saw nosferatu tonight and i'm not even close to a regular movie critic, but i don't know if i've ever seen a worse movie. i walked out of the theater with my mind absolutely blown, (and possibly destroyed). how did this even make it to theaters, and even more importantly, how does this movie have 87% on rotten tomatoes?? it was disgusting to say the least. wish i could bleach my eyes and my brain.

spoiler alert

edit: i will say that i had pretty much no problem with it until she's possessed and says something about her husband not being able to please her like the vampire could, and then in what seems like an attempt to prove a point, they start aggressively banging? like...who had that idea? at that point the whole movie was pretty much ruined for me, and then it somehow managed to get worse as the movie went on, which ruined it even further. i do think that it started off strange, alluding to her as a child allowing this vampire to come into her soul or whatever, it's pretty weird. but up until that specific scene, and the many ones that would soon follow, having any chance of liking this movie was gone for me.

Poll

If you've seen the film, please rate it at this poll

If you haven't seen the film but would like to see the result of the poll click here

Rankings

Click here to see the rankings of 2024 films

Click here to see the rankings for every poll done

Summary:

A gothic tale of obsession between a haunted young woman and the terrifying vampire infatuated with her, causing untold horror in its wake.

Director:

Robert Eggers

Writers:

Robert Eggers, Henrik Galeen, Bram Stoker

Cast:

• Lily-Rose Depp as Ellen Hutter

• Nicholas Hoult as Thomas Hutter

• Bill Skarsgaard as Count Orlok

• Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Friedrich Harding

• Willem Dafoe as Prof. Albin Eberhart von Franz

• Emma Corrin as Anna Harding

• Ralph Ineson as Dr. Wilhelm Sievers

Rotten Tomatoes: 86%

Metacritic: 78

VOD: Theaters

Horrible, horrific and heartbreaking. Everything that it was supposed to be and more. Egger’s yet again proving his understanding of folklore, removing the glorified version of vampires as the world had come to know them. The film rips away any form of positivity you could have towards Orlok- leaving you feeling repulsed and disgusted by him with absolutely zero redeeming qualities. The first true Strigoi in cinema and nobody could have done it but Egger’s. Bill is unrecognizable both vocally and visually. Lily-Rose is haunting, magnetic and terrorized through not only her dreams but her reality. Nicholas Holt is the perfect Thomas Hutter, as the grief and horror consumes him. Von Franz provides a voice for Ellen, camaraderie, and an opportunity to act as she must- without restraint. Costume design by Linda Muir was something I cannot even put into words. Ellen’s mourning-wear exceeded my expectations and my only sadness came from not seeing her lilac evening ensemble longer than it deserved. The soundtrack was perfection, giving me chills on several occasions and being the perfect background to each haunting shot.

If you are looking for some form of romanticism in the story, this is not your film. The torment is perfectly repulsive and this will be your truest insight to what people of 1838 truly believed the vampire to be. There is nothing about this story that does not make you want to burst into tears for Ellen or detest Orlok to the highest degree. Perfect, perfect, perfect.

Poster made by me, feel free to use it.

Definitely worth a watch, had a really good time with it

Nosferatu (2024) is a fine film that misses the mark slightly while still being a visually pleasing journey through dread.

The good: The scenery, lighting, and some performances created a treat for the eyes. The monster itself is imposing, memorable, and represents a powerful force of nature. Our introduction to Nosferatu in particular does an good job of creating a monster that moves like a predator just beyond our field of vision, who defies the senses and exudes power. Nicholas Hoult does a fine job as a mild-mannered but resolute lead. Ralph Ineson and Willem Defoe are a welcome couple of side characters. To top those things off, the movie itself is paced thoughtfully and deliberately toward its end. The conclusion is powerfully acted and obeys its own in-universe rules. The special and practical effects were all believable from the clothing of the bourgeious to the movie monster's long imposing fingers.

The Bad:

The performances from some characters was off-putting and created the appearance that the actors themselves did not understand the intent behind their lines. Anna Harding's performance appears as one of a high-schooler quoting Shakespeare unsuccessfully while Aaron Taylor-Johnson gave a poor performance in most scenes he was in, coming across as an impotent shadow of the character he was meant to portray.

The lore given in 2024's Nosferatu vs 1929's Nosferatu is expanded upon clumsily, such that the new lore is a mess compared to the sparse details given in the original film. In 2024's version, Lily-Rose Depp's character Ellen had been plagued by Nosferatu her entire life, which creates confusing motivational descriptions for Nosferatu, who only pursued Ellen after her marriage to Thomas (Nicholas Hoult). Atop that, the plot's resolution is strange--one crew goes on an apparently useless adventure while Ellen stays behind to save the day. 2024's version chose not to capitalize on Ellen's self-sacrifice as a 'big reveal', which does not detract from the film itself, but may be perceived as a missed opportunity to showcase strength from goodness in such a selfless way (truthfully, both Mina Harker and Ellen Hutter are characters on whom directors seem to miss capitalizing--but that's a story for another time.)

At risk of comparing 1929's version to 2024's version, a subtheme was lost involving the power of sunlight in dispelling fears, which also feels like a miss as this subtheme was not replaced by anything in the modern version.

The medium: Lilly-Depp Rose as Ellen delivers a fine performance but underdelivers at crucial moments in the film which were then compounded by confusing directional choices which made Ellen appear to be possessed at certain moments in the film. The choreography at those moments in time look awkward--not so much as to ruin the movie, but enough so that you'll be pulled a little into uncanny valley or have your immersion broken. Ellen's virtuous character is muted from the original 1929 film which is unfortunate, however Ellen's interactions with Nosferatu itself are very strong and powerfully acted, creating very high peaks and offputting lows throughout the film.

Overall: This film is gorgeous. It is worth a watch or two. It may even find itself loved among a fervent many, but it is not without it's share of problems. While I had high hopes, this movie will likely not be among those I purchase for home use despite hitting many tones I enjoy.

Nosferatu: Directed By Robert Eggers:

Nosferatu is a tale as old as time, however Robert Eggers manages to make something ive seen so many times something I’ve never seen before. This is definitely Eggers version and it shows from the start of the movie right till the terrifyingly anxiety inducing final shot. When I the film finished I found myself paranoid over the dark corners of my house and jumping when the wind rattled my bedroom window. I was totally afraid to close my eyes to sleep. This film is as suffocating as Count Orlok’s coffin. The movie doesn’t let you rest or breathe for a single moment.

Let’s discuss the performances. Well the standout is clearly Lilly-Rose Depp who put in such a draining (in a good way) performance where I was watching in dreaded horror and wondering if her tiny body would break when she has her seizures. She also manages to make Ellen the most complex and interesting character in a film about a vampire. As well as Lilly-Rose Depp, we have Bill Skarsgard as the haunting and intimidating Count Orlok. I don’t have much to say without spoiling anything but I will say he’s completely humanly unrecognizable, I had no idea there was an actor on screen under the makeup, he transforms himself to the point that will have you guessing if that’s really Bill Skarsgard or an actual vampire that Robert Eggers found in Romania. We also have Nicholas Hoult as Thomas Hutter, this is a career best performance from Nicholas Hoult so far for me. He puts energy, concern and real fight into his performance that I just watch in awe. Willem Dafoe is well and truly having so much in his role as Doctor Von Franz, he brings a different kind of energy to the film, he also portrays his character as man on a mission, a mission to destroy the bringer of death. Emma Corin and Aaron Taylor-Johnson also both star in this and both have more screen time than I thought they would going into this, and they both completely hold their own, and credit to them both for once again proving they’re both the film industry’s top rising talents. Lastly I want to speak on Simon McBurney as Herr Knock. I have a feeling this will be the most underrated performance of the Oscar’s calendar. From the moment we meet Knock you feel uncertain and you’ll shift uncomfortably in your seat. Simon McBurney is truly damn right bone chilling, and he’s not even the vampire!

The film is an absolute classic that will be studied by horror film makers for years and years. The cinematography alone is enough to leave you stunned and glued to the screen. You’ll want to look away but you won’t be able too. Please see this in theaters as late at night as you can as you’ll get the full effect then.

Nosferatu (2024) = 9.8/10

Eggers Nosferatu is pure atmosphere with very little to no nuance in its retelling. I honestly thought it was kind of a mess. It looks unbelievable though. Really cool use of light and shadows. With that being said, Nosferatu is Eggers first miss in my opinion.

A testament to the fact that stunning cinematography, production design and a solid ensemble are not enough to make a great film.

Although if you liked a movie like longlegs which many of you seem to have enjoyed, you will probably absolutely love this.

For a movie that originally had no dialogue, this one is filled with nothing but people expositorily talking in dark rooms for scenes that drag on for way too long. Didnt find it thought provoking or suspenseful whatsoever. I think the biggest issue was the fact that none of these characters had any sort of personality or were interesting/dynamic at all which made it tough to become truly invested. They merely feel like props rather than lived in characters. The elements that excite are spaced out between… “fine” or "meh" moments. i repeat, shot beautifully, but just like… cool, what are we doing here and why do we care about these people?

Theres no doubt that Eggers is an absolute craftsmen and a wildly talented auteur, but this one just felt incredibly stiff and hollow. Not a bad movie by any means, but surely a disappointment at least in my eyes having been quite pumped for it since it was announced. Just a wonderfully shot nothing burger of a remake. Of course, this is all just my opinion. try not to crucify me.

Debating if I should see it in the theatre, live vampire themes but I’m a baby when it comes to horror. Is it really scary or more erotic?

Saw Nosferatu yesterday and I'm still floored by how amazing it was. The cinematography, editing, harrowing music, compelling acting, and captivating story were exceptional. Most strikingly, I found the film to be a powerful allegory for female oppression and the violence women face in society. There are numerous examples throughout the movie that illustrate this: Orlok deceiving Thomas into signing over Ellen as if she were property; Ellen’s lack of freedom and agency at the hands of men; her sexuality being treated as a malady that must be subdued through ether or physical confinement (such as being tied to her bed or constrained by a corset); and Friedrich’s disgust with Ellen, rooted in her perceived impurity and defiance of societal norms.

Throughout the film, Ellen is portrayed as manic and melancholic, reflecting her struggle to fit into a society that condemns her expressions of womanhood. Her experiences are imbued with a sense of sexuality that contrasts sharply with Anna Harding’s character—a virtuous woman who conforms to societal expectations by marrying and bearing children. These two characters appear to symbolize opposing views of women: Anna represents conformity to gender norms and the approval that comes with it, while Ellen embodies sexual liberation and the judgment it incurs. Considering that Anna and Ellen are the only two recurring female characters throughout the film, aside from the young twins, it seems likely that Eggers intended to offer the audience two archetypes of how women are often viewed in society: either as sexual objects or as mothers.

Count Orlok and Friedrich Harding’s characters highlight how men in society perceive and treat women. Friedrich, portrayed as a loving husband, adores Anna for adhering to traditional roles. Her life revolves around motherhood and pleasing her husband, a dynamic Friedrich clearly approves of, as he repeatedly mentions his desire for her and boasts about their growing family. In contrast, Friedrich’s view of Ellen—a woman whose sexuality defies societal expectations—is marked by contempt and hostility. His eventual ire and malice toward Ellen reflect deep-seated misogyny, as women are expected to be virtuous, sexually appealing yet restrained, and solely devoted to childbearing within marriage. Friedrich’s hostility toward Ellen intensifies as he perceives her as a threat to his idyllic family life. Nevertheless, despite Anna’s conformity to female gender roles, she too falls victim to violence, illustrating that even adherence to societal expectations does not protect women. Friedrich’s final violation of Anna, even in death, underscores the inescapable nature of male violence.

In contrast, Orlok’s desire for Ellen is primal and predatory. His pursuit of her is purely sexual, and he is willing to kill to satisfy his lust. Orlok’s obsession leads to not only the deaths of Anna, her children, and Ellen, but his insatiable lust for Ellen brought also brought a literal plague upon an entire German city. His unrelenting objectification of Ellen stands in stark opposition to Friedrich and Anna’s relation. And, while Ellen is married and yearns for a life and marriage that is normal, her sexuality and allure drive Orlok into a frenzy that cannot be satiated. Orlok’s lust for Ellen represents the male objectification of women and the violence wrought onto them as a result.

I find it interesting, and definitely not a coincidence, that Orlok’s lust and desire were his ruin (as well as Ellen’s), and Friedrich’s desire for his wife led to his ruin, as he contracted the plague from her. Orlok’s animalistic violence towards Ellen resulted in his eventual demise, and Friedrich’s necrophilia was the final form of violence levied against Anna. My thought is that Friedrich and Orlok are foils to one another.

We can also examine Thomas’ actions toward his wife and how he invalidates her desires, treating them as mere burdens. At the beginning of the film, Ellen pleads with him to stay just one minute longer before he leaves for the day, yearning for more physical and emotional intimacy. Thomas, however, shows no interest; his priority lies elsewhere. He leaves his wife—who clearly craves a deeper connection—so he can toil for a crusty employer who has struck a deal with the devil. While Ellen appears to love her husband and genuinely wishes to be with him, one could argue that something at the film’s outset has already pushed Thomas away from her. Despite being a married woman, Ellen finds no joy or fulfillment; her existence seems to revolve solely around her husband. Thomas’ fixation on work and external matters leaves Ellen in emotional isolation. Though she fulfills the role of a loving, devoted wife, Ellen cannot escape the dark cloud overshadowing her life.

It’s not until an eccentric and unconventional scientist, doctor, and occultist enters Ellen’s life that she gains a semblance of agency and power. Prof. Albin Eberhart von Franz, a man cast out of the scientific community, views Ellen with kinder eyes, recognizing her as a person of worth rather than an extension of her husband. Their interactions suggest a bond akin to kindred spirits. At one point, von Franz tells Ellen, 'In heathen times, you might have been a great priestess of Isis. Yet in this strange and modern world, your purpose is of greater worth. You are our salvation.' Isis, the Egyptian goddess of protection, motherhood, and magic, symbolizes fertility and power. Von Franz’s perspective sharply contrasts with the other men in the film, emboldening Ellen to embrace her unique strength and use it against Orlok.

While Orlok initially tricked Thomas into signing Ellen away like property, the monstrous count required her willing consent to consummate their unholy union—consent she refused to give. By the film's end, Ellen is no longer defined by her husband's house or wishes. Instead, she discovers the agency that had eluded her throughout the story, ultimately becoming the key to Orlok’s undoing.

It’s also significant that von Franz—a man ostracized from the scientific community and someone who defies societal dictates on how to live and operate—is the only man in the film who admires Ellen without sexual or romantic desire, as a mere extension of her husband, or as a nuisance. He truly sees her as a person, unlike the other men in the story, who view her more as an object.

I’m sure there are details I’ve missed or forgotten. I plan to see Nosferatu again and take note of additional examples that support my interpretation. Even if my perspective is off base, Eggers has masterfully crafted a film that invites endless interpretation, allowing each viewer to find their own meaning. Nosferatu is art at its finest.

TLDR: Nosferatu is an allegory for societal violence against women.

Last night I saw Nosferatu and I would give it a mediocre 3/5 stars.

What do you say? Did it get you? I was relatively disappointed.

I find the story quite boring anyway, even in Bram Stoker's Dracula. Lilly Rose Depp overacted, that was really exaggerated and partly unpleasant for me. Hoult's performance and Skarsgaard in the costume were what carried the film for me. Great camerawork, an uncanny flair and good lighting.

But no suspense in the film and I kept looking at the clock because it was simply boring.😂😂 but just my opinion.

What do you say?

I've been reading good, bad and ugly reviews of this movie and it's fair to say that not everyone agrees with each other. Which is mostly great, that's how good art works i guess.

What struck me at the beginning is how well known is that story. I've seen movies, tv shows, parodies and i got the basic structure memorized. But it's almost weird to complain because i somewhat knew that this is a classic retelling. Still, it's not like there are surprises coming.

Early it becomes clear that eggers can prepare a pretty great shot, reminiscent of a eery painting, full of contrast and composition. Sadly there are few of these throughout the movie and rest of the movie looks kind of bland and boring. It's not exactly bad, it just feels like something you would see in a mike flanagan show, not some nosferatu epic. Tons of close ups, people holding yellow leds, contrast lighting, central composition. While watching it, it struck me that i would love to see what del toro would do with a movie like this. How many sets he would built, how experimental he would be with colors and prosthetics.

Acting felt super weird and uneven. You had characters like defoe who were grounded in reality and gave mostly believable performance. But then you get Depp being so weirdly melodramatic, living her life like its a theater play. Everyone had questionable dialogue and everyone seemed to get different direction. Aaron's character was such a bland knucklehead dead set on playing suave gentlemen. So much of the acting and dialogue just felt offbeat and out of place. Wasn't a fan of casting at all but that's a different story.

I don't know, i guess i just wanted to vent a little. Tons of people on reddit start their reviews with a generic: "Acting, music and visuals were all on highest level" and then just jump to some esoterical commentary about pain of addiction and loneliness.

I get what they are doing and i get what eggers was going for. It just feels like a movie has to be a masterpiece and everything has to work perfectly for it to be spoken with such admiration and acclaim.

I've seen a lot of different movies, insane amount of horrors. Modern and old. This honestly didn't felt like the masterpiece people are hyping it up to be.

Got done watching Robert Eggers' Nosferatu. I'm still forming my thoughts about the film, but I wanted to try and pin down what I've understood about it and explore the themes the movie explores.

To me, I think the movie is primarily about two things: the wane of mysticism and spiritualism versus the rise of science and reason, and the difference between the lust for carnal pleasures and true love.

The clash between science and spiritualism is epitomized by the clash between Von Franz and Friedrich Harding. I won't talk much about Von Franz since I think his role in the story on a thematic level is kinda straightforward: he represents the occult, or at least serves as a guide to show us that the world is not purely physical and material, that good and evil are forces emanating from God and Satan. However, I think Harding is more interesting, specifically because of his fate in the movie. Harding is a simple man, a man who believes in the results and virtues of science and reason and yet, isn't a scientist himself. He's a mere shipyard worker. He only believes in the material. When his wife contracts the plague, he ignores Franz's pleas and insists the plague is natural, borne out of the vermin. He lusts after his wife and desires her only as an object for sex. He only values her in the physical sense (this is also why Ellen and Anna have such strong kinship with one another). He's a slave to the material, the physical, the carnal. It's this addiction that leads to his doom in the end. Even in death, he cannot lay his hands off his dead wife. He continues to lust for her, and eventually, this kills him. The blind devotion to science and reason is no better than the blind worship of mysticism.

The second clash is displayed by Ellen, Thomas, and Count Orlok himself. First, I want to broach how and why Orlok desires Ellen so heavily. It's implied throughout the movie by multiple characters and Ellen herself that she's always been downbeat and melancholic. But in addition to her melancholy, she also alludes to a sin she committed in her past, namely lust. Ever since she was a young child, it's implied she's been lustful to a fault, even to the point of seeking the company of others despite being with Thomas. Her desires are unable to be satisfied, and hence, she inevitably calls upon the Count to give her what no one else could. Ellen seeks to die; she is trying to commit suicide, and she asks Orlok to deliver her this mercy. Hence why at the beginning, she describes her "wedding" with Orlok as the happiest moment of her life, despite the obvious death it entails for her and everyone else. Life is not good enough for her, so she seeks its end.

Count Orlok represents her melancholy, but specifically the melancholy that arises out of addiction—the loneliness that arises out of the inevitable dissatisfaction of untamed desire and appetite. She hungers for more and more and can never get it; this is simply her nature. Eventually, she calls upon death himself to satisfy her.

Enter Thomas. Despite the fact that Thomas is unable to satisfy Ellen physically, it's clear that she loves him and he loves her. Their love transcends the physical, and for that reason, their relationship survives Orlok's scheming. It's this love, perhaps what the movie is trying to portray as true love, that helps Ellen vanquish Nosferatu. She accepts her nature, she accepts who she is, and with this acceptance, she vanquishes the melancholy that's arisen out of this nature; she vanquishes the Count. I think her final embrace with Orlok is borne out of love for Thomas. Despite the fact that she's addicted to carnal desire, it's also clear that there's something in her that recognizes her love for Thomas—a love that can't be shown in any physical way, through sex or otherwise. She rebukes Orlok's advances and tells him he doesn't know true love, only appetite. In her sacrifice, I think she proves to Thomas and perhaps the audience too, that she is also capable of true love, despite her nature.

That's my interpretation of the movie. What did you guys think? Did I miss something?

Robert Eggers Nosferatu sat in a weird place in me once I left the theatre. Everything from the production design, the acting, and the cinematography was beautiful to look at and really helped set the mood of the film. My biggest problem is the direction. This movie seems to only go between two shot choices (static shots, and pans). A friend of mine told me this choice was to make the movie feel like an older film which it is able to do with its lighting, and set design. If this is the case however why is there some sequences Eggers chooses to place the camera at impossible angles like in the castle sequence.(one of my favorite parts in the movie). Along with the some plot details in the script I believe the direction led to pacing issues by not having a sense of style. I am curious to see what the director’s cut will bring.