Nosferatu
audience Reviews
, 73% Audience Score- Rating: 0.5 out of 5 starsUtter rubbish - I am being polite
- Rating: 4 out of 5 starsI enjoyed this reboot. It follows the original 1922 very well.
- Rating: 5 out of 5 starsI bought the movie as soon as it became available and watched it 3 times immediately over and over. I love everything about this film. Its in a league of its own. I love the Thing, American werewolf in London and Fright Night. Nosferatu stacks up and will hold its own over the tests of time.
- Rating: 5 out of 5 starsEverything was perf, the actors, the prosthetics, the costumes, the directing—Count Orlok is daddy af
- Rating: 2 out of 5 starsI wanted to like this more than i ended up liking. Many scenes were so cringe, with such bad acting. Like an amateur theater play, portraying what some of these scenes should look like. Then there are the cuts: they feel so abrupt, in scenes that should have been given time to breathe. While other scenes, drag on for too long and look silly. Speaking of looking silly: Nosferatu's looks are not scary at all; they are almost comedic. And the way he speaks is just annoying and boring, making the pace even slower. In the end, i was left very disappointed. And don't even get me started with the ending... are we supposed to believe Nosferatu fell for that? I know it's a movie and you have to suspend disbelief, but it's ridiculous how a guy who carefully planned everything forgot the most important thing... I understand why, but it is still ridiculous. I only enjoyed the cinematography, and the first few minutes of the movie. They were actually intriguing. And you could feel Nosferatu's presence, bringing this creepy tension to the plot. Sadly, that got lost along the way and the scenes became repetitive. Overrated movie, for sure...
- Rating: 2.5 out of 5 starsHas many things working for it, and many working against it. Beautiful to look at, but longer than it needs to be, and very little character development considering how long it gets. When it ended I thought to myself "it was a good movie but I wouldn't watch it again". I did saw it again, but I didn't get past the second half before turning it off. I wish Eggers would spend less time in trying to make everything 'period perfect' and more time fleshing a compelling story. It's unfortunate his best continue to be The VVitch.
- Rating: 4 out of 5 starsA masterfully created movie, with almost everything done really well. The production design is beyond great, and there are plenty of shots that are just beautiful. The story and characters are all interesting too, and expand well on the original. And this is the first genuinely scary horror movie I’ve seen in years, perfectly building tension and dread until (multiple different times) it reaches a breaking point. The tone is definitely a bit too serious for the campy story being told, but the movie more than makes up for it. The Orlok design isn’t great though. It’s intimidating, but lacks the creepiness of the original. And the mustache sucks.
- Rating: 1 out of 5 starsThe most disappointing movie I can recall. A bad version of Dracula.
- Rating: 2 out of 5 starsNo offense given but it was kinda overhyped. First of all great actors (exept Lily), great style and stunning visuals. I really feel this film does the gothic style justice and the overall idea of the plot is good, but it's executed poorly. Some scenes drag on for way too long and others are just way to short. The acting is good but the characters are bad if that makes sense. Many scenes are just unnecessary or drag on for way to long. Many actions made by the characters don't make sence and just leaves you confused. I feel like this movie sacrifices plot enjoyability for style and dramatic expressions and exposition. Or a better way to put it "It insists upon itself"
- Rating: 3.5 out of 5 starsWhole lot of nostalgic whimsy, quite a bit of which is possibly unintentionally funny; there are some laughable lines and scenes, but in the end it entertains and does not bore.