MovieChat Forums > OuterSpace
OuterSpace (134)
Posts
Replies
Despite being a Nosferatu remake, Eggers decided to incorporate aspects from the official Dracula and the mustache is one of those (And some Vlad Tepes for good measure as well).
I'm 50/50 on it. I don't have a problem with it in a general sense but I do think it alters/hides Orlok's rat-like design and said design was the most iconic thing about Nosferatu. At least he knew not to alter the hands.
Because despite the pacing issues all silent films face due to constantly stopping to display the intertitles, I still find the 1922 version to be more entertaining and visually interesting. With historical context there's added interest as well. Plus despite said pacing, it also has the benefit of brevity.
It was a passion project Eggers had been trying to make over the course of the last 10 years. The existence of this is mainly due to him, not a studio looking to remake the movie and then he getting attached to it.
Not the first remake of Nosferatu either though I'm not really a fan of the Herzog/Kinski version. Definitely prefer the original 1922 version to that version.
And this movie is way too ponderous and slow for your aforementioned ADHD audience. Only people into "art house" type films will be seeing this a second time.
He's taking from the book and Vlad Tepes though I did find that to be a strange choice since one of the most unique and famous elements of Nosferatu is the design of Count Orlok. Eggers kept the hands but otherwise really downplayed the look despite being it one of the defining aspects of Nosferatu.
It's pretty good. The visuals and acting are great though there were moments where it did feel somewhat slow.
It remained rather close to the original Nosferatu's version of the Dracula story, so if you're familiar then it doesn't really do anything new, it's just a visually arresting version of that same story.
Considering how full of shit this movie is, a time jump sequel might as well take place in modern day where pro-wrestling is actually real.
For ESB and Jedi there's really no scene where it's necessary to reference his character. He may even be in disgrace for being in command of the Death Star when it was destroyed.
With the prequels we're given no backstory for seemingly any of the generals or important Empire villains not related to the Sith. George seemed to have no interest in expounding on those elements. That said, Tarkin was supposed to be featured more in EP 3 via CGI and archive footage but it was felt the tech wasn't good enough to achieve this, hence just a quickie long shot of a guy in prosthetics.
It's probably for the better though. Tarkin plays a large role in Rogue One and it ends up further diminishing the competence of his character.
At the very least you certainly get the impression they had a more involved history with Anakin; Owen in particular possibly being a close friend in their youth and being resentful of Anakin's decision to pass on the simple life and devote himself to the Jedi, thus getting involved in the clone wars, followed by the events which led to his "death". He seems to harbor a similar resentment to "that crazy old man" Obi-Wan, most likely casting a certain level of blame for what happened to Anakin and disparaging him so Luke would not associate for fear of similar circumstances repeating.
And yet they have to have some adult appeal because adults are mainly the ones buying the toys due to younger generations not having an interest or attachment to toys like the older gens.
This and Fury Road are intended to have an over the top comic aesthetic though unfortunately this one has a cheaper look to much of it despite the large budget.
And no, there's no big ending action sequence. The tanker chase and the fight at the bullet farm are the big action sequences and then the rest is just finishing the story followed by a questionable ending.
It's definitely a movie for people who really liked Fury Road and wanted more of that world.
View all replies >