The visuals in particular make it obvious that Nosferatu '79 is the work of a master. It's basically a two-part story - first a Transylvania storyline, then one from Wismar - and each of these two parts is excellent but they have little in common. Part one is a character-based vampire tale, part two is an apocalyptic depiction of the plague with Nosferatu reduced to a vague presence. They share a feeling of helplessness but little else, and as such Nosferatu seems schizophrenic to me.

The best vampire film ever made.

Insane Kinski.

An atmospheric and faithful retelling of the original - right up until the final scene, which felt oddly unnecessary and out of keeping with the rest of the film. Kinski is outstanding as the pathetic, depressive vampire - his scenes with Adjani are creepy as hell in a skin-crawling kind of way - and the plague sequences are wonderfully ominous. That said, it doesn't really add anything to the original, and the familiarity of the story sometimes meant like it was just retreading old ground.

Kinski > Schreck

As great as Kinski is, he isn't nearly as terrifying as Schrek, but Herzog improves on the original in just about every other way while still remaining very true, particularly in the numerous shadow motifs. The narrative and pacing are most notably improved, but what did it for me is how Herzog takes the atmosphere that really only shows itself in a handful of scenes in the original, and uses it for the entire film. Of course it's not his best, but it's still damn fine.

There is so much to praise. Kinski and Ganz were terrific. Herzog's direction and the camera work was perfect. Fitted the themes which only made it more haunting and at times it left this chilling feeling down my spine. A very worthy entree in the Dracula based films.

Mesmerizing color remake of Murnau's classic. This vampire is no sexy count but a loathsome, disease-spreading creature; the film is fascinating as it evokes the wretched details of the pestilence, and quite haunting.

Artistic, haunting, absolutely mesmerising. Don't expect cheap thrills. This beauty is about loneliness and melancholy.

Spooky, funny, reverent. Kinski is magnificent as the good Count, and Adjani's classic beauty is utilized to the hilt.

Herzog understood early on how emulating Murnau's German Expresionist tale, in terms of feeling and design, would give the film its deserved atmosphere. Having accomplished that task, the film still carried his signature style. Kinski is once again a joy to watch and Wagner's Vorspiel was a welcome addition. The script was laughable at times but it didn't detract from the end result. A great take on the iconic horror tale.

Herzog brilliantly uses mise-en-scene and slow, lingering shots to create a creeping sense of dread. Christ, just look at that fucking death scene and try not to feel the horrible loneliness of Kinski's Dracula as he dies in the corner of a sparsely decorated bedroom. Wonderful Victorian Gothic horror, and I actually prefer it to the original.

Fresh take on the Dracula mythos that gives the well-worn character a healthy dose of pathos. Kinski's Count is not a suave charmer like Lugosi or Cushing, but is instead a beaten down shut-in, bored with eternal life and desperate for romantic love (not just cravings of the flesh), however he can get it. Herzog's visual style is as strong as ever, nailing iconic images from the original and introducing some brilliant new scenes (the "invisible" count stalking Lucy in her mirror) to the canon.

This is equally the creepiest Dracula movie and the most peculiar. While I appreciate Herzog's patience in showing us beautiful scenery, there are a handful of scenes that overstay their welcome. But despite that qualm, the movie really is pretty great. It has the hugely talented Klaus Kinski in a truly amazing role, and he brings a level of horror and tragedy to Dracula that no actor has come close to. Herzog's moody lighting heighten and illuminate his grotesqueness quite effectively.

Love the shot of the shitting pig. But seriously folks. On a whole the film was great, despite some issues with lighting, though I guess it gives the film more of an expressionist feel. I love Tom Waits and all, but this was also the best Renfield of all the Dracula movies.

Apparently this was intended to be dead-serious, but as I watched it I thought it was supposed to be a dark comedy. Herzog's style makes it hard to tell sometimes, I guess. There are some magnificent moments (Harker's trek through the mountains to Wagner, the rats infesting the outdoor party, slow motion bat flight), but they were accompanied by a lot of ineffective scenes. The good stuff was just so good, though, that sitting through the rest was easily worth it. Kinski is fantastic.

Beautiful images and possibly the best Dracula adaptation, but it lives in this weird place between expressionism and realism that, along with awkward pacing, makes it difficult to get involved with the narrative or characters. It values style over substance at every turn, including a very nonsensical ending. The style is good, but not good enough to completely overcome the issues this approach creates.

The original Nosferatu went against prevailing standards and patterns of silent filmmaking, whereas Herzog's remake -- with its purposeful evocations of expressionist cinema and Hammer-esque quality -- seems more a product of derivation, albeit one with precious Herzogian nous. Kinski's performance is a keeper too, and perhaps the reason this minor horror overcomes its myriad shortcomings.