I loved this movie. for the 20s it was pretty creepy. it could have been from the stop-motion parts because things that move in strange ways scare me more than anything in horror movies.The story line was interesting and some of the narration made absolutely NO sense but i think we got the idea.
it was definitely a good place to start for vampires. i think we should go to Dracula next for a movie, we will start reading it out loud on friday so we can talk about it while we read it.
^ this picture captures the best of Nosferatu in my opinion. Thriller! ^.^
would agree. this movie was awesome. i was actually impressed with how nosferatu was actually kind of creepy and scary as opposed to some other dracula movies that i have seen where he is just funny.
ReplyDeletei would also say that vampires have definitely (i dont want to say evolved to what we have today *cough* edward cullen *cough*) changed over time. and i am excited to look at some of the other movies.
and yes. the part of the movie that you have captured in the picture above was absolutely the best part of the movie.
It was well done as far as creepiness, but it was not very imaginative. It really was just Dracula with the names changed. That is not such a bad thing in and of itself, but billing itself as separate (using "Nosferatu" instead of "Vampire" and "Count Olock" instead of "Count Dracula") made it seem a little silly. All this film did was change the names of the characters, omit many secondary characters, and change a few minor details. Generally, when a studio can't get the right to a story (as was the case here), it doesn't make the film: this studio made the film, was sued, and folded. So, while this was an excellent display of creepiness, the fact that it was a famous story with the names changed detracted from it.
ReplyDeleteyah. i guess that is kinda dumb on their part. but hey. whatever.
ReplyDelete