SeamusMacDuff

Not sure why anyone thought a 2nd remake of the 1922 horror classic was needed, particularly since the story is lifted from the original Dracula novel. (So closely that the Stoker estate sued copyright infringement and won, with all reels to be destroyed. Hard to stake a vampire though.) The set design is superb, showing 1830s Germany in great detail including costumes, architecture, and props. The setting is dark and atmospheric, maybe too much so. Most of the supporting actors do well with what they have particularly the eccentric Dafoe, much of it requiring some nuance as the growing horror is increasingly psychological. Herr Knock is one crazy Renfield type, although the demon-vampire melding is a bit confusing.

The real problem is the leads. Skarsgaard can be one scary dude; ask Pennywise. But his hulking shape, the silent move villain (!) mustache, receding hairline, wheezy heavily accented breathing, and that we never really get a good look at him don't really add to the terror. That Depp's character and he shared some past life seems lifted from Coppola's Dracula version. She's not up a role that would be tough to pull off anyway, as much of the film is about her visions and contortions. She has no chemistry with her husband Hoult, which is really needed given the plot.

The ending, matching 1922's, is underwhelming - particularly since Dafoe's character mapped it out in detail. (Why is Orlok mostly biting chests? Tough bite even for him and not much blood there.) Worth a watch for vampire flick fans, but something silent and 100 years older is more scary.