NOSFERATU (1922)

Nosferatu, that name alone can chill the blood. Does it not sound like the call of a deathbird? Nosferatu is probably one of the luckiest films of all time. All copies were ordered destroyed after F.W Murnau failed to acquire filming rights for Dracula. He had changed the story just enough to seperate it from Stoker's story. Florence Stoker, his widow, noticed more than enough similarity as far as she was concerned. If this bitch (and I use the word passionately) was successful in her bid to wipe this film out, the world would have lost a great piece of art. Thanks to bootleggers and maybe film collectors, the movie did survive and can now be found in most DVD bargain bins often in varying degree's of quality. There seem to be three versions (63, 83, and 93 minutes) but if I had to reccomend one, I'd pick up the KINO ON VIDEO version which contains an extra disc with the film using it's original German intertitles, among other things. It contains a most fascinating documentary entitled "The Language of Shadows" which links Nosferatu to the occult even more than it already has been. Nosferatu is one of the better classic films that used on-location shots rather than sets, but the authentic scenes throughout the film surely enhance it, especially the scenes in and around Count Orlok's castle. Now some may say location shooting disqualifies the film as a true German Expressionist piece. I disagree. The use of shadow is far too heavy in this film to not count it as German Expressionist.

Count Orlok was the first and best screen vampire. He has easily retained his title 88 years later. He was played by Max Schreck, who's name in German means terror (not a publicity campaign). Interestingly enough, this name was used for a business man villain in the 1992 masterpiece, BATMAN RETURNS. Schreck was chosen for the vampire due to his "ugliness" and was indeed a strange man who enjoyed long walks through dark forests. Shreck acted in several films, but will be remembered primarily for this.

As with my F13 review, a summary of such a familiar story is rather pointless. There are only a couple of key moments I desire to mention. When Knock (Harker, or Hutter's boss) Reads the letter from Orlok stating his wish to purchase a home in Wisborg, we can see an unrecognizable language. We are never told what exactly this says, but it is obviously a Demonic or occult language and seeing it written down is very creepy, I find. Perhaps more so that it's never explained.... The scene of Orlok traveling by sea is very creepy and desolate, almost a sign of utter hopelessness. This hopeless feeling is greatly expanded after Orlok brings his rats (and the plague) to Wisborg. The scene of a man drawing crosses in chalk on doors throughout the town truly captures desolation in a way no other vampire film did, until Nosferatu was remade in 1979 by Herzog (We'll get to that, don't you worry...).

Perhaps it's the fact Nosferatu was a location film that elevates it's level of terror well above it's contemporaries. Still to this day the film can chill, while others of the period, though amazing in their own right, have lost the power to scare. But if there is any criticism to be made of Nosferatu, we can place the blame on Gustav Von Wagenheim (Harker, Hutter) who's overacting (even for the silent period) gets in the way of true terror in many cases. Orlok and Knock are the only characters who are utterly convincing throughout and many of the film's best scenes involve them. Still Wagenheim is a fun character to watch, even if his acting is often far too over the top. I'm simply pointing out what has become a dated flaw. This "flaw" does not impede my love for this film in any way.

Albin Grau, who produced the film, was an enthusiastic occultist who published numerous materials dedicated to his Occult beliefs. He claimed that during WW1, as a German soilder somewhere in eastern Europe, to have heard of real life vampires. He was shown a document claiming an exhumed body was found to have sharp teeth protruding from the mouth and no signs of decomposition. The lord's prayer was read over it, whereupon it groaned and died. A sidenote, but something I had to share with readers.....

Perhaps Nosferatu has lost much of it's original impact. I've still watched it countless times and it is probably the greatest of all Silent Films. However, I tend to look at the film from an artistic approach (as I do many of the period). It is also a film that creates a mood of dread, utter hoplessness and thus presents an "end of the world" feeling of doom, something that no other period piece has accomplished, in my mind. There are many subtle sexual themes that critics try to point out, but I hold my belief that if Murnau was sending us any message, it probably had more to do with Occultism (Prana film, who made this their first and only film, desired to make occult pictures). Murnau was lost from us at far too young an age. I don't believe I've seen any other of his films, but seeing Nosferatu leaves me screaming for more. FIVE STARS OUT OF FIVE.

FRIDAY THE 13TH (1980)

Let it be known this review was chosen for now because it is fresh in my mind. I'd love to give all the F13 movies the COTF treatment eventually so this will get that ball rolling. There is so much I can say about this film, so I'll try to point out what is important and also about how this technically mediocre film is held in such high regard among the horror community. Technically of course, doesn't always apply. The fact that I'd watch this any time rather than the Oscar-winning Shakespeare In Love says something about what this film means.

By now we know the story. Kids go to camp, smoke up, have sex, wander off by themselves and generally make other stupid decisions that permit their demise. Some people will cite Psycho or Black Christmas and sometimes Halloween as the film that established the slasher genre. While they all predate Friday the 13th, it is easy to forget what this film established: The rules of the slasher film. Have sex? You die. Light up that dube? Don't even think about it. Wander off to do whatever unaccompanied? You're so fucking dead. F13 presented this pattern perhaps more clearly than any predecessor.

To give a general summary of what happens in this film, is rather pointless. The slasher movie has it's clear, distinct promises. Usually a bloody knife on the poster let's us know exactly what we're in for. What I can summarize is the creativity of the kills (for the most part) and the subtle touch of all ominous music following the killer, not allowing the false alarms any music. Many slasher movies are guilty of building up the fake scares, giving them music, usually a sign of desperation for the writer. Here we have a few but wisely, there is no music. I suppose ominous music played during Crazy Ralph's visit scene, but only to suggest he MIGHT be the killer. Speaking of him, he is the Slasher genre's first soothsayer, the original prophet of doom. RIP Walt Gorney.

The film made about 70 times what it cost to make. With a profit like that, Paramount had an idea: Franchise. Jason's brief appearance at the end was meant as nothing more than a joke to the writers, but he was easily capable of taking up his mother's hobby for the endless sequels. Thank god for that. It remains the highest grossing F13 film, taking in overall number of tickets sold. Nobody thought this was ever possible, not least of which Betsy Palmer, who played Pamela Voorhees. Palmer, needed a new car. She read the script and said "what a piece of shit! No one will see this thing, it will come, it will go...." so she accepted the role, unafraid it would ruin her friendly public image. F13 is easily what she will most be remembered for, and she has since embraced her contribution to the franchise. Siskel and Ebert famously spent an entire show trashing the film and urging angry parents to write letters to Betsy Palmer, detailing their disgust. Sadly, I don't think Ebert has revisited these movies yet, but he should.

Almost no one will say this is the best film of the franchise. Personally after watching these films many times over the last decade, I am still unsure. But it contends. Getting into the F13 movies almost changed my life in a way. Around the time I did, I became exposed to the horror genre more and more. One thing led to another, and continues to this day. The film has a 70's feel no matter what they say but these early 80's slasher films have a distinct charm to them, almost unexplainable. The sequel has the same feel. The film established the campground as a normal hacking site and has that atmosphere that no amount of money can buy. Greatly flawed, technically not spectacular, somehow it's what we want in a film. It just appeals to so many people on so many levels and I'll never forget the joy of being a worry-free 13 year old spending the summer of 2001 enjoying this and it's sequels. Imperative to see at a young age. FOUR STARS OUT OF FIVE.

MURDERS IN THE RUE MORGUE (1932)

I've yet to see another incarnation of Edgar Allen Poe's famous tale, and I'm in no rush to. I'm perfectly content with this first 1932 version. Having said that, the film contains plenty of flaws which I'll point out. The film has mostly to do with Dr. Mirakle (Bela Lugosi in yet another crazy wide-eyed role) a scientist who's life has been devoted to one twisted idea: To fuse the blood of man with that of an ape. He seeks only to accomplish this task in order to prove human kinship with the ape. This "scientist" makes his way "trapping the pennies of fools" with a circus show that in his perverted world he calls science.

During a performance, a young spectator by the name of Camille catches the attention of Mirakle's sideshow pet ape: Erik. She comes for a close up view with her boyfriend Pierre, whom Erik attempts to kill out of jealousy. Mirakle knows Erik loves Camille and sends his servant to follow her home.

Mirakle's spare time usually consists of kidnapping women, following women, injecting ape blood into women and so forth. He sends Camille a new hat, which worries Pierre as he knows something is up with Mirakle. We can all sense where this is going. Camille is kidnapped...... Pierre comes to the rescue..... Mirakle gets what he deserves......Erik kills and possibly(?) rapes Camille's poor mother..... You fill in the blanks.

Highly contraversial when first released, when viewed now it is hard to take the storyline seriously. It has become tried and cliche and the number of examples is just enormous. The reason I truly appreciate this film: The sets. MITRM is in many ways, another art film. It's 1845 Paris design is unforgettable. From the beautiful painted sky to the Caligari-ish building scenes, this film is filled with eye candy. I cannot emphasize enough how good the sets are and this is the film's area of strengh.

As I implied, the story is perhaps a little lacking and cliche but it can still entertain you. No one can talk to an ape and make it convincing the way Bela Lugosi can and he delivers the goods. Erik the ape is shown in close up scenes as a real ape, and in other scenes as a guy in an ape suit. The comic relief throughout the film pointlessly beefs up what is already a short running time (the credits roll an hour in) in what could have replaced by Mirakle or Erik beefing up their kill counts. The only big complaint I have about this film is an ever so obtrusive singing scene halfway in, something I feel helps to date the film.

This is one of the more overlooked of the fantastic Universal Horror films but remains one to be seen by all, even if only once. From a technical standpoint, the film evens itself out through bad writing and fantastic art but it's the latter reason for which I enjoy it, not to mention Lugosi's hammy acting and the general atmosphere created by Universal horror films throughout this period. This is a film for which I impose my bias, my love of the style and what is associated with it. A DIFFERENT KIND OF FIVE STARS OUT OF FIVE