"Nosferatu the Vampyre" *** (out of ****)It is a rather audacious act for a filmmaker to remake a movie that is generally considered a classic. F.W. Murnau's "Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror" (1922) is recognized as a masterpiece of silent cinema, a masterpiece of the horror genre, and one of Murnau's finest achievements. To take on a project with this reputation you better bring something special to the table.
This leads us to Werner Herzog's "Nosferatu the Vampyre" (1979). A movie ultimately I can't say gives audiences a fresh perspective on this existing material. Yes, Werner Herzog is a great filmmaker. And, yes this remake of "Nosferatu" is well made but I must conclude it is an unnecessary exercise. Some call this movie an affectionate homage to the original and to Murnau. That all may be true but it isn't a good enough reason to touch a classic despite what ever best intention's Herzog had.
The fundamental flaw in Herzog's version of this material is the filmmaker's interpretation of Murnau's film. "Nosferatu", in the hands of Murnau, was not merely a "vampire movie". I understand the lead character was a vampire but I suggest re-watching the movie. There is a theme of the constant battle between good versus evil in nature. Herzog, ever so delicately, touches upon this theme but ultimately I feel Herzog has given us a straight forward vampire movie. Look at the remaking of the title as an example.
There is nothing wrong with making a vampire movie. The question is, why remake Murnau's movie if you are not going to elevate the material. For me, Herzog has taken what made that movie unique from other vampire movies and has given us something, in theme, more routine.
Many may know the circumstances surrounding Murnau's "Nosferatu". It was an unofficial adaptation of Bram Stoker's "Dracula". Murnau was not able to secure the rights to the novel and thus changed the names of characters. The vampire for example is called Count Orlok.. Still, the estate of the Stoker family sued and won their case. All copies of "Nosferatu" were thought to have been destroyed. Herzog however is able to call the characters by their originally intended names since the novel is now in the public domain.
And so we get Jonathan Harker (Bruno Ganz) a newly wed real estate agent sent to Translyvania to meet with Count Dracula (Klaus Kinski), who wants to buy an estate in the same town as Harker, Wismar. According to Harker's boss, Renfield (Roland Topor) there will be a large commission to be had if Harker can seal the deal. This is all the incentive Harker needs. Finally, he believes, he will be able to afford a proper home for his wife, Lucy (Isabelle Ajani).
Lucy has been having nightmares and a daily nightly appearance of a bat flying into her bedroom (why she doesn't shut the windows is beyond me) makes her believe Harker should not travel to meet with Dracula. She senses an evil force. Harker doesn't heed her advice and begins his journey. He learns the townspeople fear Dracula's castle and plead with him not to travel any further. Harker ignores their advice as well.
If you knew nothing of vampire movies, this may have been an effective tool to create suspense. Are the townspeople right? Is Dracula an evil figure? What could he possibly look like? But, we have seen vampire movies before from "Dracula" (1931) to "Nosferatu". Therefore this all feels routine in its set-up and delays the inevitable payoff.
Since no one dare approach the castle, Harker must travel by foot. Here is where Herzog lightly broaches the theme of good and evil in nature. Before Harker leaves, Lucy wants them to spend some time by the sea. It all seems peaceful. The two lead a simple life. This is contrasted with Harker's journey. The skies look violent. Nature isn't so kind and peaceful. Trouble seems to be in the air. In the end though it becomes a foreshadowing of Dracula and not part of a larger social commentary.
When we see Dracula, those of us that have seen the original, will marvel at the attention to detail in makeup. Kinski looks identical to Max Schreck.
And it must be said, this is not a "gimmick" movie. Herzog and Kinski handle this material with sincerity. Kinski is not giving an impersonation of Max Schreck. Kinski makes the character his own. Herzog doesn't want the audience to bask in nostalgia for the original. If you have seen the silent version, naturally in your mind you will make comparisons. The problem is the original looms over this remake.
From the meeting between Harker and Dracula we go into the familiar story. Harker becomes a victim of Dracula, who and travels to Wismar with great haste upon the site of Lucy. The movie suggest an almost telepathic ability the two have to communicate with each other. Eventually leading to a showdown between the two. Dracula represents evil and Lucy represents purity.
Some have suggested Herzog does add something new to this material. They claim this version of "Nosferatu" explores Dracula's loneliness. I admit there is a scene where Lucy is face to face with Dracula and the two discuss her love for Jonathan and death. In this scene the viewer may pick up on the despair in Dracula however to suggest this movie fully explores such a theme is to really over play your hand.
Defenders of this movie will advise others to pretend they never saw the original and to judge this movie on it own merits. In theory it is wonderful advice. In practicality however it is nearly impossible. One can't undo their life experiences. So, we must ask the question, what separates this version of Dracula from other versions? There is a greater sense of dread among the inhabitants of the town upon Dracula's arrival. Herzog is a talented visual filmmaker and can compose arresting compositions. Pay attention to the lighting in relation to Dracula. Because of the makeup, the black costume Dracula wears, and the bald head up against the black background Dracula's head is luminous. It creates an interesting effect.
Herzog's other big contribution to the movie is the visual of hundreds of rats roaming around the city. It is a metaphor for something. What I am not sure. Disease / evil spreading across the town? Herzog shows a bit of dark humor as a group of people try to have supper outside while the rats surround them. Does this show how people adapt and conform to trouble around them? The image recalls one from Herzog's "Aguirre, the Wrath of God" (1972) and a scene with monkeys.
One couldn't say Herzog's "Nosferatu" isn't well made. You can certainly admire the performance by Kinski and some of the visuals as well but the movie is stuck in the shadows of the original. Where Murnau's version is regarded as a horror masterpiece, Herzog's version isn't even scary and takes on a more somber tone (which is not necessarily a flaw, just an accurate observation).
There is definitely an audience for "Nosferatu the Vampyre", especially among those that have never seen the original. I am sure they will enjoy this. If you have seen the original and this remake, it would be fun to watch "Shadow of the Vampire" (2000) the fictitious story of the making of "Nosferatu".
Posts
