Continuing my Halloween-themed Tuesday tricks, this frock flick is more obviously spooky. Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979) is writer/director Werner Herzog’s version of the 1922 classic Nosferatu. That early silent film was, itself, an unauthorized version of Bram Stoker’s 1897 novel with names and some plot details changed. Herzog’s film uses most of the 1922 movie’s plot overlaid with a few things from the original novel, like character names. Although Mina and Lucy’s names are swapped, so the main character is Lucy Harker, married to Jonathan Harker, and Mina is a friend and minor character. I’ve only watched the English-language version, however Herzog says the German-language version is more “authentic” (and both languages were not filmed simultaneously; they shot some scenes in each language and dubbed some scenes — which would explain differences between the versions).
Werner Herzog considered the 1922 film to be Germany’s greatest film, and he wanted his version to bridge the gap between those early German expressionist films and the then-current “renaissance” in German filmmaking. The result is a very atmospheric, moody, and dramatically shot story where the horror is of the creeping, longing, despair variety. Cinematographer Jörg Schmidt-Reitwein wanted to film the movie in “shimmering pastels,” according to a behind-the-scenes article from BFI, and did not allow any bright colors. This gives a different take than today’s super-dark films — this movie plays with shadow and light, all within a limited palette, to great effect.
The costumes are likewise limited, both in colors and in detail. The film had a small budget, and characters have minimal outfits. It’s hard to tell exactly what year the action is set, it looks vaguely mid-19th century, maybe 1840s due to the necklines and since there’s no crinolines. Costume designer Gisela Storch supplied Isabelle Adjani‘s Lucy with several obligatory flowing white nighties for the vampire meeting scenes, but Lucy’s daytime wardrobe isn’t as cliched. It’s just simple and rather basic. What stands out most is the massive amount of modern eye makeup Adjani wears — I guess it looks kinda goth but not historical.
But you don’t come to this Nosferatu for the costumes. It’s all about the ART. This is all misty ethereal shots of mountains and sea, moonlight and clouds, interspersed with meaningful imagery of bats and rats. Having seen the 1922 version in the theater once, I can appreciate what Herzog was doing here, but other than adding dialog and a few minor scenes, his remake feels almost slavishly reverent. He recreates so many specific scenes that this one doesn’t feel fresh or new. Of course, if you haven’t seen the original, then now you don’t need to!
Randomly added things in this Nosferatu that I have questions about: Lucy and Jonathan have kittens! They’s shown frolicking in one scene and Lucy holds a kitten, but they’re never mentioned at the time, referred to, or seen again. Why do they even exist in this movie?
Another one: This “last supper” is added, and is, I’m sure, deeply symbolic, but it feels out of place at this moment. It’s not connected to much else, just plopped in at one point, the characters aren’t relevant or related either.
Have you seen Herzog’s Nosferatu or the original?
I’ve seen them both and my views on both of them are the same. They are some of the most boring films I’ve ever seen. I didn’t find them atmospheric or “art” just sheer boredom.
I have seen the original Nosferatu, but neither of Herzog’s remakes. Also, cats never need a reason to be in a film! We are just meant to accept their beauty and superb status without question!!
She’s wearing a white dress and cuddling a black kitten. Oh the cat hair!
My guess is that the kittens are meant to add a certain vitality to the domesticity of these opening scenes – so they read as a cosy home life, rather than an atmosphere of Victorian repression (I also have a horrid suspicion that one could justify the kitten’s disappearance by the sort of plague-panicked purge that saw so many felines exterminated in London during the Plague Years of the later 1600s).
One also suspects that the heavy eye makeup would be a 1970s homage to the styles of the Silent Movie era (Though that would be more of a guess).
Also – and on a more cantankerous note – I am rather annoyed by this film’s decision to misuse the names from DRACULA, despite otherwise making not a single effort to bring the plot in line with the novel (Admittedly I feel Graf Orlock to bear the same relation to Count Dracula that Spider-Man does to Superman: one of them was based on the other, but they can safely be regarded as wholly distinct characters).
I think the name swap had something to do with initial copyright issues — Nosferatu in the original could not use “Dracula” and so the names might have been switched as well. (They also did it in the original stage play for Dracula, which became a 1979 version with Frank Langella — which also had the names switched around. Lucy/Jonathan, and in that one, Mina was Van Helsing’s daughter.)
Well yes, but my original point was that – given NOSFERATU’s name changes were only the start of it’s major divergences from the original novel – it never made sense to me that Mr Herzog would revert to Mr Stoker’s names, despite having done absolutely nothing else to bring his NOSFERATU closer to DRACULA.
Actually ‘In name only’ adaptations of almost any sort really, really bug me, but since I particularly enjoy DRACULA the novel such adaptations gall me all the more when they mistreat it.
Yeah, I don’t have a clue why he used the names if the plot wasn’t anything like the book. Trying to piggyback off Dracula fame, maybe?
I don’t really love either version. I personally prefer Shadow of the Vampire, with Willem Dafoe and John Malkovich. :)
I walked out of the original in college. The scene where Nosferatu tries to suck blood off the other guy’s finger was too creepy for me.
I walked out of the original Nosferatu when I was in college. The scene where Nosferatu tries to suck blood off the other guy’s finger was too creepy for me.
Werner Herzog is one of the most overrated and overpraised directors in the film industry and I cannot fathom how he garners such praise? I have watched several of his films (Woyzeck, Aguirre the Wrath of God, Nosferatu, Fitzcarraldo, and Encounters at the End of the World) and they are slow, boring, monotonous and an agonizing chore to watch. Herzog is a classic case of the Emperor’s New Clothes, there is nothing there.