Robert Eggers, known for his meticulous yet fruitless research to the subjects he depicts (fruitless because they are fictional stories and characters - The Northman, not historical characters), does it again with Nosferatu- a gothic vampire story told countless times in cinema history before, and therefore there's no meat left to peck on. So how does it fare up against all other Dracula iterations?
Eggers reinterprets unauthorized Murnau version of Bram Stoker's Dracula, Nosferatu (1922), with an Eastern European folklore twist that Stoker was inspired to write his book from. So there are slight differences in the foreboding story of the supernatural in the age of enlightenment, but the choices Eggers makes here are not particularly cinematic nor thrilling.
In this new Nosferatu, the undead, Count Orlok is neither a suave Victorian age shapeshifter, nor shriveled up, rodent like creature. He is more like a zombie who is resurrected by dreams of a little waif who burdens herself to save humanity from the plague.
I can't help but compare this new film with Werner Herzog's take on the same story, which is one of my favorites of all time. And Lily-Rose Depp, with all her conniptions and convulsions, is no Isabelle Adjani. In all aspects - cinematography, choice of locations, music, acting (even in intentionally stilted theatrical performances by Kinski, Ganz and Adjani), and periodic and cultural details, Herzog gets that 'ecstatic truth', that Eggers can only dream about bringing from his historical research to the screen. Even the sex and nudity can't liven up this dull, sodden version of the story.
2 comments:
You're gross
Completely agree with this. The German language version of this tale is about perfect, maybe it's something about being European I don't know but edgers film kept me thinking about Disney
Post a Comment