Nosferatu

I usually love Robert Eggers' work - his films have this unique ability to pull you into eerie, unsettling worlds that linger with you long after the movie has finished. But his take on Nosferatu just didn't land for me.

The pacing was painfully slow, to the point where it felt like it was dragging for the sake of atmosphere rather than tension. And while I can appreciate deliberate storytelling, this just felt uninspiring, like it was going through the motions without that signature spark Eggers usually brings to his projects.

To make matters worse, I couldn't stop seeing Dr. Robotnik from Sonic the Hedgehog every time Nosferatu was on screen. It's probably not fair to the film, but the resemblance was so distracting that I found myself more amused than unsettled.

Ultimately, Nosferatu lacked the sharp, visceral energy that made Eggers' previous work so compelling. Instead of feeling haunted, I left the theater feeling underwhelmed.

It is boring. The acting is way too much and ridiculous overacting. The crying, the terrified faces and behaviour all felt so overplayed and unnecessary. The scenes, images and costumes are very impressive but that's about it. I didn't like any of the characters, Lily Rose Depp and her husband are not my definition of beautiful or handsome. The count's "breathing" is very annoying too.

The scenes as individual images were really well-made. I like historical settings in movies but overall, the film felt pretentious and self-indulgent, trying too hard to impress without delivering real meaning or a real story.

The movie doesn't quite live up to the hype it has built over time. While the cinematography, costumes, and sound design are impressive, the film falls short where it matters most-delivering real horror. Lily shows promise as an actress, but her tendency to over-exaggerate certain scenes takes away from the immersion. The slow pacing and lack of genuine scares make you double-check if you're even watching a horror movie. Despite a few good moments, it ends up feeling underwhelming and forgettable. Nosferatu felt less of a creepy vampire but more of a old man with a deep and weird voice. Not the worst, but definitely not memorable.

Lushly beautiful with fine period costumes, lovely cinematography, and a hard-working Lily-Rose Depp in thrall to the vampire, this adaptation of Nosferatu ultimately falls flat by too many hypnotized fits by Depp, too much exposition, and a villain that grows less interesting with every appearance until he finally appears looking like an undead Ringo Starr on a stretch-rack. Nicholas Hoult is commanding in the Jonathan Harker role and it's clever to cast Willem Dafoe in the Van Helsing role since he played Count Orlock in 1999's much better Shadow of The Vampire, but this ultimately lacks bite.

That's not to say Nosferatu is a bad film. Everything about it is top notch. It is very atmospheric, a little sensual, and had a couple of really good scenes (loved the pigeon scene) but it also drags quite a bit. Coppola's version had more WTF moments. It was more grotesque, more sensual, more messed up, and it even had bestiality in it, which is crazy.

I liked the Anthony Hopkins character more than Willem Dafoe's, but more importantly I liked Gary Oldman as Dracula far more than I liked Bill Skardgard. Nosferatu's Dracula felt 2-dimentional and mostly constipated. Eggers tried to make him more ominous, I get it, but I still liked Coppola's version better. Oh, and I sorely missed Dracula's wives. They were ridiculous in Coppola's film.

If you've never seen Coppola's Dracula, you owe to yourself to watch that before you watch Nosferatu.