Nosferatu 2025 (8/10)

 

    "Nosferatu" is a 2024 American Gothic horror film directed by Robert Eggers - the same mad genius who directed "The VVitch" and "The Lighthouse." Both are crazy, artsy films that I highly recommend. This one is, of course, a modern remake of the 1922 silent film, "Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror" by Henryk Galeen. And obviously, this whole story is "heavily inspired" by the original 1897 story by Bram Stoker, "Dracula." 

    As far as trigger warnings, this one has a couple: Violence and gore are pretty prevalent, dude bites the head off of a bird. Some nudity, though I would say it is very tasteful and artistic rather than vulgar. "Pedicide" aka the murder of children. Some plague, sickness. And a lot of sexual themes throughout. 

    Also just a good note that nothing bad happens to the cat.

    Honestly some other people's reviews thought the film was just disgusting and I didn't think it was that bad but maybe that says more about me than it does about them. I certainly wouldn't recommend it to the squeamish sort but it wasn't the kind of thing that "ruins your night" or whatever. I've certainly seen films that were far more unpleasant and unsavory. And the story of "Dracula" is obviously a horror story right off the bat so I didn't really find any of the more adult themes to be severely out of pocket.

    The movie is soooo artsy, obviously. It has the same strikingly loud sounds and eerie minimal music that enrich Egger's other films. Glaring whites and the darkest shadows. Fantastic framing and focal points. Just marvelous as far as visuals go. 

    The main 3 cast members really put their all into their roles. Lilly Rose Depp did fantastically. (This isn't her acting debut by any means but this is the first time I've ever heard of her so it's kind of her debut for me as a viewer.) Her possession scenes were so raw and realistic - she certainly performed "Ellen" like a professional actress. Nicholas Holt does his best with every character he's given and "Thomas" is no different. 

    

    Of course Skarsgard as "Count Orlok" was amazing. The prosthetics and voice acting were top tier. His hands in particular were so slender and elegant, it was basically 'hand porn.' It was a very ballsy decision to NOT recreate the original Orlok's appearance and instead create their own depiction of the famous vampire, but I can see why they did it. The 1922 version is just so iconic, they didn't want to even challenge it. 

    

    I suppose I will go into some more specifics so I'll just put the page break here.

***

SPOILER

WARNING

***

    I really liked the addition of the crazy Orlok servant, it was a clever way to enact Orlok's will on a city that was all the way across the sea otherwise. 

    I also adored all of the "old-fashioned" filming techniques they used with the way Orlok's hand passed over the city and over Ellen as a haunting shadow. 

    The work with silhouettes was just superb.

    Willem Defoe as "Van Helsing" was GREAT and I loved his character so much. He was so charismatic and charming. It was so refreshing to have a character that obviously dealt with very grim, nefarious creatures be so positive and upbeat at the same time. 

    

    And here's some Orlok quick to show off his new design because it was so interesting and different. 

    I haven't yet watched the original 1922 film but, as far as I could tell, the plot was basically the same. (That's why the people saying "the movie was too different, so different from the original, the story was all over the place" really confused me.) Some people said the film was too long and I suppose I can see that if they weren't as enraptured by the art style as I was. It could've been shorter, but I didn't mind the length at all. 

    There was one big plot change that they did make - They had Ellen call for Orlok instead of him just choosing her after thinking she's pretty in Thomas' locket. She was lonely and just wanted a friend, "an angel, a companion" so that she wasn't so alone. That was a really interesting change in my opinion. On the one hand, it was so sad to think that Ellen just wanted friendship and summoned A VAMPIRE. I know they say "be specific when you call out to an entity, don't just call out because you don't know who - or what - will answer." But come on, she just wanted a friend.

    But on the other hand, it gave a different spin to Ellen's sacrifice at the end. Whereas in the original she had to die with Orlok just out of happenstance, in the 2024 version she had some agency. Not to say that it was "her fault" necessarily, but it felt a little more like she ... was responsible for taking Orlok out after she had unintentionally brought him about. 

    The original was much more of a tragedy - Ellen did nothing to deserve her fate - but the newer film had a different sort of "intent" to it. It was less "random", I suppose, though still tragic that Ellen was basically punished just for a simple accident. But it made her choosing her own sacrifice to feel a bit more noble and brave. 

    Just wanted to reiterate that the ending scene was so well done. Ellen's nudity felt so tasteful and majestic. It really was like watching an angel lie with the devil himself, horrible and beautiful at the same time. 

    I really enjoyed the film overall. It was just -such- a treat for the eyes all around. 

    Fantastic. I suppose it was only because of the pacing of the film overall and maybe the simplicity of the plot? that ended up detracting from the score. The scenes they chose, the scenes they didn't -- I don't really know how to explain it but it just wasn't a 10/10.

    But 8/10 is still damn good in my book. 

Thanks for stopping by.

More reviews to come.