this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
50 points (94.6% liked)

movies

1954 readers
337 users here now

Matrix room: https://matrix.to/#/#fediversefilms:matrix.org

Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.

🔎 Find discussion threads

A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome

Related communities:

Show communities:

Discussion communities:

RULES

Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.

2024 discussion threads

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Robert Eggers’ Nosferatu is everything that’s beautiful and horrifying about classic vampire stories.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MrJameGumb@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I just watched this movie earlier today and I don't get the hype. I was really looking forward to it but I ended up dozing off 2 or 3 times.

[–] TwoFacedJanus1968@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

True. It is not really scary, but personally I don't think I've ever found any adaptation of DRACULA to actually be scary except maybe for a few moments in SALEM'S LOT but that was only slightly a Dracula story and I was a little kid when I saw it on television.

My favorite adaptation is the Coppola DRACULA film, and it was much more entertaining and more of a Gothic Romantic adventure - like the novel - than a horror movie. In fact, watching NOSFERATU, I felt it was much more similar to Coppola's film than either the Murnau original from the silent era or the 70's remake by Herzog.

In the end, it felt more tragic and melodramatic than horrifying and though Orlock might be the most disgusting and possibly dreadful depiction of a vampire on film, he was far from the most frightening. Nevertheless, it was a compelling performance and all the actors played their parts well - especially Depp and Dafoe.

[–] MrJameGumb@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think my biggest issue was how cartoonishly evil Count Orlok seemed. That accent they gave him made me think more of Boris Badenov than the prince of darkness. Also a lot of the characters seemed kind of one dimensional and I couldn't really get invested in any of them. I agree it had a lot in common with the Coppola version but just more stripped down and monochromatic. By the time Nosferatu ended I just wanted to go watch the Coppola one again. I agree Depp and Dafoe were the best parts of the film.

[–] TwoFacedJanus1968@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Yeah, that is interesting about Orlock. He was cartoonish or poorly fleshed out at least in what was shown and heard on screen. Klaus Kinski's version in the Herzog film was more interesting - even Willem Dafoe's version in SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE was more entertaining.

An interesting take on the character but not a compelling one. Also, confusing in the sense that he seemed to understand himself in ways that would be impossible if it were true. Like when he says that he is only an appetite. If that were true, then how would he be able to understand that? Is anything he says the truth? Did Ellen essentially conjure him from the darkness? So, in a way, his motivations must be deeper than that.

In general, I felt like there was a much more well developed world behind the story and the film only displayed its surface.

[–] Jaderick@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

I thought it was a good movie that succeeded at what it was trying to do with the horror/drama/theatrics, but I don’t want to watch it again. It did drag a few times, especially at the beginning.