I wouldn't watch it again" rating.

F. W. Murnau's (illegally adapted) 1922 film Nosferatu presented the vampire as a sickly, batlike elf. In the new 'Nosferatu,' Robert Eggers introduces an off-putting new look for Count Orlok, but Nosferatu (2024) is an unnecessary retelling of Murnau's original film wrapped in mediocrity. It reflects a trend of nostalgia and reboots. Innovation takes a backseat to reverence in the foreground. This is an exercise in indulgence that only the MMXXV Generation will enjoy. Visually, the film is overblown in its impressionistic palette. Coppola's Dracula was visually more imposing, combining opulent gothic imagery with operatic intensity. Herzog's Nosferatu (1979) had more haunting, austere beauty. And Carl Dreyer's Vampyr (1932) was more dreamlike.

The 1922 film masterfully manages to touch on themes such as death, impermanence, innocence, sacrifice, inevitability, eroticism, love... The 2024 film is just a vampire movie. Nothing less, nothing more. It has a good start. Or, rather, the aesthetics manage to favor a novel, immersive experience for a while. But as time goes by, the aesthetics lose their novelty, and the film becomes tedious, boring, ridiculous and a little cringe-inducing. I don't regret having seen it, but I wouldn't watch it a second time. I would recommend the original even to those who don't like horror or vampire movies. The 2024 film, no. It can be entertaining to watch at home, on cable, without expectations, on a night when there's nothing to do.

I was very excited to see this movie and finally went to see it. And it is....... Fine.

I've read other reviews saying it was beautiful and emotional but I honestly didn't feel very connected to these characters.

It also wasn't very scary. Very creepy! But not very scary.

The monster is constantly seen. He doesn't give me the creeps that the old Nosferatu still gives me appearance wise.

The actors are good but overall the majority of the film feels pointless.

The shaking of the characters particularly the lead is incredible and they do seem to show genuine dread. But again it felt like it was building and nothing happens. Also the ending is kind of just whatever. I think if the characters meant more to me by the end it would've been a good ending but also I kind of didn't care about the characters as they tell you intimate details about the characters which is why you should care but do nothing to build the characters so that you do care.