Watch Nosferatu the Vampyre For Free

Waste of time

Better Late Then Never

Absolutely the worst movie.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

I'm not a film buff or anything like that, so I feel completely unqualified to talk about this beautiful movie at length. I'm sure there are a lot of interesting details relating to its production, actors and shooting locations - things infinitely more compelling than who is sleeping with who in Hollywood, which is what people seem to be more interested in.The scenes in the countryside and the mountains seem so real that they might be a documentary - not actors, but Werner Herzog knocking on the door of a building he thought was beautiful in a remote village somewhere in Romania or Bulgaria and filming the lives of the people who happened to open the door.The scenes in Dracula's - uhh... I mean Orlock's - no wait this is the movie where they actually call him Dracula - Dracula's castle are eerie as anything I've ever seen. Imagine being trapped in the middle of nowhere in that stone ruin, at the mercy of that *thing* that dwells there...Which brings me to Klaus Kinski. What an actor! I've seen him play Jack the Ripper and Aguirre besides Dracula, and he is always menacing, always a real presence, but in this movie he is hideous, inhuman, an albino bat that truly threatens your life. The scene where he approaches Jonathan after he accidentally cut himself gives me chills - Dracula's inhibition, Jonathan's terror, the shadows...The movie is spectacularly beautiful. The sea is a presence, as are the mountains, and the beautiful European city of Delft where the movie was shot - though it is said to take place in Wismar - but most of all the darkness and the shadows. The vampire sits in the shadows, unmoving, for a long time, until the shadows move and reveal his pale face, a face out of nightmares.

"Nosferatu the Vampyre" (also known as "Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" auf Deutsch), is a remake of the F.W. Murnau film, which follows Count Dracula and his "interest" in buying a castle near the Black Sea; Jonathan Harker, along with his wife, Lucy, become entangled with the Count, who has had a profound effect on Jonathan.Often lauded as one of the better vampire films, Werner Herzog's retelling of the 1922 film is indisputably beautiful. The film opens with a chilling montage of various corpses in a catacomb, followed by a lingering shot of a bat against a dark turquoise sky, all set to a chilling and ethereal score. This is the kind of fashion in which the entire film is presented; long, moody shots of characters, and quiet emphasis on foggy fields and dark mountain passes. It is these precise moments that make Herzog's film stand out, and are also what make it so eerie. The score is haunting and accentuates the loneliness and solitude of these scenes, and the turnout is equally gorgeous and harrowing. As a mood piece, the film is phenomenal.Some have complained about the film's slow nature, and I'll give them that—this is not a narrative-driven film, and it is slow as molasses at times. The viewer needs to understand what they are getting themselves into here, as it is a far cry from most contemporary vampire films. Klaus Kinski's performance as the meek and paltry Dracula is memorable for its evocation of total despair. Isabelle Adjani is decent, although I actually found her understated and somewhat eccentric performance to be a bit single-note; she's done far better in her career, but she's not bad by any means. Bruno Gaz is also a solid presence as the hero-turned-victim, Jonathan Harker.Overall, "Nosferatu the Vampyre" is an aesthetic accomplishment that is completely visually absorbing. Herzog wrings atmosphere from every shot and musical cue, and the film is unforgettable for that. It is unusually slow-moving, so it's not something that can really be casually-viewed. In any event, it is a hazy and quietly unnerving film, and one of the best horror remakes to date. Memorable scene: the Count's initial intrusion into Lucy's room—check out the cinematography. 8/10.

The original 'Nosferatu (1922)' remains one of the greatest early films. However, possibly feeling that some aficionados might be put off by the understandably scratchy quality, German director Werner Herzog set about recreating the atmosphere original.For the pivotal character of Dracula, or Count Orlok, Herzog cast his friend, the mighty Klaus Kinski, who brings an incredible haunted intensity to a role that seemed to be made for him. Whether staring longingly at Harker's bleeding hand, or his bride Lucy, or snapping into inhuman speed due to his blood-lust, Kinski shines like a beacon in every single scene. It truly is an unearthly performance, he is probably the creepiest vampire of them all.There were two versions shot of this; an English and a German version. Perhaps because English is not the actors' native tongue, only Kinski emerges with a believable performance. Other members of the cast do well to sustain the slightly 'removed' atmosphere vital to such a dreamlike horror, but the acting does occasionally stray into wooden territory.And yet everything else is wonderfully ethereal. Harker's journey, Dracula's arrival by boat at the Varna seaport, the infestation of plague rats, the vibrant but desolate town, the choice of location and architecture … all these things come together to make a truly spooky film. Happily, the ending doesn't strive to placate the viewer, as Harker – one of the few survivors of the story – begins to look a little unwell.

"Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" is a movie over 35 years old written and directed by German filmmaking legend Werner Herzog. This is his proof that he can also succeed with remake as this is obviously very heavily based on Murnau's silent film classic from 1922. You could basically split Herzog's movie into three parts. The first third belongs to Bruno Ganz, the second to Klaus Kinski and the third to Isabelle Adjani. This last segment is probably also why she agreed to star in the movie as her character was a bit of a nothing role until then and she already was an Academy Award nominee at that point.This film is also the only one that had Ganz and Herzog work together. So far, I shall say. It would be amazing to see them reunite at some point. Of course, Herzog worked so many times with Kinski in his career and they brought up the best in one another, especially Herzog in Kinski. The latter got lots of awards recognition for his work here and it's easy to see why. He basically redefined the modern vampire in this movie. Man was he scary. Of course, a lot of it also had to do with the excellent makeup, but let's not look down on Kinski's mesmerizing performance here. I can't deny that Ganz looked a bit pale beside him (no pun intended!) Still I love the guy and it's nice to see him in some of his earlier roles long before his career-defining performance as Adolf Hitler. Kinski made an Italian sequel to this one, almost 10 years later. I have not seen that one, but looking at the rating and the absence of Herzog, Adjani and Ganz, I am not too eager to see it, even if I like Pleasence and Plummer.Back to this one here, it's a pretty good film. I can't say that it is among my very favorite Werner Herzog films, but all in all it is 107 minutes certainly worth a watch, especially for people with an interest in older German movies or films about vampires. There actually have been tons of them in the past already, featured so frequently in film, and this is easily among the better efforts about this subject.