Talk:Nosferatu the Vampyre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Film (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the German cinema task force.
 
WikiProject Horror (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled comments[edit]

I seem to remember that at the time this film was made, all the negatives for the 1922 Nosferatu were thought lost. (A court order from the lawsuit in the 1920s decreed that all copies should be burned, and I don't think a 'lost' copy was uncovered until the late 1980s.) So as well as making his own film, Herzog was partly trying to restore a 'lost classic', from which only photo stills and 55-year-old eyewitness accounts survived. But I can't remember the source for this, so haven't added it to the main article. If anyone can back this up, please add it.

I can say that I saw the original on television in 1978, and it was quite widely known at the time, so.... Guess memory fails.

I am slightly doubtful about comment film wasn't dubbed. I don't know. The reference doesn't provide confirmation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.162.168 (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

After its court-ordered destruction failed, Murnau's 1922 film had been generally available in reasonably-complete form throughout its history. Cinematheque Française acquired it in the 1940s, and the New York Musuem of Modern Art had it soon afterward. It played in art houses, with new musical scores, in the 1950s and 1960s. Educational stations aired it nationwide circa 1973. Herzog must have had numerous chances to view it. (Some lost snippets were restored in the 1990s, and better prints are now available.) WHPratt (talk) 17:59, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Page moved[edit]

As per WP:NC(UE), I have begrudgingly moved Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht to Nosferatu the Vampyre. Even though I hate that title, it's the rules. Aguirre, the Wrath of God being the prescedent.

Maxdave2010 03:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The rats in the film[edit]

There is a contradiction in the film's article.

At first there's written that the release of the rats was refused by the mayor of Delft, and that the crew had to film that part in Schiedam. In a later paragraph, it's written that the mayor of Delft offered 5 guilders for each rat that was brought back in. One would deduce that it would be the mayor of Schiedam that did that, not Delft's, since he refused the rats' release in his town.

Also, there is no citation for that anecdote. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.0.84.226 (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

Rotten Tomatoes[edit]

A single movie critic, Christopher Null, gave the film 2.5/5 Stars. His "Rotten Tomato" reduced the website's only perfect review from 100%, to 98%. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.230.233.88 (talk) 05:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

"The film was released as Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht in the German language edition and Nosferatu the Vampyre in English language edition. It was a critical success, receiving a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 100%. "

Seems to imply that it got a Rotten Tomatoes rating after release, which I doubt. Since the release date is listed as October 5, 1979. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.88.128.238 (talk) 03:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, this is a problem. Шизомби (talk) 04:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Critical reception is revisionist[edit]

I remember the critical reception of this film at the time of its release, and it was not positive. There were a handful of admirers, but most commercially-published critics complained about the film's length, pacing, and lack of sympathetic characterizations. Kinski's vampire was viewed as pathetic, and many critics at the time did not perceive this as intentionally being the case.

I don't propose to track down newspapers of the day myself, but I would like to point that the "let's check Rotten Tomatoes and go with that" approach that we are seeing in Wikipedia is misleading modern readers.

Sterlingjones (talk) 20:52, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Rats in Delft[edit]

The Production section says the rats didn't go there as planned, but the trivia section indicates rats were released in Delft? What's correct here? Шизомби (talk) 04:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Mina / Lucy[edit]

"Herzog proceeded with his updated version of the classic German film, which could now include the original character names. Strangely, however, Jonathan Harker's wife was named 'Lucy Harker', even though her name was Mina in the original novel, and a woman named 'Lucy' was a friend of Mina's. Herzog's production reverses these roles."

This isn't an innovation. Hamilton Deane's 1927 Broadway script reversed the names, and so did the 1979 film version of the Broadway revival. WHPratt (talk) 04:30, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Color palate?[edit]

I can't believe that Roger Ebert really said that. Probably a transcription error for palette. 50.196.145.34 (talk) 04:42, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Fixed the typo. —Patrug (talk) 20:27, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Explanation for trims[edit]

Hello, MarnetteD. Here are my rationales for this morning's trims:

  • A French actress and a French release do not verify Nosferatu the Vampyre as a French film.
  • Italian ticket sales are only a small fraction of the film's gross receipts. The correct amount must be much larger.
  • Following the guidelines of WP:SUBCAT and WP:CAT, I omitted some redundant Categories:
    • "Category:Horror films" is included by "Category:1979 horror films".
    • "Category:German-language films" is included by "Category:German films", which is included by "Category:German horror films".
    • "Category:Films based on works by Bram Stoker" and "Category:Vampires in film" are both included by "Category:Dracula films", which in turn is included by "Category:Nosferatu".

I'm sorry there wasn't enough room to explain everything in the Edit Summary, so please feel free to reply here if I can help answer further questions. Thanks for your interest, and please keep up the good work on the article! I just raised the Quality assessment from Start to C class, and I think it's close to qualifying for B class. —Patrug (talk) 20:27, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

The Castle a Dream?[edit]

The film hints at this, that the castle was actually just a ruin and when the sun sets it in fact appears to be so. When Harker arrives, we see a fully complete castle along with the gypsy boy appearing at random playing a violin. Did Harker enter some type of netherworld shadow where the castle was still standing? -OberRanks (talk) 03:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Two Films?[edit]

Shouldn't this count as two separate films since the German and English language were filmed separately? I'm sure if they were released n different years it would be considered two, why not if released at the same time then?

As seen here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl4H0o_K6pg the scenes are not even identical in the two versions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.23.244.10 (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2017 (UTC)