New Wine, Old Bottle

Film: Nosferatu (2024)
Format: Market Square Theater (Theater 7).

Sometimes I wonder what story has been filmed the most. Certainly Dracula and variations of it are at or near the top. When the Robert Eggers version of Nosferatu was released, I knew it would be one of those rare occasions when I would make it out to the theater. That said, it’s the fifth Nosferatu-related film I’ve watched for this blog—the silent version, the 1970s remake, Shadow of the Vampire, and The Last Voyage of the Demeter, and now this one. It’s a bit much, and that’s not even including all of the Dracula variants.

Eggers’s film expands on the original Nosferatu by nearly a full hour of running time. The Murnau version clocks in at just over 80 minutes, and this one at about 135, with roughly seven of that taken up as credits. Most of that additional running time is used to show the influence of Count Orlock (Bill Skarsgård) on the area around him and going deeper into the individual aspects of the story. Where the original may have glossed over some things or run quickly through scenes, Eggers takes his time.

I tend to focus a great deal on story with this blog, and Nosferatu gives me pause because of that. This is, for all intents and purposes, just Dracula with different names. We have Count Orlock instead of Count Dracula. The man who goes to Transylvania to sell him a house is Thomas Hutter (Nicholas Hoult) instead of Jonathan Harker, and his wife is named Ellen (Lilly-Rose Depp) instead of Mina. The Hutters are friends with Friedrich Harding (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and his wife Anna (Emma Corrin) instead of Arthur Holmwood and Lucy Westenra. Instead of Van Helsing, we get Professor von Franz (Willem Dafoe). Doctor Seward is replaced by Doctor Sievers (Ralph Ineson). Even Renfield is replaced by Herr Knock (Simon McBurney).

But it really just Dracula to the point that the 1922 version was almost lost to history when the estate of Bram Stoker successfully sued the filmmakers and all of the copies were ordered destroyed. The essential copyright infringement isn’t hidden at all. The differences are mostly on the surface and in the detail. That being the case, the differences between this new version and the earlier versions is probably what is most interesting. If you aren’t familiar with the basic Dracula story, you should read the book (it’s genuinely great) and see a few versions of the movie. Nosferatu is only going to differ in the details.

The biggest change is the appearance of Count Orlock. All of the previous versions of this film have Count Orlock as something purely inhuman in appearance. He is tall and gaunt, with pointed ears and obvious fangs and overly long fingers. Some of that is retained in Bill Skarsgård’s Orlock, but this version of the count is bestial in a different way. His facial appearance is still fairly monstrous, but much more human. His body, though, is almost lupine, and covered in scars. He is hideous, but unlike other versions, he is also much more sexually charged and aggressive.

Here’s the thing: If you’re a film nerd (and if you’re not, how did you get here?), you’ve seen Nosferatu in at least one version before, so you’re not watching this one for the story but for the style, and it really is all about the style. Eggers made the smart decision to do a great deal with light and shadow. Better, and more importantly, Eggers doesn’t simply mimic Murnau but does a great deal more and differently with it. We don’t see Orlock’s shadow climbing the stairs, but instead see his hand stretching out across the city, covering it in shadow and plague. We see empty rooms, but blowing curtains reveal his profile. It’s decidedly creepy and effective.

One of the more interesting choices is that Eggers moves us between reality and dream without telling us, and frequently, something that looks very much like reality becomes a dream sequence when a character awakens. Since this happens several times, we are never clear if what we see is real or dream, and it adds an additional level of surreality to the tale.

It wouldn’t be a shock to see this nominated for a lot of the more style-based awards in the coming months. Best Picture certainly seems possible as well, but I don’t know that we’ll see a lot of nominations for the acting--horror movie and all (but Depp deserves some consideration). Willem Dafoe might be the exception here, as he is clearly having a grand time.

Why to watch Nosferatu: Come for the story, stay for the style.
Why not to watch: Not all of the expectations are going to be met, at least in terms of what Orlock looks like.