Nadja

This film was one that I think I discovered when looking for sequels, remakes and versions of films of Dracula. I believe this is a semi-remake of Dracula's Daughter. I had seen this years ago and didn't remember much aside from it being an arthouse take. I've given this a rewatch for my Foray through the Fours.

Synopsis: members of a dysfunctional family of vampires tries to come to terms with each other in the wake of their father's death. Meanwhile, they are being hunted by Dr. Van Helsing (Peter Fonda) and his hapless nephew.

We start with Nadja (Elina Löwensohn) talking to a character played by Nic Ratner. This is an interesting way to introduce her, telling him about her family and about where she's been. We then see her biting his neck and drinking his blood. She is a vampire as well as our title character. What we'll learn is that she is the daughter of Dracula. She is accompanied by Renfield (Karl Geary) who is her slave. She learns that her father is dead.

This then takes us to meet Jim (Martin Donovan). He is boxing when his wife enters the gym. This causes a distraction and his coach, played by Jack Lotz, knocks him down. Her name is Lucy (Galaxy Craze) and she informs him that his uncle has been arrested for murder. They leave together.

It goes over to the morgue where Nadja and Renfield want to retrieve her father's body. She uses her ability to charm the man at the desk, played by David Lynch. We don't see what happens, but we learn later that he can't explain what happened. The body is gone though.

Jim's uncle turns out to be Dr. Van Helsing. They're at a diner so he can explain what happened. Apparently, he doesn't think he killed a man, but he was already dead with a stake in his heart. When he finishes eating, Van Helsing needs a drink. This annoys Lucy.

Nadja then meets her at a bar. She is lonely and interested in Nadja when they meet due to her accent. They go back to Lucy and Jim's apartment. Nadja is fascinated by their pet tarantula. What she doesn't like is the Dracula doll on their Christmas tree. They end up making love, which seems to lean Lucy getting bitten.

Secrets are revealed through this group. Jim finds there is something off about his wife. Van Helsing worries that she could be bitten. Nadja visits her twin brother, Edgar (Jared Harris), to ensure he knows what happened to their father. He's sickly. They have different outlooks on being vampires and she helps cure him. He is being aided by a nurse he met when living out west, Cassandra (Suzy Amis). This group has more in common than they realize when Nadja takes Lucy, forcing Van Helsing and Jim to seek the aid of Edgar. This all goes back to the old country as well.

That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I'll start is by saying this is an interesting film. This is a post-modern vampire movie that mostly takes place in New York City. It is interesting because Dracula was originally written with a vampire that is living in Transylvania and then going to London. The version of that city from the novel is not bustling metropolis, yet it still has more victims for him. This could still almost be a sequel to that though since it is taking place in the 1990s, aside from how it truly ends.

Let me then discuss how this is a remake of Dracula's Daughter. I've only seen that sequel once, so I don't remember how that played out. I know that the titular father character isn't in it due to a contract dispute with Bela Lugosi. I do know that there were lesbian undertones which are more in the forefront here. Lucy is attacked by Nadja. There was flirting there and the former brought the latter home with her. This is cheating, but I am more forgiving since vampires have the power to hypnotize their victims. Lucy doesn't even remember the next morning. This can be seen as a commentary on doing things while drinking with no memory the next morning. Jim loves Lucy, but it doesn't seem to be reciprocated. I do like how this is managed here.

I'll then incorporate filmmaking here with other aspects to discuss. This is an arthouse film. It is filmed in black and white, despite being made in the mid-1990s. This is a passion project for sure with great actors, even just in cameos. It doesn't have a big budget, but I think it does well enough in hiding the seams there. This is borrowing heavy from Dracula, just telling the story differently. Instead of our villain being that vampire, it is Nadja. It is fitting that our damsel in distress is named Lucy. It is ending in Transylvania, while not actually being shot there is great. I'll credit the cinematography and framing for doing what it can here.

This is also limited in the effects it uses, but it doesn't need them. Being filmed without color hides that. The blood looks real thanks to it. I also found trivia where scenes where it gets blurry were done on a Fisher Price toy camera that wasn't made long. It had low resolution so that helps with a surreal feel. I credit the experimentation there. I'll also say that the soundtrack was fine for what was needed.

Then to finish out with the acting. Löwensohn was good here as Nadja. I like that we start by meeting her so when she becomes our villain, there is still humanity there from what we know. Fonda worked on this for the minimum and he plays a quirky Van Helsing. He is also Dracula, with his face hidden, which is fun. That is playing the opposite characters. The film debut for Geary and he works. He isn't given much. I like Donovan, Craze, Amis and Harris in their roles. The cameos by Lynch and José Zúñiga were good. No issues there. The acting fits the atmosphere needed and helps bring their characters to life.

In conclusion, this is an odd film. I like what it is doing for the most part. We are taking a familiar character and story, then doing something different with it. It is strategic to remake a film like Dracula's Daughter which has interesting things to say, but it is lesser seen. I like the experimental nature of this arthouse film. Not everything works, but trying it gets credit in my book. We have a solid cast being led by Fonda and Löwensohn. The rest help to round this out. This won't be for everyone. There are lot of vampire films out there so one that tries something different works for me.

My Rating: 7 out of 10.

"Nadja" falls into a category of films I would describe as 'vampire movies for adults.' Viewers seeking an action-packed gorefest along the lines of "From Dusk Till Dawn" (1996) or "Blade II" (2002) should bypass "Nadja". Moody, opiated, and dreamily ethereal, it is similar in this respect to Guy Maddin's more recent "Dracula: Pages from a Virgin's Diary" (2002) and not most other modern vampire flicks. Its emphasis on the emotional and evocative rather than physical aspects of the genre puts it in the company of Tony Scott's "The Hunger" (1983) and Po-Chih Leong's "Immortality" (aka "The Wisdom of Crocodiles") (1998). Shot on black-and-white film, a dying art form, with a good musical score by Portishead, it avoids sinking into pretentiousness with occasional, self-parodying irony (example: "He says he's dying ... for a cigarette."). A major drawback to the film is director Michael Almereyda's overuse of the Pixelvision camera, a technology he has used in the past and should have left there. The acting is spotty, but that's of little importance in a film emphasizing atmosphere over character portrayal. Elina Lowensohn in the title role and Peter Fonda as Dr. Van Helsing (played as he has never been played before) do stand out from the rest of the cast. I'd rate this as 'must see' for aficionados of vampire films, if only to take a break from the less imaginative schlock that overwhelms the genre. Rating: 7/10.

A strange, disarming feeling sits over this film, as if everyone is in a semi-comatic haze. That's a good thing. While a bizarre mix of humor, horror flick, and psychodrama, it also draws from (and pokes fun at) the vampire flick tradition. Full of highlights, not the least of which is a ratty haired Peter Fonda.

Nadja is a very refreshing version of the redundant vampire movies out there. It had beautiful and intriguing cinematography that at times seemed like a livening photograph. Although the average viewer that is used to watching "spoon-fed" movies that do not require any viewer intellect or imagination may find this movie to abstract for their taste, It will Certainly be their loss for this movie is a must see if you are any kind of a movie aficionado. I am very happy to have added this movie to my movie history repertoire. Enjoy.

I liked this very odd, surreal and somewhat camp vampire film much better on 2nd viewing, when I was prepared for its David Lynch like lack of naturalism, strange rhythms and odd blend of silly humor and almost melodramatic drama. (It's not surprising that Lynch executive produced this, and appears briefly in the film).

The black and white, stylized photography, the music, and parts of the dialogue are terrific; original and compelling. And setting a modern vampire tale in the nightlife of young hip 90s Manhattan yields some very interesting results. But at other times it can't seem to make up it's mind about what ratio of camp to reality it wants to be.

In the end, it's not as strong as its recent spiritual offspring: "A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night", but it's still worth seeing -- as is any work from the always inventive, ahead of the curve Michael Almereyda.