As a young horror movie fan, I was always taken aback by photos from Nosferatu, a silent and unauthorized film version of Bram Stoker’s Dracula made in 1922. What struck me most was the strange appearance of the vampire, played by Max Schreck. He seemed too weird and unlike the vampires I’d seen portrayed in more recent movies by Bela Lugosi and Christopher Lee. There was something freakish, yet appealing, to Schreck’s mannerisms and facial features.
Shadow of the Vampire, a fictional behind-the-scenes look at the making of Nosferatu, proposes that Max Schreck was, in fact, a real vampire hired to play the part of the vampire in F. W. Murnau’s 1922 film. Murnau (John Malkovich) is determined to make a successful picture despite the fact that Schreck (Willem Dafoe) seems to be more interested in attacking his co-stars than acting.
The script, by Steven Katz, portrays Murnau as a obsessed perfectionist who will stop at almost nothing to get this movie made, even if it means putting his crew and cast in danger. Dafoe’s performance as Schreck is a simultaneous portrait of sadness and near-camp that parallels the movie’s dual personality as a pseudo-documentary and a horror film.
There is a lot to like about Shadow of the Vampire, from the lighting and set design to the subtle performances by Eddie Izzard as Gustav and Udo Kier as the film’s producer. The idea of a real vampire playing the most convincing screen vampire makes for a great story and the film makes it seem somewhat plausible. What I didn’t like about the movie, though, is the sometimes plodding pacing and the odd and wholly unsatisfactory ending.
Still, as escapist entertainment, Shadow of the Vampire is well worth seeing, especially for Willem Dafoe’s Oscar-nominated performance and its interesting premise. Too bad it’s not a true story.
3.0 out of 5.0 stars
Buy on Amazon!
