|
Directed by: E. Elias Merhige Starring: John Malkovich, Willem Dafoe, Eddie Izzard The Shadow of the Vampire is a loving homage to the silent film classic Nosferatu, made by German director F. W. Mernau in 1922. Instead of a conventional remake (like the Werner Herzog version of 1979), Shadow of the Vampire chooses to dramatize the process of the making of Murnau’s film, adding the clever twist of portraying Max Schreck (the actor who played the vampire in Nosferatu) as a real vampire, who is recruited by Murnau to assure the authenticity of his cinematic retelling of Bram Stoker’s Dracula. The film is unique in its referential relationship to Murnau’s original film, and complements its predecessor as much as it borrows from it. The film takes on an almost vampiric connection to its source material, to the point where it almost seems to alter Nosferatu through the now inescapable connection between the two films. Merhige’s film also humorously plays with many of the concerns of European filmmaking in the 1920s, some of which are still known to affect film productions to this day, making it a relevant satire despite its arcane subject matter. Willem Dafoe is equally hilarious and terrifying as Schreck, alternating between movements of quiet menace and blundering awkwardness, depending on his mood and environment. He captures the movements of the original performance to a T, but also adds his own sensibility and personality to the character. John Malkovich plays director F.W. Murnau, also turning in a terrific performance, though he is often upstaged by Dafoe’s scene stealing turn as the vampire. Both characters display elements of madness, Schreck mirroring the behavior of a heroin addict, and Murnau as a mad scientist trying to craft his legacy to the world. Malcovich’s slow collapse as his film falls apart is expertly crafted. Comedian Eddie Izzard is the strongest of the supporting cast, playing an actor who is unknowingly caught up in Murnau’s experiment. He captures the overly dramatic and theatrical acting style of the period with effective humor and authenticity. Merhige’s direction is much more restrained in comparison to his cast. He brings a clever self-referentiality to the project, making slight continuity breaks between the source material and his own film, and turning the vampiric stare of the camera on the audience, reminding them of the relationship of spectatorship. Much of the humor of the film is found in Merhige’s craftsmanship, and the film really plays out like an elaborate in-joke for film lovers. You don’t need to be familiar with Nosferatu to enjoy this film, as a lot of the references are self-contained. However, a lot of the subtleties of the film will be lost without knowledge of that connection, so it’s recommended you have some acquaintance with the source material if you want to get the best experience out of it.
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 18:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 13:44 |
|
|
I loved this movie, but to say it's horror is somewhat misleading. It's something of a comedy/horror/drama/mocumentary (in the same vein as Spinal Tap). I've actually seen the original Nosferatu, but well after I'd seen and bought Shadow of the Vampire; you definitely don't need to have seen Nosferatu to love Shadow of the Vampire. Dafoe was given a well deserved Oscar nod for his performance.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 20:02
|
|
|
This movie is mandatory for people who love the mythos (real or not) of early film. Malkovich, Dafoe and Izzard all are stellar. 5/5
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2004 21:44
|
|
|
Dafoe makes this, but really it's more a collection of performances than it is a great plot. 4/5
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2004 16:15
|
|
|
quote:Brian Fellows came out of the closet to say: 4.5; the extra .5 is just for Malkovich's exasperated voice while complaining to Dafoe as Schreck. *edit* watched it again last night; if I could, I'd increase my rating. The cinematography is brilliant. Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 21:33 on May 9, 2004 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2004 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 13:44 |
|
|
I enjoyed everything about this film. It honestly can't possibly be explained in a way that does it justice. A very solid 5
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2004 19:27
|
|