My Favorite Movies

Nosferatu, as well as being one of my outright favourite movies of all time, it remains the second most creepiest movie I have ever seen (losing out to Inland Empire obviously), from beginning to end it has this macabre, eerie look that never lets up, And with so many contemporary horror films relying on loud noises to scare you, this one has a suttle quietness and after all it is a silent film but that only enhances the atmosphere and makes you feel like your in a nightmare, that wicked shadow ascending the staircase, the shape of Dracula coming through the doorway which barely fits his body, these are images which you don't forget, they have all become popular screenshots for years to come and perhaps for all time.
By far the greatest movie of the silent era.

A dark,disturbing slice of america.from the outside we all appear to live normal,mundane lives but when we close the doors and pull the curtains,normality ends.Set in a small town this film documents the lives of its inhabitants who look like angels but turn into demons during the night.Sex,Violence,Drugs,Sadism, all surface and take over in an orgy of violence and depravity.watch this film with friends or people you know and love.before you do turn off the phone and tv.sit back and prepared to be scared.A modern classic if ever there was one.

Where John Wayne said :"Get Off Your Horse And Drink Your Milk", Clint Eastwood pulls you off the horse at full speed, kicks the shit out of you until you wish you were dead and forces that bottle of milk down your throat. This movie is the best western of all time without a doubt, it surpasses even Once Upon A Time In The West its so good.

I first saw this movie three years ago and I have been in love with it (and Stanley Kubrick) ever since. I never get tired of seeing this movie. Why it remains so underappreciated (at least by "casual" movie viewers) is beyond me. Everything is great; acting, direction, cinematography, the sets, everything. A Clockwork Orange is the finest film that has ever been made, in my view. Stanley Kubrick has made so many masterpieces, and is by far the best director that ever graced our world. A Clockwork Orange is simply his finest hour!

The film grabs you and glues you to your seat from start to finish. Malcolm McDowell gives us a shining example of superior acting, and the movie is as perverted as any of Kubrick's masterpieces (and then some!). It contains horrifying violence, extreme emotions, perversity and weirdness at it's very worst. It all boils down to serve you a plethora of thoughts for you to take with you and contemplate, after the film ends.

However, with all the perversity bursting out of this film, you will probably NOT like this film the first time you see it. I know I didn't. Fortunately, I gave it a second chance, and thought: Hey, it was actually not bad at all. After the third time, I was lost for words. After the fourth time, there was little doubt in my mind, that this was the finest film ever made, and regardless of how many great masterpieces I see, A Clockwork Orange still towers above them. I'm sure you'll agree, if you give it the chance it deserves, although it may require for you to see it more than once.

An absolute masterpiece. Quite possibly one of, if not THE greatest film of all time. can it be said that a film has defined a genre, but never is that more true than in the case of The Godfather. Since the release of the 1972 epic (which garnered ten Academy Award nominations and was named Best Picture), all "gangster movies" have been judged by the standards of this one (unfair as the comparison may be). If a film is about Jewish mobsters, it's a "Jewish Godfather"; if it's about the Chinese underworld, it's an "Oriental Godfather"; if it takes place in contemporary times, it's a "modern day Godfather."

If The Godfather was only about gun-toting Mafia types, it would never have garnered as many accolades. The characteristic that sets this film apart from so many of its predecessors and successors is its ability to weave the often-disparate layers of story into a cohesive whole. Any of the individual issues explored by The Godfather are strong enough to form the foundation of a movie. Here, however, bolstered by so many complimentary themes, each is given added resonance. The picture is a series of mini-climaxes, all building to the devastating, definitive conclusion.

Rarely does a film tell as many diverse-yet-interconnected stories. Strong performances, solid directing, and a tightly-plotted script all contribute to The Godfather's success. This motion picture was not slapped together to satiate the appetite of the masses; it was carefully and painstakingly crafted. Every major character - and more than a few minor ones - is molded into a distinct, complex individual. Stereotypes did not influence Coppola's film, although certain ones were formed as a result of it.

The film opens in the study of Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando), the Godfather, who is holding court. It is the wedding of his daughter Connie (Talia Shire), and no Sicilian can refuse a request on that day. So the supplicants come, each wanting something different - revenge, a husband for their daughter, a part in a movie.

The family has gathered for the event. Michael (Al Pacino), Don Vito's youngest son and a second world war hero, is back home in the company of a new girlfriend (Diane Keaton). The two older boys, Sonny (James Caan) and Fredo (John Cazale), are there as well, along with their "adopted" brother, Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), the don's right-hand man.

With the end of the war, the times are changing, and as much as Don Vito seems in control at the wedding, his power is beginning to erode. By the standards of some, his views on the importance of family, loyalty, and respect are antiquated. Even his heir apparent, Sonny, disagrees with his refusal to get into the drug business. Gambling and alcohol are forces of the past and present; narcotics are the future. But Don Vito will not compromise, even when a powerful drug supplier named Sollozzo (Al Lettieri) arrives with promises of high profits for those who back him.

Don Vito's refusal to do business with Sollozzo strikes the first sparks of a war that will last for years and cost many lives. Each of the five major mob families in New York will be gouged by the bloodshed, and a new order will emerge. Betrayals will take place, and the Corleone family will be shaken to its roots by treachery from both within and without.

The Corleone with the most screen time is Michael (it's therefore odd that Al Pacino received a Best Supporting Actor nomination), and his tale, because of its scope and breadth, is marginally dominant. His transformation from "innocent" bystander to central manipulator is the stuff of a Shakespearean tragedy. By the end, this man who claimed to be different from the rest of his family has become more ruthless than Don Vito ever was.

Despite the likes of Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon, Scarface, ...And Justice for All, and Scent of a Woman on his resume, Pacino is best remembered for the role he created in The Godfather (and subsequently reprised in two sequels). While this is not his most demonstrative performance - indeed, he is exceptionally restrained - the quality of the script makes Michael Corleone notable.

Next to Humphrey Bogart's Rick from Casablanca, Oscar winner Marlon Brando's Don Vito may be the most imitated character in screen history. The line "I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse" has attained legendary status, as has the entire performance. With his raspy voice, deliberate movements, and penetrating stare, Brando has created a personae that will be recalled for as long as motion pictures exist.

Don Vito is a most complicated gangster. In his own words, he is not a killer, and he never mixes business with personal matters. He puts family first ("A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man") and despises displays of weakness. He understands the burden of power, and his wordless sympathy for Michael when he is forced to assume the "throne", is one of The Godfather's most revealing moments (about both father and son).

The Godfather had three Best Supporting Actor nominees, all well-deserved. The first was Pacino (who probably should have been nominated alongside Brando in the Best Actor category). The other two were James Caan and Robert Duvall. In a way, it's surprising that Duvall wasn't passed over. His presence in The Godfather isn't flashy or attention-arresting. Like his character of Tom Hagen, he is steady, reliable, and stays in the background. Not so for Caan's Sonny, whose demonstrative and volatile personality can't be overlooked.

Family responsibility. A father's legacy. The need to earn respect. The corrupting influence of power. These are some of the ingredients combined in Francis Ford Coppola's cinematic blender. They are themes which have intrigued the greatest authors of every medium through the centuries.

Although the issues presented in The Godfather are universal in scope, the characters and setting are decidedly ethnic. Even to this day, there is an odd romanticism associated with New York's Italian crime families. The word "Mafia" conjures up images of the sinister and mysterious - scenes of the sort where Luca Brasi meets his fate. Francis Ford Coppola has tapped into this fascination and woven it as yet another element of the many that make his motion picture a compelling experience.

We come to The Godfather like Kay Adams - outsiders uncertain in our expectations - but it doesn't take long for us to be captivated by this intricate, violent world. The film can be viewed on many levels, with equal satisfaction awaiting those who just want a good story, and those who demand much more. The Godfather is long, yes - but it is one-hundred seventy minutes well-spent. When the closing credits roll, only a portion of the story has been told. Yet that last haunting image (Kay's shock of recognition), coupled with Nino Rota's mournful score, leaves a crater-like impression that The Godfather Part II only deepens.

This is in my opinion the greatest of the universal cycle. It may not have the spine chilling effect of Dracula nor the character in-depth of Frankenstein but in terms of a true horror movie this rules by far. After the 1935 Werewolf Of London, Universal decided to give Lon Chaney Jr his own signature role as Larry Talbot, the unfortunate young man who is bitten by a previous wolf and now seeks to destroy all those he loves. It is another classic example of horror-noir, with the foggy streets and forests, the stop-motion effects are pretty good in this as well and not to forget the classic dialogue. This has to be one of my top ten favourites.

It is impossible to analyze James Whale's "Frankenstein" without taking in consideration its iconic status. No one could deny that this is one of the most influential movies ever made, but unlike most films that have started a trend or have established a series of movie clichés, this adaptation of Mary Shelley's story still has a lot to offer to movie buffs. It is no longer a disturbing and/or scary film, but despite some dated elements (Frederick Kerr as Frankenstein Sr. is a total nuisance), the movie still works marvelously well. It was ingenuously shot by director Whale, whose odd creative choices never cease to amaze me. You've got to love the vertical sets and the unusual, wide camera angles and fluid tracking shots. Also, I liked how Whales makes you feel sorry for the creature, not the scientist, an idea that he will explore in more depth with the 1935 sequel. The monster kills three people but he remains an innocent victim of circumstances throughout the entire film. Dr. Frankenstein - who according to the film is really a narcissistic sociopath - is the real villain of the piece. The film made Boris Karloff an instant movie star and it is still amazing to see how he conveys so many emotions despite being buried under the iconic make up designed by the great Jack Pierce. His entrance still packs a wallop. However, I have always been partial to Colin Clive, whose edgy, near hysterical performance in the role of Dr. Frankenstein has not been surpassed yet (he is like a male version of Bette Davis). Dwight Frye is great as Fritz and Edward Van Sloan is authoritative as Dr. Waldman. I used to think that the movie was a little too creaky, but now I'm convinced that it is one of the greatest horror films of all time.

Russ Meyer has to be one of the most under-rated directors of all-time. His films are comicbook and cartoonish in style, everything is exaggerated. Men are generally portrayed as weak, impotent losers to which his powerful, oversexed women throw scorn and ridicule. This film is no exception. And along with FW Murnau's Expressionist masterpiece "Faust", "Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!" also features one of my favourite opening sequences to any film. Go baby, go

Made in 1968 on a hand to mouth budget by enthusiasts in Pittsburgh, this suitably grungy off?Hollywood production became one of the most influential horror movies ever made.

George A. Romero?s film has had official sequels (Dawn of the Dead, Day of the Dead, Land of the Dead), remakes (one in 3-D), parodies (Return of the living Dead, Shaun of the Dead), rip-offs (Living Dead at the Manchester Morgue) and several horribly mutilated re-releases with useless extra footage, new soundtracks or colorisation. It changed the face of the horror film, setting a precedent for the work of directors like Tobe Hooper, Wes Craven, John Carpenter and David Cronenberg in the 1970s.

In fact, it?s such an important movie that it runs the risk of disappointing first-time viewers who?ve seen all the later films that copied its licks ? part of its strength is that it?s not a glossy, predictable Hollywood horror and so it has a grainy, semi-amateur, black and white look which gives it a dread sense of conviction. The shambling dead besiege a group of squabbling wannabe survivors in an isolated farmhouse, eating the entrails of those too inept to see them off with a bullet to the brain.

Many of its plot strands were unprecedented: a heroine who reacts credibly to an appalling situation by becoming a useless catatonic, a black hero who finally has less to fear from the zombies than from the ghoul-hunting posse combing the countryside as if on a Vietnam search and destroy mission, news bulletins that include expert advice (?kill the brain and you kill the ghoul?) from the men on the ground, a relentlessly pessimistic ending.

THE best gangster film of all time. This film is absolutely flaw-free, everything is done down to absolute perfection. Scorsese's fast, violent, stylish mobster movie is a return to form, De Niro, and the Italian-American underworld. But in following, from '55 to the late '70s, the true-life descent into big-time crime of Henry Hill (Liotta), he and co-writer Nick Pileggi seem less concerned with telling a lucid, linear story than with providing sociological evidence of an ethically (ethnically?) marginalised society united by the desire to make a fast buck. Because Hill and the older 'good fellas' he first falls in with as an awestruck kid - De Niro, Pesci, Sorvino - exist almost totally on the surface, we watch shocked and beguiled but never come to care. The camera and cutting style is as forcefully persuasive as a gun in the gut, so that we are not enlightened but excited by the cocky camaraderie, bloody murder, and expansive sense of 'family' on view. Still, the movie excites the senses in a way few film-makers even dream of, and its epic sweep and brilliantly energetic film language rest on a cluster of effortlessly expert performances.

Citizen Kane is possibly the most important film ever made. The cast are brilliant, the choreography is brilliant, but the thing that tops over all of that is the moral message it signals out to its audience. In this movie we see his tragic life, and then he tries to overpower it with fame and money its almost like Travis Bickle the rich version, he had it all but in the end nothing ever made him as happy as he was when he was a little boy living with his real mother & father. It's there we see the comparison beetween having money and not having it, and in the outcome at the end of the day, your better not having it.

Fanastic movie, great special effects

This is possibly my favourite movie of all time. It has all the elements of a proper chiller, fog, bats, wolves, crumbling castles and not to forget the greatest vampire actor of all time Bela Lugosi. The rythmn and accent of his voice would forever be recognised as the way Dracula spoke, and though he was not the first Dracula he is by far the most iconic throughout history and pop culture. He is also by far the best Dracula there ever was or will be and if you have any doubt about that, he was buried in the cape, now that is commitment. He just has this evil presence and when he does that glare at you, you know your fucked. Another fanastic yet surrealistically frightening performance is Dwight Frye as the insane Renfield, this was the first sound horror movie so they did not think to add dialogue so when theres no talking there is barely any sound what so ever but that only adds to the spooky atmosphere. Definetely worth a watch.

This sixteen-minute cinematic taste of surrealism is definitely an escape from conventional motion picture. In an irrational string of events, verristic surrealists Dali and Bunuel present eerie images, usually read as symbolisms, that are bound to leave its viewers thirsting for a lucid sense of significance. It is, however, virtually impossible to provide one definitive explanation for a movie like this, which is created in the name of the queerness of Freudian psychoanalysis.

Regardless of the moot quality of this dreamlike movie, it is one that every film aficionado must experience. Black and white images of eyeball incisions, a severed hand getting nudged by a stick on the street, ants crawling out of a human hand, and a dead donkey strapped onto a piano being dragged by a man may not exactly look appealing to the conscious mind, but an artwork as incredibly mystifying as this must not be left unseen.

Blood & Gore. In the beginning with films like The Wolfman the genre started out pretty tame, then came along Psycho and shocked everybody, Night Of The Living Dead crossed the line in movies forever and in the 1970's there was a lot of exploitation films which did not aim for quality but rather for special selling points such as hardcore sex and brutal, wanton violence. These movies were usually shown late at night and was shown ina double feature known as Grindhouse Cinema. Well in 1974 Tobe Hooper came out with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Now, despite its title this movie is anything but tore-out organs and disabled testicles and limbs, this movie is what you would simply call The Greatest Slasher Flick Of All Time. In tjis movie the whole thing can be a bit cliche but before this, there wasn't really such athing as cliche. Check it out, its one of the best made movies I have ever seen.

OK, first things first this movie is literally like seeing your worst, darkest most pessimistic nightmare on screen. The story is as macabre as it is extremely confusing. If you thought the likes of Mulholland Drive and Sunset Boulevard exploited the true cruelty of Hollywood, you have not seen anything yet. Laura Dern's performance in this is incredible, her role becomes her life and she is as frightened as the audience are. This is David Lynch's creepiest movie by a long shot, far beyond the mutated terror of Eraserhead and the psychopathic mind of Dennis Hopper in Blue Velvet, this movie twists and turns at every chance possible leaving a lot of questions unanswered, some might say that this is the movies downfall but if you choose to just take this film as it comes then you are guaranteed an enjoyable watch as I did.

"Raging Bull" is a cinematic masterpiece which pulls no punches. Based on a true story, Robert De Niro (in his second Oscar-winning role) stars as Jake La Motta, a middle-weight prize-fighter from the late-1940s and early-1950s, who basically destroys himself and those around him because of an uncontrollable temper and poor decision-making. Instead of going down as one of the greatest boxers of all time, La Motta ruined his career because he was unable to see the "big picture". He threw bouts, he got involved with low-life underworld crime figures, he beat his wife (Cathy Moriarty, in her Oscar-nominated role), he abused all those closest to him, and he had relationships with young girls who were still considered minors. Even his strongest tie, his younger brother (Joe Pesci, in an Oscar-nominated, star-making part), gets cut during the course of his untimely self-destruction. La Motta goes from middle-weight champ to a washed-out stand-up comic at a local club. He gains weight uncontrollably and ultimately just becomes another face in the crowd by the end of the film. By the end, La Motta proclaims that he: "Could have been a contender....", quoting Marlon Brando's famous line from "On the Waterfront". "Raging Bull" is one of those films that is masterfully crafted in all possible departments. The screenplay is one of the best in the history of film. Martin Scorsese's direction is superb and so is the cinematography (shot almost entirely in black-and-white). The film delivered De Niro an Oscar and also won for its editing. "Raging Bull" is one of those films that is very close to "Citizen Kane". They both deal with men who desperately want to be great, but ultimately destroy themselves and those around them. This film is often rated the best film of the 1980s. I cannot argue with that opinion. I also think that this is the best work that Scorsese and De Niro have ever done. The fact that this film lost the Best Picture Oscar to "Ordinary People" in 1980 is probably the biggest disappointment since "Citizen Kane" lost to "How Green Was My Valley" in 1941.

An almost endemic representation of working-class American culture, 'American History X' could not have been more appropriately titled. American history seeps, breathes and vomits racism in every aspect of life, and nothing in the last 332 years of its Constitional existence has been done about it. It is as natural a part of life as eating and sleeping, something all Americans, no matter what spin they continue to put on it, cannot escape as the single most destructive aspect of life that haunts American history. The titular 'X' symbolises Edwards Norton and Furlong's own existence, drifters, gang-bangers, dedicating themselves to meaningless hatred. They and their kind, their 'brethren', are the unseen unheard class that society ignores. They are shunned from education and jobs, outcasted because of their lack of ability or familial background. They are reduced to a mere statistic, an X. With no hope or chance of being accepted these cultures thrive on the anger and frustration of these young people. And when the different worlds of the different races collide, then the outcome can only be violence. The film may simplify this, but it does so in a genuinely painful and emotional way, as if crying out for something to be done about this. The violence is shocking, brutal, visceral, but it's not glamourised. The consequences are shown that violence only begets more violence, and that human life can be so fragile, yet so valued and necessary. People need each other. And as a warning, a sensitive evocation of a desperately out of control situation in American society, the film succeeds. The performances are outstanding, with a credible and towering turn from Norton. The decision to film the flashbacks in black and white also presents a stark contrast with the escalation of violence into the present. This isn't an easy film to sit through, but it is a devastating and virulent piece of cinema. Angry, anguished and alone, it is the X, the ghost of American history...

For me this is the best of the 'Dollars' trilogy . Although a lot of people I know would disagree with me on this one choosing G,B,U over this but I still stand by my decision. Eastwood handles himself very well as the stranger, shaping a character strong enough to beg a sequel. Further plaudits go to title animation by Luigi Lardani, which sets the style of this film from the start. Also to music, somewhat redundant but effective in the western vein. . All the classic Leone ingredients were there - the atonal score, the graphic violence, the horrendous dubbing - and the film's Stateside success changed the face of a genre. For me, Leone only beat this with Once Upon A Time In The West, but fair to say he had a massive reputation then, here he is only a beginner but yet with this film he changed the Western genre and made it into a form of exploitation film known as 'Spaghetti Western' and therefore changed not only a genre, but film history.

Dragging away from the silent, intelligent underworld of The Godfather & Miller's Crossing, this is a movie where friendship is as real as the toothfairy and where you meet your end by chainsaw. This movie is not a thinking mans gangster movie, Tony Montana screwed up everything for everybody and in the end the only guy that came out of the whole thing smiling was the guy with the shotgun that killed Tony. The unpleasant part about this film is mainly the demise of Pfeiffer and Mastrantonio, the only two people he ever cared about, well at least for one of them he did. This film is a cult classic. It is reknowed as one of the best gangster filmsof all time. Its not wrong. The feel of the film is spectacular. Al pacinos performance of tomy montana allows you to really feel the emphaphie of the character which allows you to fall into the story. This creates the edge-of-your-seat violence and tension. The screenplay is spectacular but oscar-winning oliver stone cannot help himself. the film shows raw passion, power and respect corrupting a man until eventually he has to pay a price. This film would have done better but it was ahead of its time in terms of bloody effect and graphic reaalisism. It would have won oscars had it come out in this age. This film can be found in any film collection big or small and i promise you now its worth it. Just buy it and trust me, you will not regret it.

No matter what wars are going on, what the neighbours are screaming about next store, how many kids Sally Struthers pleads on behalf of, at the end of the day the media (movies, TV, books, etc.) more often than not present us with a candy-coated view of the world where in the end everything turns out right. John Boy gets his goodnights in, the Tanners of Full House get their hugs and the boy and the girl live happily ever after. Happy endings are a good way to feel good, but the sheer percentage of happy endings as opposed to the blur of reality is far too great. Perhaps that's why Martin Scorsese's Taxi Driver is so frightening. It's got a happy ending of sorts, but the root of the happiness is deeply frightening.

Made at a time when the world was skeptical and the powers that be were deemed untrustworthy, Taxi Driver resonates today as much as it did upon its initial release. The film focuses on a loner New York cabbie named Travis Bickle (Robert De Niro in one of his career-defining roles). Travis struggles to make any real friends, even failing to really get along with his coworkers over mid-shift coffee.

Through Travis' eyes, Scorsese shows New York as an urban hell filled with drugs, pimps, weapons and politicians. This is established in the opening credits in a famous shot in which Travis' taxi emerges from a plume of steam that symbolizes the underworld of below.

Travis is a Vietnam veteran who is unsure as to where to go with his life. All around him is human vermin and scum, surely not what he went to fight for. He is also alone in the world. He's shown with acquaintances, but there's never any sense of friendship until the end of the film, and even that "friendship" could be viewed as more familial than one of kinship.

Looking at the world through a lens of trouble and disappointment, Travis is blind to love. When he lands a date with Betsy (Cybill Shepherd), a campaign organizer for a presidential hopeful, he takes her to a porno film their first time out. Amid the predictable fallout, Travis genuinely sees nothing wrong with his choice in date movies thinking that sex equaled love and vice versa. He has no concept on how to maintain a relationship. This, in part, allows Travis to become the violent anti-hero that he goes on to become later in the film. Because of his disconnect he isn't 'normal' and therefore Travis can go and commit murder and be admired for doing so. If he were your average guy in a suit, murder would not be so easy, even if it were to an abusive pimp who farms out young teenagers.

Travis' motives are always pure. He simply wants a world filled with good. And just like he was willing to go to war earlier in his life on foreign soil, Travis is willing to fight on the streets of his homeland against enemies that aren't so easily identified. Travis is a soldier fighting the good fight.

Taxi Driver is a grimy film that perfectly reflects its grimy subject matter. Paul Shrader's script combined with Scorsese's direction and topped off by De Niro's performance makes Travis Bickle one of film's most complex characters. When you talk about super heroes, he truly is one minus the tights and powers. This is a violent film that should be nothing less. Travis' world is an ugly place so what we see shouldn't be anything but.

When Scorsese made Taxi Driver, he was still avoiding the glitz and glamour of a big-budget Hollywood production. Even if he was now in the spotlight, Taxi Driver maintains a gritty feel that was necessary for it to have any impact.

The fact that this film is as applicable today as it was three decades ago is a sad testament that it is impossible for one man to make all the difference in the world. Although I don't think Scorsese meant for Taxi Driver to be a call to arms for would-be vigilantes around the world, it should be seen as an eye-opener - something that makes you more aware and educates about the sad reality of some people's lives.

Robert Wiene's 1919 classic "Das Cabinet Des Dr Caligari" is, in every way, a courageous piece of film making.

The Expressionistic set design, as the backdrop to the story of a mad doctor and his manipulation of a somnambulist, is brilliantly conceived, especially when considering the twist at the end of the film. The sets give the film a definite and appropriate dreamlike quality.



The importance of the film cannot be overstated since it undoubtedly influenced the later Universal monster movies that proliferated in the 30's and 40's as well as later horror films.

It seems certain James Whale was inspired by German Expressionism, if not "The cabinet of Dr Caligari", for the set design on his version of "Frankenstein".



The DVD has been designed to emulate the Expressionism of the film. Good production values and attention to detail with an in-depth audio overview of the film.



This film is essential viewing for anyone interested in early German cinema or the history of horror films but, it is equally valid as an important piece of German Expressionist art.