MoviesNewsTalk
Robert Eggers is a director well-known for meticulously researching historical settings. From the puritanical terrors of The Witch to the seafaring madness of The Lighthouse or the harsh Norse myths from The Northman, he seems committed to showcasing both visually unique stories as well as character driven and layered performances all within detailed time settings and because of that unique production method his choice to reinterpret such iconic cinematic monster with his approach over past cinematic adaptations in "Nosferatu" becomes both predictable yet still deeply fascinating due to what that core concept of such film should entail. Today, therefore, we'll examine both Eggers' latest take as well as its position in pop culture, analyzing various influences and what separates his vision over all previous versions in order to further explore this very important figure within film making.
Before any meaningful analysis could take place it’s imperative to go to the very source as Eggers intends for his movie. In that respect that core is rooted within Bram Stoker’s “Dracula” however F.W Murnau took such source, to then present his own vision which (due to copyright laws ) gave us one of early horror cinema’s best monster creation with 1922 “Nosferatu”. Murnau’s interpretation wasn’t like most movie interpretations from that time period as the film deliberately chose to depict Dracula ( here named Orlok) as not some refined aristocrat ( as later shown with Bela Lugosi’s approach) but instead a deformed being; the visual representation being an entity more animal than man. Then another creative production choice involved using that framework with visual elements from older German expressionist movement which added another degree of visual power in its representation. It all creates an iconic figure that despite it being mostly relegated due to legal copyright issues it became an important inspiration for countless horror stories to come. All of these combined made "Nosferatu" stand far above the general productions, becoming unique despite the origin story source similarities it might have to another well known property like "Dracula."
With such concepts set firmly, that then leads us into Eggers choice, and instead of creating an over-the-top modern take ( akin to the one Francis Ford Coppola created in the 90’s); his version seeks almost an equal visual method while also honoring both Stoker’s source material as well as the original framework initially designed and structured with Murnau’s initial creative vision by crafting an almost equal adaptation while at the same time also adding many subtle ( but crucial) creative decisions that make it into more than an exact replication.
What makes Robert Eggers interpretation so unique as a modern take for the well known property is by choosing that meticulous style. Rather than updating it into more modern visual or themes the series chose to remain very close to both cinematic technical approaches of silent movie era while still attempting to show new story developments within those familiar and core ideas. The usage of the classic 1800's German town in the movie ( that closely mirrors Murnau’s “Wismar” ), with high contrast and color pallet from tinted prints makes Eggers intent very obvious: to bridge present to past while also modernizing with clear new elements.
While he retains familiar character archetypes: such as the ill-fated Thomas Hutter, his haunted wife Ellen and Bill Skarsgård now takes over Max Schreck's previous monster character of “Count Orlok”. There’s various new characters, plot details all in a more expanded world that tries ( and often times achieves ) more than just a carbon copy but more a direct tribute. These additions make that series to stand firmly from simple copy or pure reproduction but a creative interpretation within existing source material as a means to highlight new, if mostly related, contexts that show a greater view to what can often appear rather static at most other cinematic re-tellings. These alterations may appear small but those choices add additional layers.
Another major focus falls onto specific acting choices, such as Willem Dafoe taking on an expert that mirrors “Van Helsing” from various lore sources and the main interpretation, he adds into that character. This is where Eggers is clearly willing to go in different directions to make that familiar monster feel completely different without betraying core concepts that fans loved so greatly about it before. Simon McBurney’s Herr Knock , in that same manner, makes “Renfield” a more central character role. By carefully picking those actors and the acting direction given, all helps bridge all source material into a coherent modern viewing style without undermining previously beloved takes from prior source. There isn't an effort to change core elements but to modernize that message from many unique choices at multiple creative levels. Its never a purely surface interpretation.
The largest shift for Eggers version, without question, is Bill Skarsgård interpretation on Count Orlok as this single creative production element ( from set design, costume choices to actor choices, delivery of dialogues) offers some clear deviation over both past movie (or even literary source material) as Orlok is not just a withered, balding, and sickly cadaver like figure, rather, a more towering, and animalistic beast that now carries a more prominent and strong physicality, enhanced by the use of a very exaggerated accent, while constantly swathed in furs to underline his untamed roots. It is a radical shift but not a completely dismissive take from those prior ideas. It is in these concepts that Eggers seeks to create more of an equal and completely unique monster that operates under a new setting.
While many might appreciate a faithful adaptation of what Max Schreck previously displayed, Bill’s take operates in what feels very much part of core character. He is no longer some relic from a bygone era but a force that seems tied both within old and modern setting as it doesn't simply feel like a random production change; this creative choice creates a fresh new unique dynamic with the film as every action taken feels intentional ( which for both an actor's and director’s skill does add additional value) and is not merely something designed at some surface level aesthetics but something directly built into an authentic part of every narrative interaction.
What "Nosferatu" offers isn't purely to make one production of what was always previously presented through many iterations across countless mediums and various platforms throughout entertainment production history. While that respect ( almost devotion) over a century of cinema becomes a focal point through set designs, production choices or casting, his movie also seems to focus on adding something unique into it ( rather than just simply repeating them). A crucial choice lies specifically at the characters interactions such as Skarsgård’s Orlok & Ellen to hint on how a connection seems tied to some form of psychic/personal attraction that has nothing to do with plot or setting, that specific choice underlines some key messages over all interpretations; characters are often moved by an invisible call rather than just plot beats and its exactly this type of creative production value that has been missing from previous retellings where everything feels purely objective rather than subjective or even emotional.
Though those connections seem more pronounced within Eggers interpretation; it would be entirely inaccurate to state that the other movies were completely devoid of that value as all had something unique within them as those all tried to tackle what that meaning should entail, and as much of this project was based on those iconic movies its important to recognize they all hold an equal importance to why ‘Nosferatu” remains such compelling work as the source for so many adaptations which does seem to be Robert Eggers key understanding: one single version isn’t everything that a narrative or a set of iconic characters could provide if carefully planned by someone who actually has some love for source material.
Ultimately, Robert Eggers "Nosferatu" is not simply a remake, it feels more akin to an act of deliberate cinema deconstruction as it not only recreates an important period for old cinema classics it offers new meanings through that old familiar source material as an entirely new experience without ever undermining prior important concepts and elements. While clearly deeply rooted in Murnau’s original work, Eggers provides an added twist, a modern vision while adding important character developments and subtle creative choices making this iteration stand very firmly by itself while still honoring what was made long before.
By fully showcasing the strengths as well as key limitations (such as, but not limited to the overall slower pacing when compared to faster action oriented more modern productions) this deliberate decision of bringing old into new by not losing sight over those details is what separates that series from most common or similar products as by highlighting ‘what is different’ Eggers pays his tribute with something so very different that makes a new generation find out about, or for old timers to fully engage, that ancient horror masterpiece with new vision, in what could now be deemed a must watch within vampire based sub-genre in movie format and perhaps may just give some needed life for old or stale properties under less qualified studios or other competing products in long time scale.