Genuine: The Tragedy of a Vampire

For director Robert Wiene, he yearned to duplicate his success by hiring "Caligari's" writer, set designer & cinematographer for his next project, September 1920's "Genuine: The Tale of a Vampire." Using the same framing structure, the tale has a former painter falling asleep while reading a horror novel. His dream is about his portrait of a high priestess, Genuine, hanging on his wall above him. The dreamlike quality of the movie is similar to "Caligari" with its surreal sets and tone.

The term vampire in those days in cinema meant a woman taking the financial pants off of unsuspecting men. Such was the femme fatale Genuine, the subject of Wiene's film. Unfortunately for the director and Decia Studios, "Genuine" was a colossal flop. But that didn't stop him from directing well into the 1930's, producing some classics along the way.

Robert Wiene repeats the techniques he used in "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" with far less success in "Genuine". His looming architectures and broad swaths of darkness are glaringly at odds with the utterly ridiculous story of the seductress-priestess-wild girl brought to unsuspecting Europe. There are some striking visual effects, such as the jungle of branches where Genuine climbs up and up to escape from her prison, but they don't add up to anything. (I should note that only fragments, adding up to about a half hour, survive of this movie; but I suspect that the parts I didn't see wouldn't have added any deeper meaning.)

...yes, it's from the same director, Robert Wiene, whose landmark THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI was released earlier the very same year, 1920; and, yes, much of the same cinematic technique created for CALIGARI was used here as well. The main differences between the two utterly defeat any chance that GENUINE, at least in the 43-minute "condensation" that appears on the 2002 Kino DVD release, would ever be a tenth as watchable as CALIGARI (or, for that matter, THE HEARTS OF AGE, Orson Welles' self-described "amusement" that spoofed all the surrealist silent European cinema concocted by Wiene, F.W. Murnau, Salvador Dali and the like). First, the sets and makeup of the players are not as flamboyantly odd this time around. Second, the pacing is far too slow for the story. Third, the story is itself far too bizarre and convoluted for a casual viewer to find any interest in; CALIGARI's is relatively straightforward in comparison. If you want a pre-NOSFERATU take on vampires, track down the DVD of LES VAMPIRES instead...

I've just viewed the Image DVD of CALIGARI, with commentary by Mike Budd. This DVD also includes excerpts from GENUINE. While the snippets included are pretty strange and disconnected, they show a major similarity between the two films -- that is, the "frame" structure of the story. CALIGARI's frame is that it is a story told by a madman. In GENUINE, it appears that the story is a "dream" experienced by a young man who has fallen asleep reading his favorite novel. What I saw of GENUINE makes it seem the young man's favorite author was Sacher-Masoch. See also how Genuine messes up the young man's hair in a rush of passion -- shades of John Barrymore's transition scenes from DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE?

FYI, there is a longer 89 minute version with French intertitles. The story is allowed to develop much better, it's worth seeking out.