Tag: Dracula

Nosferatu (2024)

Posted on by fenrisfil

Since Robert Eggers latest movie “Nosferatu” was released in the UK January 1st 2025, for me it is the first movie of this year. To many of my readers though it will have been the last movie of 2024 since it arrived Christmas day for the US and a few other territories. Sadly that means my review is behind everyone else. It also means it missed out on my “Best of 2024” list. But in my view it’s viable for 2025 with that release date. We’ll see where I place it next December. Anyway, this is written and directed by Robert Eggers. Jarin Blaschke provides cinematography and Robin Carolan the music. This is of course a remake of the 1922 silent movie, which was effectively an unofficial adaptation of Bram Stokers Dracula.

Bill Skarsgård stars as “Count Orlok”, the titular Nosferatu. This monster has established a psychic bond with Lily-Rose Depp’s “Ellen Hutter” and concocted a scheme to bring his reign of terror to Germany so that he can “Be one” with her. This also involves getting rid of her new husband “Thomas Hutter” (Nicholas Hoult). Fortunately for him Hutter is a solicitor and estate agent and so he can kill two birds with one stone by inviting Hutter to his castle to sign the deed to his new estate in Germany. Anna meanwhile continues to be haunted by dreams of this dark figure she likens to death itself. As the menace draws near her doctor seeks the assistance of Professor Albin Ebernhart Von Franz (Willem DaFoe) a controversial expert in the occult.

Gothic Horror is Back

This is a visually and sonically stunning movie. Not a huge surprise from Eggers, but he really has outdone himself with this one. Almost every scene has beautiful cinematography. Eggers makes great use of framing in his shots that really gives everything the look of a painting. He’s also clearly spent a lot of time watching old universal horror films and of course the original Nosferatu. The technique of using what you don’t see to build terror is at near perfection here. But as great as the visuals are, the movie is perhaps more impressive sonically. The use of the intense soundtrack, the frightening way Count Orlok speaks and strategic silence really helps to build the ominous tension and really make you feel in the presence of absolute evil.

It’s not all positive though. Eggers skills possibly don’t stretch to getting child actors to not really feel like children trying to act. The two children in this story were distractingly bad. Fortunately their roles were minor and effectively limited to two scenes (Well two where they had dialogue anyway). The second, larger problem is the plot. It’s not that it is a bad story, far from it. Since it is effectively Dracula it is arguably the most successful horror story ever written. But that is the problem right there. If you haven’t lived under rock your entire life you’ve definitely seen this story (Or something similar) before. Horror fan and/or a movie buffs have probably seen it at least ten times, maybe as many as fifty times. That is a problem.

Dreams And Nightmares

Despite the fact I’ve seen this story many times, the way Eggers approaches it is still unique. The heavy focus on dreams and the way they mesh with reality has always been one of his trademarks. Here he uses it in perhaps his best way yet. Having an evil that can be more of a presence through dreams without having to run around everywhere fits Gothic Horror perfectly. The genre has always been more about implying evil than showing it plainly. The idea is to give the viewer a sense of dread and Nosferatu has that in spades.

Where I wonder if Eggers does perhaps have a weakness, is in directing actors. This is a hard one to judge. The child actors were grating, but a few of the others felt a bit dodgy too. Notably, Aaron Taylor-Johnson felt a bit… off. Lily-Rose Depp though by contrast, was particularly good. Unsurprisingly Willem DaFoe, Nicholas Hoult, Bill Skarsgård and Emma Corrin all did great. But actors of that caliber don’t need that much guidance from a director. It’s when you look outside those names that I start to wonder. That’s not to say anyone was outright terrible though. Even the children, they were just notable by contrast. Put a pin in this one for now.

Remakes Worth Remaking

While I’m not normally a big remake fan, this is one that was definitely needed. After all, I think 100 years is more than enough time to warrant a second go. But since the soundtrack was so important to this film, it is very much justified as an improvement over it’s silent predecessor. It also goes some way to make amends for the shoddy way the original was treated. That is would be a whole separate can of worms, so suffice to say the Bram Stoker estate wasn’t best pleased with the unofficial take on Dracula. Yet it wasn’t until Christopher Lee took on the role that anyone played a more menacing vampire than Max Shreck. This film returns Orlock to the head of the table as scariest vampire.

But speaking of remakes, I can’t help but wonder what “A Nightmare on Elm Street” would be like if made by Francis Eggers. I mean sur,e he’d probably set it in Victorian England or something, but I don’t know anyone that has made so much of an art out of dreams, hallucination and madness. If ever there was a director outside of Wes Craven that could actually do a good Nightmare on Elm Street movie, I think Eggers is the man for the job. He would need the right cast though. I’m not sure the director is as good with the actors as he is with everything else. But, he has always been lucky in finding the best talent to work with.

Conclusion

When it comes to horror it is often down to personal taste. This however, is a film every horror fan can appreciate at least on the audio/visual level. Where opinions may vary is on the story. Gothic romantic horror isn’t a wide field as far as story tropes go and when you are remaking a 102 year old movie based (unofficially) on a 107 year old novel no take will ever feel totally original. However, we all knew what this was going in. Also, you don’t really watch Eggers for the story. That’s not a criticism, it’s just he creates atmosphere like no other director. That is why we watch his movies. That and his incredible attention to accuracy and detail. This is his best so far and it’s worth noting, every movie he releases is his best so far. I can’t wait for his next. This one is in the clouds at 8.5/10.

Rating: 8.5 out of 10.

The Last Voyage of the Demeter (2023)

Posted on by fenrisfil

The second movie of my 2023 October Horrorthon is one I’ve been looking forward to for a fair while. This is a Dracula movie with a bit of a twist in that it focuses on one specific chapter from Bram Stoker’s Novel. As the name suggests this is about Dracula’s journey to England on board a vessel known as “The Demeter”. For those that haven’t read the book, it’s worth noting it is an epistolary novel, that is the story is conveyed via a series of letters, diary entries and logs. This chapter in particular is written in the form of the Captain’s Log. This gives a lot of freedom in telling this story on screen since the source material is intentionally vague.

The Long Journey ahead

The movie is directed by André Øvredal (Troll Hunter, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark) and written by Bragi F. Schut (Escape Room) and Zak Olkewicz (Bullet Train). The cast features some strong acting talent (If not the biggest name draws) with Corey Hawkins (Straight Outta Compton, The Tragedy of MacBeth) taking the lead, and Game of Thrones alumnis Liam Cunningham (As the Captain) and Aisling Franciosi (A Stowaway) offering the main support.

The first thing to note here is that Hawkins’ character of “Clemens” is original to this movie. Clemens is a Doctor looking to travel back to England, as a man of Science he naturally will have to face that the world has more to it than he can easily understand. In the book the crew had sailed with the Captain many times, but this tweak in minor. Anna (Franciosi) is also an addition and a little more against the source material as she is a stowaway (In the book they searched the ship thoroughly and found no one not meant to be there). Still it’s a reasonable change and her role is important to the story, as she is the primary exposition character.

Nosferatu

The most interesting element of the film is Dracula himself, who is presented in a far more monstrous form than we are used to. It is a little reminiscent of Count Orlok in “Nosferatu” (1922), a film that still holds up shockingly well for a hundred and one year old silent movie. I appreciate this approach not just because I’m a fan of Nosferatu but because I like Vampires that are actually terrifying. This is about as opposite to something like “Twilight” that you can get. On top of this they kept his presence mysterious and minimal so as to maintain the atmosphere of terror throughout.

Despite the miniscule amount of source material (Honestly, it’s barely a chapter), you may be concerned that with a nearly two hour run time things may drag but the pacing is spot on and builds perfectly to it’s climax. In regards to the characters, none really stand out but they do have depth and all fill their roles adequately and believably. As I mentioned at the start this is a strong cast of quality actors, none of them are big name draws but for a horror film you don’t really need that.

Having Your Cake And Eating It Too

The film manages the impressive feat of both maintaining accuracy to the source while putting their own twist on the story and it does it in a way that adds to the original instead of taking away from it. This is a rare example of an adaptation actually getting to have it’s cake and being able to eat it. All too often there is a battle between staying true to the source and finding something new to say. but here that is a non-issue. Of course it helps when you are adapting something short and deliberately vague!

In conclusion, while not the best Dracula film ever made this is a strong entry into the mythos and refreshingly original. Vampires are finally scary again! This is a 7/10.

Rating: 7 out of 10.

Count Dracula (1970)

Posted on by fenrisfil

Tonight’s movie is Jesús Franco’s take on Bram Stoker’s “Dracula” from 1970. This is reputed to be the truest adaptation to the novel and a version of the story I’ve never seen before. It is also in the unique position of being Christopher Lee’s single non-comedic appearance as Dracula outside of the many Hammer films. Indeed it was actually made in a year when he appeared twice for Hammer in the role and had a cameo as the character in a Spike Lee comedy. For someone concerned with being typecast it seems like probably a bad move. Lee’s interest in this particular movie though stems from one of his long standing issues with his Hammer appearances: He always wanted to play the character more like he was in the novel. So now he had his chance.

October Review Challenge – Day 21

The story starts with lawyer Jonathan Harker (played by Frederick Williams), travelling to Transylvania to secure property for Count Dracula. If you are reading this you probably know how this goes by now so I’ll keep it brief. Dracula is of course going to feed on him after doing the necessary paperwork for his new property in England. After the first feeding though Harker manages to escape and finds himself back in England (Apparently someone found his unconscious body in Transylvania and transported him asleep back to the UK. Handy).

Back in the UK, Harker finds himself at a psychiatric clinic owned by Dr. Van Helsing. Naturally no one believes him about Dracula, until Van Helsing spots the bite marks on his neck. Harker’s fiancée Mina and her friend Lucy arrive to take care of Harker, but unbeknownst to them Dracula has followed and begins to prey on the women. Lucy dies and returns as a vampire herself, at which point Van Helsing and company set out to rid themselves of Dracula and his cohorts. This eventually leads back to Transylvania where the Count is attempting to return.

Production Quality

Despite the expanded role for Lee (Who never talked much in the Hammer series) and the accuracy to the source the movie clearly lacks in a lot of the production values Hammer brought to the table. The sound designed is grating to say the least and a number of times the effects reminded me of those used in Bela Lugosi’s time (40 years earlier). On top of this a lot of the camera work is downright shoddy. I know this is low budget, but I wasn’t expecting it to look that low budget. While the music obviously couldn’t utilise Hammer’s themes for the character, what it does present doesn’t seem to quite fit.

The plot meanwhile, while relatively true to the source really seems to drag, despite the relatively short run time for the film. The conclusion of the film feels anti-climactic and I can’t help but find myself missing the more action orientated endings of the Hammer films. Those always seemed to deliver a dramatic finale, but here it’s a bit of a matter-of-fact ending; It just sort of happens.

Characters and Performances

Christopher Lee does an decent job, but by his standards it is below average and the truth is while he may talk more than in the Hammer films he still doesn’t get a lot of screen time. Like in the novel Dracula initially appears as an old man but gets younger every time he feeds, this doesn’t really factor in to much in the plot outside from a casual reference later on.

Klaus Kinski puts in a very good performance as the bug eating Renfield, though the characters role in the film is relatively short. Herbert Lom performs his part as Van Helsing with authority but the character itself seems largely wasted in this version, having a stroke about 2/3rds of the way through and then being relegated away from the action. In the novel while he doesn’t kill Dracula himself, he is still involved in the action, disposing of his minions. The rest of the cast are pretty average.

Conclusion

Overall, while a bit of a curiosity and perhaps of mild interest to fans of Christopher Lee or Bram Stoker’s novel, it is ultimately a poor vampire horror that compares badly to the original Hammer Dracula with Lee. The opening scenes with Harker at Castle Dracula are good, but it’s all downhill after that. This is a 4/10.

Rating: 4 out of 10.
https://youtu.be/jsxst69muTY