kilgres_bloodmoon
Joined Apr 2000
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews10
kilgres_bloodmoon's rating
The vampire genre has seen its share of lackluster films. Indeed, the centerpiece of the grand tradition, the Dracula legend, has seen so many remakes and revisionist attempts that one would be hard pressed to find a version of the tale that is original in its telling. Dracula, like it or not, is a cornerstone of Western society. And it is wholly unfortunate that Bela Lugosi is considered THE Dracula (although Hammer fans may contend that Christopher Lee holds the title since he played the good Count over twenty times).
With Werner Herzog's "Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" (also known as "Nosferatu: The Vampyre"), the old Hollywood rules seem to have been thrown out the window in favor of F.W. Murnau's striking silent film, the 1922 masterpiece "Nosferatu: Eine Symphonie der Grauens" ("Nosferatu: A Symphony of Terror"). While many purists of the genre balk at the idea of favoring the Nosferatu tale over the time-tested Tod Browning and Terence Fisher entries, one must realize that the cape-clad widow's peak Count has been sullied by a thousand parodies over time, and is simply not a frightening entity any longer. This was a matter much pondered by Francis Ford Coppola when considering his adaptation. While Gary Oldman's portrayal was serviceable and definitely different, something key was lacking from the tale.
This is what Herzog and his long-time "trouble and strife" lead man Klaus Kinski found when they ventured upon the "Nosferatu" remake. Herzog shifted the attention of the viewer away from the plot, which acts mostly as a backdrop for the imagery, and made it so the primary intake becomes a visual one. Kinski's Dracula is not the scowling insect of the Murnau film. He portrays the Count in a way that no other actor has quite grasped. In this film, Dracula is a suffering being, loathing every moment of his curse's continuation. Of course, as the good Count himself states, "Young men. You are like the villagers. and cannot place yourself in the soul of the hunter." The vampyre is trapped by his instincts, and Kinski's eyes betray harrowing madness (as they did in "Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes"), spiteful malice, and a sorrow so bottomless it defies description. It is as if the beast wishes to weep, but has forgotten how.
Filming on location in Germany, Herzog uses the same dreamlike camera angles, mixing them with a rich color palette and masterful lighting. There is a certain uneasiness that filters outward from the screen as you watch. As Jonathan Harker explores his surroundings during his lodging at Castle Dracula, there is inexplicably a young gypsy boy incessantly playing a scratchy violin under the archway. The surreality of the picture is only matched by its attention to the dark magic of the vampire. Like its predecessor, it actually seems to believe in the creatures, and respects them. It holds the legend, the plight of the people of Wismar, and the plight of the Count himself in deep reverence.
What can be extracted from the dialogue and plot is that this is not your average bloodsuckers extravaganza. In fact, the good Count only sets his fangs to the throat of the living once on screen, and when that occurs, it lends more of a feeling of sacrifice and sorrow than of terror. Indeed, the tone of the film is driven toward tragedy, and does not shift its course. One of the film's more telling moments is when Dracula, alone with Harker's beloved Lucy, ventures to plead with the beautiful lady, "Will you come to me. become my ally? Bring salvation to your husband. and to me. The absence of love. is the most abject pain." When she refuses, he does not lash out or decide to make a meal of her then and there. He instead moans with the intonation of a wounded animal and slinks off into the night.
"Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" is the most complete of vampire films, and towers over the genre. It could be considered a pity that the only film that sits upon its coattails is its predecessor of the same name. Under Herzog's direction (wisely choosing to avoid remaking classic shots), we get an entirely different film that exudes an entirely different feeling. It not only maintains the eerie horror that the genre deserves, but also achieves a beauty and mystique that has been lost over the years. A must-see.
With Werner Herzog's "Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" (also known as "Nosferatu: The Vampyre"), the old Hollywood rules seem to have been thrown out the window in favor of F.W. Murnau's striking silent film, the 1922 masterpiece "Nosferatu: Eine Symphonie der Grauens" ("Nosferatu: A Symphony of Terror"). While many purists of the genre balk at the idea of favoring the Nosferatu tale over the time-tested Tod Browning and Terence Fisher entries, one must realize that the cape-clad widow's peak Count has been sullied by a thousand parodies over time, and is simply not a frightening entity any longer. This was a matter much pondered by Francis Ford Coppola when considering his adaptation. While Gary Oldman's portrayal was serviceable and definitely different, something key was lacking from the tale.
This is what Herzog and his long-time "trouble and strife" lead man Klaus Kinski found when they ventured upon the "Nosferatu" remake. Herzog shifted the attention of the viewer away from the plot, which acts mostly as a backdrop for the imagery, and made it so the primary intake becomes a visual one. Kinski's Dracula is not the scowling insect of the Murnau film. He portrays the Count in a way that no other actor has quite grasped. In this film, Dracula is a suffering being, loathing every moment of his curse's continuation. Of course, as the good Count himself states, "Young men. You are like the villagers. and cannot place yourself in the soul of the hunter." The vampyre is trapped by his instincts, and Kinski's eyes betray harrowing madness (as they did in "Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes"), spiteful malice, and a sorrow so bottomless it defies description. It is as if the beast wishes to weep, but has forgotten how.
Filming on location in Germany, Herzog uses the same dreamlike camera angles, mixing them with a rich color palette and masterful lighting. There is a certain uneasiness that filters outward from the screen as you watch. As Jonathan Harker explores his surroundings during his lodging at Castle Dracula, there is inexplicably a young gypsy boy incessantly playing a scratchy violin under the archway. The surreality of the picture is only matched by its attention to the dark magic of the vampire. Like its predecessor, it actually seems to believe in the creatures, and respects them. It holds the legend, the plight of the people of Wismar, and the plight of the Count himself in deep reverence.
What can be extracted from the dialogue and plot is that this is not your average bloodsuckers extravaganza. In fact, the good Count only sets his fangs to the throat of the living once on screen, and when that occurs, it lends more of a feeling of sacrifice and sorrow than of terror. Indeed, the tone of the film is driven toward tragedy, and does not shift its course. One of the film's more telling moments is when Dracula, alone with Harker's beloved Lucy, ventures to plead with the beautiful lady, "Will you come to me. become my ally? Bring salvation to your husband. and to me. The absence of love. is the most abject pain." When she refuses, he does not lash out or decide to make a meal of her then and there. He instead moans with the intonation of a wounded animal and slinks off into the night.
"Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht" is the most complete of vampire films, and towers over the genre. It could be considered a pity that the only film that sits upon its coattails is its predecessor of the same name. Under Herzog's direction (wisely choosing to avoid remaking classic shots), we get an entirely different film that exudes an entirely different feeling. It not only maintains the eerie horror that the genre deserves, but also achieves a beauty and mystique that has been lost over the years. A must-see.
Let me first say that I am not a Christian. I do not subscribe to any religion, and my views of the Book of Revelation are preterest at most. I am, however, a lover of film. And let me be the next to say that this film is awful. Abysmal. Worse than "The Omega Code", and that's a bad thing. Kirk Cameron's "performance" was leagues worse than the insipid acting effort put forth by Casper Van Dien, and THAT is definitely a bad thing.
Take the location of the shoots. Much of this film takes place in Israel or the United States. This film was shot entirely inside Canada. I'm sorry, but Saskatchewan wheat fields simply do not resemble the Israeli landscape in even the most far-fetched scope of imagination (which this film asks the viewer to entertain throughout).
The most infuriating thing about this film is that it WILL win awards, mostly from the Protestant groups that applaud its very existence. This is the same reason that the horribly written and conceived books sell millions. As an aspiring novelist, this also makes me ill. To all the fans of the books and movie, think about this:
How many times have you seen a straight-to-video movie muscle its way into the theaters? I hope beyond hope that it fails dismally. 1 star (I'd give it none if there was an option).
Take the location of the shoots. Much of this film takes place in Israel or the United States. This film was shot entirely inside Canada. I'm sorry, but Saskatchewan wheat fields simply do not resemble the Israeli landscape in even the most far-fetched scope of imagination (which this film asks the viewer to entertain throughout).
The most infuriating thing about this film is that it WILL win awards, mostly from the Protestant groups that applaud its very existence. This is the same reason that the horribly written and conceived books sell millions. As an aspiring novelist, this also makes me ill. To all the fans of the books and movie, think about this:
How many times have you seen a straight-to-video movie muscle its way into the theaters? I hope beyond hope that it fails dismally. 1 star (I'd give it none if there was an option).
This film is simply amazing as both a story and as a visual wonderland. The entire film is a long, brutal dance with evil that is ever-present, but always a bit untouchable.
"The Cell" has forever changed my opinion on first-time directors, as I now view Tarsem Singh as one of two things: 1) A madman with flashes of brilliance or, 2) A brilliant director who has been lost in the world of music videos and commercials. He truly could be one or the other. The outcome of his first foray into major film direction is a breath of fresh air blown directly into the lungs of a disappointing summer crop stagnating with useless special effects and jokes involving anal cavities.
As far as plot goes, this one has it in spades. "The Cell" is actually three stories at once, intertwining seamlessly (albeit through the use of jump cuts, which I'm not too fond of)into one frightening journey. The time is the near future. Jennifer Lopez (in a surprising turn toward competent acting) plays Catherine Deane, a child therapist who has volunteered to help a comatose boy escape his neverending dream by linking to his inner mind. She does this by utilizing new technology which allows her to enter the boy's world. But this is not the problem. At the same time, a serial killer has recklessly dumped the body of a young girl in a shallow stream. Using slim clues, the FBI captures him, but only after a freak aneurysm brought on by acute schizophrenia renders him permenently comatose. Enter the new technique.
What follows, as the FBI races to discover the latest girl the killer has condemned to death, is an absolute masterpiece of cinematography and visual effects. The world inside the mind of the killer (played by a vicious Vincent Donofrio) is like a mix of Salvador Dali's paintings and German S&M theater. Lopez, aided by a nervous but focused Vince Vaughn, delves into the the darker corners of the killer's delusions, which are stalked by a dark, majestic being that represents the killer's dark side.
My hat is off to the director, screenwriter and cinematographer of this film. They deserve several oscar nominations, and some wins as well.
"The Cell" has forever changed my opinion on first-time directors, as I now view Tarsem Singh as one of two things: 1) A madman with flashes of brilliance or, 2) A brilliant director who has been lost in the world of music videos and commercials. He truly could be one or the other. The outcome of his first foray into major film direction is a breath of fresh air blown directly into the lungs of a disappointing summer crop stagnating with useless special effects and jokes involving anal cavities.
As far as plot goes, this one has it in spades. "The Cell" is actually three stories at once, intertwining seamlessly (albeit through the use of jump cuts, which I'm not too fond of)into one frightening journey. The time is the near future. Jennifer Lopez (in a surprising turn toward competent acting) plays Catherine Deane, a child therapist who has volunteered to help a comatose boy escape his neverending dream by linking to his inner mind. She does this by utilizing new technology which allows her to enter the boy's world. But this is not the problem. At the same time, a serial killer has recklessly dumped the body of a young girl in a shallow stream. Using slim clues, the FBI captures him, but only after a freak aneurysm brought on by acute schizophrenia renders him permenently comatose. Enter the new technique.
What follows, as the FBI races to discover the latest girl the killer has condemned to death, is an absolute masterpiece of cinematography and visual effects. The world inside the mind of the killer (played by a vicious Vincent Donofrio) is like a mix of Salvador Dali's paintings and German S&M theater. Lopez, aided by a nervous but focused Vince Vaughn, delves into the the darker corners of the killer's delusions, which are stalked by a dark, majestic being that represents the killer's dark side.
My hat is off to the director, screenwriter and cinematographer of this film. They deserve several oscar nominations, and some wins as well.