Elements of `Vampire' don't add up
By CHRIS BANNISTER
Scene Movie Critic
Vampire films have been a staple of the film industry since its infancy. They have ranged from comical to sexy to terrifying and everywhere in between. "Shadow of the Vampire" meditates on the making of vampire films, and films as a whole, by exploring a fictional premise based on the filming of "Nosferatu," a vampire film created by premier German director F.W. Murnau in 1922.
In "Shadow of the Vampire," Murnau, played by John Malkovich, is obsessed with making a realistic vampire film and, to that end, has secretly obtained Max Shreck (Willem Dafoe), a real vampire, to play the part of Nosferatu. Murnau hides the vampire's true identity by stating that his rather eccentric behavior is a result of his practice of never coming out of character while making the film.
However, as the film progresses, the tenuous bargain struck between Murnau and Shreck begins to collapse as the vampire's blood lust leads him to make victims out of the crew.
Separately, the various elements of "Shadow of the Vampire" are each superb; however, the film ultimately fails to bring the elements together as a whole and ultimately flounders.
The performances, the monologues of the characters and the photographic style are each elements worthy of praise. Both Willem Dafoe and John Malkovich turn in great performances as their respective characters.
The make-up effects used to transform Dafoe into Nosferatu makes him almost wholly unrecognizable; yet, he is able to communicate a person within the vampire that entices a mixture of fear and sympathy.
Meanwhile, Malkovich is able to communicate Murnau's artistic hunger that pushes him towards mania.
Both Malkovich and Dafoe shine during their respective monologues, which are well written and explore the darker limits of filmmaking, reality and the human soul. For example, the monologue in which Murnau elucidates the sacrifices required for art creates an interesting debate over what the true nature of art is.
These debates are further explored in the film's photographic style and camera work. In particular, the use of extreme contrasts in lighting and shadows follows and re-evaluates the Expressionist style of the original "Nosferatu."
Thus, with these core elements accomplished with such skill, how can "Shadow of the Vampire" ultimately flounder? The film fails because it becomes too concerned with accomplishing the elements that it forgets to create a whole. Basically, it forgets that, at its heart, it is a vampire film. It is never able to effectively accomplish the most basic goal of a vampire film: to create fear and suspense.
Also, there are too many characters begging to be explored more thoroughly. For example, the second film director and the star actress are both interesting characters, but we are only given hints of their inner workings. The film takes time away from creating suspense or examining its main characters by dabbling in sketches that lead nowhere.
There are so many episodes in "Shadow of the Vampire" that it does not have time to really lengthen its most important moments to create suspense. If the film had pared down its scope, examining only a few characters and episodes, it would have functioned more effectively as a whole.
As it stands, "Shadow of the Vampire," although intriguing, is only slightly above mediocre, and thus creates a rather lukewarm response.
- Three shamrocks (out of five)
All Scene Stories for Thursday, February 1, 2001
