Reviews (29)

Possession (1981) d: Zulawski, Andrzej
Incredibly strange nasty that the art house crowd will love. Mark (Sam Neill) and Anna (Isabelle Adjani) are a married couple going through a long dark marital breakdown during the political upheaval of 1970s Berlin. The highlight of which includes Anna expressing her tormented stated of mind by cutting into her neck with an electric carving-knife. On the surface the movie seems very simple: Mark figures that he has gotten to the bottom of Anna's unsettling behavior. He assumes that she is having an affair, and hires a detective to find out who it is. In probably the weirdest twist ever committed to celluloid, we find out that Anna has given birth to an octopus creature in a award-winning ten minute bile-spraying miscarriage on the Subway. If that is not enough, we discover that she is committing incest with the tentacle lover. The demented housewife struggles with leaving her family behind for her slimy monster. "...Part art film, part supernatural thriller, and part splatter horror" this movie has finally been put back in the right order and released uncut for the first time in North America, but it still does not make a lot of sense. Deep metaphor's throughout the picture make Possession incomprehensible but fun to try and figure out.

A distorted look into the mirror of love-- a must!
After many years of acquiring a cult status of mythical proportions, Zulawski's "Possession" finally comes to the viewers as it was originally supposed to be seen.

This is not an easy movie to see or to understand -- and I suppose it neither was easy to write or film. The characters are severely neurotic and seem to thrive on their bizarre behaviour (in more ways than one) yet they are somehow all too human. Like the movie ultimately suggests (once you get to see the secret trick the movie plays on the two leads), this story may be like looking into a mirror, though dark and distorted.

Meet Mark (Sam Neill), an overworked man with a mysterious job that takes him "to far away places". Meet his lovely wife, Anna (an overwhelmingly beautiful Isabelle Adjani), a sexually frustrated housewife and former ballet instructor who has much more than meets the eye going on for her.

Between quarrels and reconciliations, these two share a nice apartment in a quiet and well-to-do district of Berlin and have a five year old son, Bob, but they also share a horror that no one could have suspected, and that will make all their fantasies and nightmares come true.

After being brutally butchered by Vestron Video for its original release, "Possession" has been restored to its original lenght and sequence, therefore becoming coherent for the viewers who used to find it mind-numbingly strange.

I think of it as a very unique piece of craftmanship, part Ingmar Bergman drama, part Polanski suspense thriller, part Dario Argento gore, part Kubrick satire, part Buñuel surrealism and still somehow, very much its own.

The camera angles, the direction, the strange whims and seizures that seem to take over the characters (including one memorable and disturbing scene on a subway station with Adjani pulling all the stops not ontly to her acting abilities but to her physical strength too) are part of a very strange style Zulawski has to tell his story.

If you are accustomed to standard horror fare, then probably you will dismiss this movie as pretentious eurotrash (something it has been labeled off as countless times) but if you're game and follow the sequences and let your imagination be ensnared this will be a convulsive ride to the depths of emotion where you won't emerge as the same person.

And quite possibly, that's what all horror movies are really about at heart.

As a footnote: Isabelle Adjani won a very deserved Gold Palm at the prestigious Cannes Film Festival for her dual role in this film that, no matter how much you loved it or hated it, is still unforgettable.

The quality of the DVD in picture and sound is also of note.

What more can I say?
You either love this film or you hate it. I write this review mostly to add five more stars to the ratings this film has recieved. There is not much more I can add to what the others have said. This film is a unique experience. By American standards, all the performances are grotesquely over-acted, but if this is pretentious, then I say bring on the pretense! Isabelle Adjani is wonderful to watch even in the calmer moments, and when she moves into High Historionics she is utterly unlike anything you have ever seen (and much more impressive than the monster). The film is not light entertainment, but deep catharsis, intended slap the viewer into satori, the Dionysian dream of an Apollonian chorus. Since viewing it, I have searched for anything by Zulawski I could get my hands on, and it has not been easy to find much. This is his only film in English, and much of his work has never even been released with English subtitles, much less in American formats. (Perhaps after the mutilation Possession recieved at the hands of Vestron, Zulawski did not want to release more of his films in the United States?)

Aimless, directionless, useless
This film was a ridiculous waste of time and energy. There was no narrative to hold the scenes together. Characters were too weird and strange and violent. The whole thing seemed pointless. The only redeeming value to this film is Isabelle Adjani, who is beautiful beyond words. And the cover art and insert have some provocative images. Aside from that, SAVE YOUR MONEY.

man oh man oh man......
I was thrilled to find so many references to Polanski and Cronenberg among the reviews for this film. It does indeed combine the dark suspense and ironic humor of ROSEMARY'S BABY, the biological horror and familial disintegration of THE BROOD, and the unabashed histrionics and directorial flamboyance of Ken Russell's THE DEVILS. With themes of marital strife, familial disintegration, and psychological breakdown harking back to the former two and the in-your-face grotesquerie and visceral drama reminding the viewer of the latter two, little-known but acclaimed Polish filmmaker Andrzej Zulawski tells the story of Anna (Isabelle Adjani, in the performance of a lifetime) and Mark (Sam Neill), she a bored housewife and he an overworked... something (the film never makes clear his occupation). They share an apartment in an empty, run-down Berlin with their young son. After completing an important job of some kind, Mark comes home to his family to find things changed. He drags the truth from Anna that she has been having an affair. She insists she cannot stay with him, and leaves Mark with the child, apparently to shack up with her lover. Mark tracks down the lover, a real weirdo named Heinz (Heinrich Bennent), but after insults and fisticuffs, Heinz insists he has not seen Anna in quite a while. Mark, perplexed, hires a detective to follow her from their apartment after one of her sporadic visits, which always end in chaos. The detective manages to get in and... something really strange happens. I know what that something is, having seen the picture, but on the off-chance you haven't read the other (spoiler-inundated) reviews, I'll keep it secret. Instead I'll talk about the photography, which goes a long way toward mirroring the absolutely unhinged performances, and the set design, which provides a cool counterpoint to the feverish tenor of the film's action and dialogue. It obviously isn't going to be for everybody, and in fact some will doubtless find it repellent. Writing the film was obviously therapeutic for Zulawski (who, like Cronenberg when writing THE BROOD, was going through a nasty divorce). A friend of mine said he was more sickened by the scenes of emotional anguish than by any of the film's often-stomach-churning special effects. Just keep two things in mind: firstly, this isn't your typical "horror flick", therefore the splatterpunk/gorehound set should stay away; and secondly, this one is playing for keeps: though laced with a bitter humor, there are no light moments here AT ALL, and this should not be watched by couples on a first date, or any couple whose relationship is not secure. Also, keep impressionable children away from it. I was very impressed with what I thought would be just another dreary, over-hyped horror film and turned out to be a genuine classic (at least as far as I'm concerned). Watch POSSESSION if you like Polanski's horror films, Cronenberg's more dramatic outings, or any of Ken Russell's stuff. SCENE OF NOTE: Adjani going ABSOLUTELY NUTS and having a miscarriage (or going into labour...?) in a subway station for what seems like an eternity. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Some crowded Parisian atmosphere and the burnished presence of Omar Sharif make this coming-of-age tale a pleasure. It's the early 1960s, and an adolescent Jewish boy (Pierre Boulanger), mostly left to his own devices by an ineffectual father, makes friends with the worldly wise Persian man (Sharif) who runs a small neighborhood grocery. The kid's fumbling experiences with sexual curiosity are the reliable stuff of many a French movie, but the unlikely friendship of young Jew and old Muslim make for an offbeat through-line. Francois Dupeyron's film shifts gears in its final section, moving from its flavorful location and into the wide-open spaces, and it goes on too long with too many pieces of advice. But overall this is a warm and winning experience, with Omar Sharif holding an instructive class in the power of understated movie-star charisma. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Trés belle- The perfect antidote to Summer blockbusters
"This is the first time I've seen you rent a foreign language film on your own", said my wife, knowing I usually need heckling to watch something without frequent explosions or some sci-fi "high concept". I think that after recently reviewing I, Robot, Harry Potter III and The Day After Tomorrow I needed a change of pace and watching this beautiful film was a thoroughly pleasant way to spend a Sunday evening.

This is a coming-of-age movie set in 1960s Paris about a young Jewish boy, Moses (Momo), with a rapidly-dwindling immediate family and his burgeoning friendship with local Sufi Muslim corner shop keeper, the titular Monsieur Ibrahim. The kid is charming but probably won't be changing any of your prejudices about French teenagers when he becomes the local prostitutes' favourite and romances the girl next door.

Sharif shines as Ibrahim, coming on like the friendly uncle you never had, dispensing sage advice to young Momo just when he needs it most. And although there is tragedy lurking behind both protagonists' lives, the film is never maudlin and raises your spirits at the most unlikely times. There are also many gently comic moments such as the menu Momo and Ibrahim put together for Momo's vindictive father or trying to buy a new car with cash. People in the film tend to receive their karmic comeuppance without it seeming too forced or far-fetched.

This is a moving, gentle film about the importance of friendship and spirituality. Although set some forty years ago, the message you get at the end is that these things are just as important today and the cyclic nature of history. I thoroughly recommend this film who feels they've overdosed on Hollywood lately and wants a different kind of escapism and assurance on human nature.

Sweet and engaging, but a bit too short and sketchy...
The coming-of-age movie is a really tricky thing to pull off. Most of them are either raunchy and vapid, and then others are too introspective and just cloying. Well, this lightweight of a French film, which has gotten rave reviews for Sharif's justifiably great performance, is a little bit of both and - in the end - neither. Ibrahim begins with a toe-tapping, swingin' 60's soundtrack as Moses Schmitt (Pierre Boulanger) practices pickup lines for hookers, and for a while it does seem like a New Wave-inspired flick complete with handheld camera angles and a negletive father. Schmitt, a Jew, soon picks up with the local grocer (Sharif, the title character) who happens to be a Muslim, and as their strange friendship develops, director Duperyon's adaptation reaches high for themes of clashing religion and the shared experiences of the young and old. And for the most part, Ibrahim is an enjoyable ride. I enjoyed its light feel, Boulanger's breakout performance, and the fact that the kid is the uptight cynic and Sharif's Ibrahim turns out to be the wide-eyed life-lover.

Unfortunately, though, Ibrahim just can't juggle all of its plot strands and be a truly meaningful film in the end - the neglectful father leaves and Ibrahim adopts, Schmitt's mother drops in, the new father and son take a (lazily edited) road trip...and then the movie ends in a tragedy that you'll see coming a mile away. The movie's short and harmless, by all means, but the movie just doesn't make sense in an emotional way; we never see enough of the developing friendship of Schmitt and Boulanger. And the final tragedy? Well, the dialogue is so ham-handed it seems ripped straight from a novel (which it probably was). As much as I admired and enjoyed the light tone of Ibrahim, intelligently laced with a current of sadness beneath, it never can let the two coexist and just ends up being disappointing. GRADE: B-

Awesome
Monsieur Ibraham is an enjoyable coming of age movie. It's the French version of Cinema Paradiso. The acting is superb, especially Sharif (I didnt know he jnew French) An awesome film that will put a smile on your face.

loved it - this is a true depiction of sufism
Don't get me wrong this is not a religious movie but the undercurrent of religion flows through out the movie. This is the true depiction of Islam as not taught by the Baptist church. Islam has a very soft side and we fail to see it but the movie does a wonderful depiction of Sufism. Omar Sharif does wonders with his role - you has seen the young Omar Sharif and now it is time for the old Omar Sharif. He has a class which puts him heads and shoulders above rest of the actors and this movie is no different. Pierre Boulanger has also given us an extremely mature performance. Photography is excellent. The back ground music just binds all these together. Omar Sharif reminds me of the characters from Naguid Mahfouze's books.
this is about a French Jewish boy and his adopted father (notice not adopted son) Ibrahim - from inner city Paris to rural Turkey everything is in the palatte and they mix seamlessly. I just loved it. If you have liked Cinema Paradiso then you will love this movie.

SHARIF STILL HAS IT IN SPADES..
Monsieur Ibrahim could have so easily been played out as a timid father-son buddy flick, but while it is not a singularly unusual tale, it does carry a decent measure of frolic and sentiment.

Sharif as an elderly Muslim immigrant grocer in Paris knocks one out of the park with his bravura performance. His charisma is infectious as he spews aphorisms left and right. And his counterpart, a young boy going astray, does a poignant turn of coming of age. As he explores his budding sexuality and navigates the trials of his first love, he comes into the sphere of the elderly grocer's friendship and some interesting interactions ensue.

The first 60% of the movie contains several small pleasures, including the boy's interaction with "worker" women , the way he and the grocer play trivial tricks on his father, his infatuation with a local girl, and his trip to buy a new car. Unfortunately, the movie pretty much loses its way after that, as the two protagonists take to the road for a trip to Turkey.

The ending is ambiguous in an unsatisfying way, and, although there is a definitive denouement, I left the film not seeming to care as much about the fates of the protagonists as I would have liked to.

Yet, for its enthralling views of Turkey and the fun histrionics of Sharif, I'd surely recommend this as a decent rental. One wonders if it would stand to a second viewing though. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Occupied France the subject of a deft, breezy comedy? Believe it. Bon Voyage gathers a collection of romantics, fools, and survivors, and puts them together in Bordeaux in 1940. Loosely arranged around the ditzy figure of a famous grand-dame actress (Isabelle Adjani), these hapless creatures trip over each other very amusingly during the course of a couple of frantic days. The central character is actually a young writer (the winning Gregori Derangere), who's torn between panting after the actress or aiding the pretty daughter (Virginie Ledoyen, 8 Women) of an important scientist trying to escape to England. It would be hard to say that any of this amounts to anything substantial, but director Jean-Paul Rappeneau whips it together very attractively, and the Bordeaux location offers luscious views of a pre-war city. Rappeneau's delightful 1966 comedy La Vie de Chateau, set in Normandy just before D-Day, treads some of the same turf. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (8)

entertaining movie
this is one of the best movies i've seen so far this year. i hope ebert & roeper don't forget about it. has some of the best cinematography i've seen in a movie in a while. this is a really funny well-made movie.

enjoyed it
i was pleasantly surprised when i saw this film. it's a world war 2 comedy\drama in french that really entertains its audience. one of the better films i've seen so far this year. i hope ebert & roeper don't forget it.

Screwball romance worried by the rumble of approaching Nazis
An early, typical scene in "Bon Voyage" takes place in a Parisian jail in June, 1940.

A public defender has been called up for military service but tells his client it's no biggie, he'll be back on the case in three weeks.

"Not even Hitler wants war," the lawyer says. "He'll make peace. You'll see."

Ahh, nothing like the sound of famous last words, which happens to be one of this movie's many specialties.

But at least the onset of World War II helps the client, Frederic (Gregori Derangere), escape from prison. Fred's a hapless but occasionally dashing writer who's been falsely accused of murder, thanks to his ex, the silky, crystal-eyed gold-digger Viviane (Isabelle Adjani). Viviane hitchhikes from one sugar daddy to the next and has fled to Bordeaux with a cabinet minister (Gerard Depardieu), and with Frederic not far behind.

Once they reach the city, which is in chaos, they become entangled in a plot involving a rickety physicist, his endlessly resourceful assistant, an amiable ex-con, a shady reporter and several bottles of heavy water that absolutely, positively must not fall into the hands of the Germans.

Despite an obvious debt to "The Third Man," "Casablanca" and Tintin comics, "Bon Voyage" is actually more like a vintage screwball comedy that grows increasingly worried by the rumble of approaching Nazis. At times, the movie has maybe a few too many spies, politicians and scientists running in and out of the plot, but that's also part of its charm, especially when the heroes rise above their own concerns and work toward a greater good.

The movie was directed by Jean-Paul Rappeneau, whose previous film was 1995's fantastic "The Horseman on the Roof." That, too, was a love story set against the sprawling backdrop of war, with characters leaping from one tense situation right into another. "Bon Voyage" operates in more of a minor key but still offers a nostalgic ode to movies, and wars, that were seen in black and white.

Mildly amusing
The story features a large cast of intriguing characters representing multiple walks of life in France before and during the occupation, whose lives intersect in sometimes comical, and sometimes lethal ways.

The film's recipe tosses together a film starlet, an aspiring novelist, a government minister, a sexual predator, a band of thieves, an elderly nuclear physicist, his young and beautiful assistant, and a traitor who is spying for the Germans. Each of these characters brings a different story plot, resulting in a mix that touches on romance, comedy, intrigue, politics, suspence, and farce.

The result contains some mildly amusing scenes and some mildly suspenseful scenes. The film maintains an entertaining, driving pace, simply because so much is happening. The actors are consistently delightful, and their characters intriguing. However, I found it difficult to care much for any character, as the film did not spend enough time with any one of them for us to learn what drove them. It seemed as though the director intended them to be cardboard cutouts set in a toy theater.

The production quality is outstanding, with gorgeous period sets, costumes and lighting.

Resistance
It is a distinct pleasure to see Isabelle Adjani and Gerard Depardieu in a romantic film once again in which neither is forced to chase an Ex around the world or discover America. All they have to do here is look good and be themselves: which is quite a lot if you are Adjani (looking radiant) and Depardieu (looking slim and handsome in his rugged way).
Unfortunately they are stuck in Jean-Paul Rappeneau's "Bon Voyage," a beautiful though mindless enterprise, if there ever was one.
Beautiful and mindless is ok if it is well written and well thought out neither of which "Bon Voyage" is. (think "Two Week's Notice," "The Banger Sisters" or "The Matrix Reloaded" for that matter)
The film is set in the 1940's German occupied France and the design is flawless but ultimately "Bon Voyage" is a big, beautifully wrapped gift with a giant satin bow that when opened up and examined reveals nothing of substance. In fact it reveals nothing at all. ... Read more

Reviews (30)

Nobody Does It To You Like Roman Polanski!
Roman Polanski's THE TENANT, released in 1976 (two years after his blockbuster CHINATOWN), is my all-time favorite movie. It isn't Polanski's best film (MACBETH gets that honor in my opinion), but this story (taken from Roland Topor's equally strange but less inspired novel) really "does it to me". Polanski himself (who also co-wrote the screenplay with long-time friend and collaborator Gerard Brach) plays Trelkowski, a timid, lonely Polish immigrant trying to make ends meet as a file clerk in Paris. Polanski's performace is genuinely amazing. There are not many actors, let alone directors, who would feel so comfortable playing such a difficult and potentially career-shattering role. In the film, Trelkowski finds an apartment in a dingy old building run by the oddly sinister Monsieur Zy (Melvyn Douglas) and a rude Concierge (Shelley Winters). The previous tenant, Simone Choule, attempted suicide by jumping out of the window. Monsieur Zy tells Trelkowski that if she dies, he may have the apartment. Trelkowski hot-foots it to the hospital to see how long it'll be before he can move in. Simone lies, semi-comatose, swathed in bandages like a mummy from head to toe. When she screams upon seeing Trelkowski's face, the head nurse demands that he and Stella (Isabelle Adjani), Simone's best friend, leave immediately. Trelkowski tries to initiate a half-hearted love affair with the frumpy Stella that evening, but they are unable to connect for some reason and go their seperate ways. The next day, Trelkowski learns of Simone's death. When he moves in, he begins to notice strange things: neighbors complain of noise, usually without cause; people seem to spy on him from the communal bathroom across the way; he finds a human tooth stashed in a hole in the wall behind his wardrobe; there are knocks on the door when no one is there; he is constantly bothered by neighbors who are either obnoxious (such as Jo Van Fleet) or pitiable (like Lila Kedrova). Eventually, surrounded by artifacts from the dead girl's life, and torn apart piece by piece by his increasingly demanding neighbors, Trelkowski slips into insanity, dressing in Simone's clothes, pulling out his own tooth to match the one lodged in the wall, and even purchasing a wig and high heels, intoning things like "I think I'm pregnant" to himself in the mirror. He begins to hallucinate, and his persecution complex turns into a severe case of schizophrenia. I won't tell you the ending, but I will say that if you enjoyed REPULSION and ROSEMARY'S BABY, then you will find this to be a fitting third piece of the puzzle. Like Carole and Rosemary in those films, poor Trelkowski is a victim of urban living, a pathetic lost soul not unlike Travis Bickle of Scorcese's TAXI DRIVER (released the same year), except that Trelkowski is a danger mostly to himself. Like I said, this isn't a great film, but it's worth your time if you enjoy horror films Polanski-style. And as a vision of one man's private hell, it's indispensable. I love this movie, flaws and all. Obviously not for all tastes.

ANOTHER GREAT CINEMATIC WORK - wanna know why?
In CHINATOWN, Polanski gave us a great story of corruption. In ROSEMARY'S BABY, he studied the occult. In REPULSION, he gave us a portrait of a troubled mind. Here, in THE TENANT, Roman Polanski gives us a stunning new portrayal of absolute paranoia.

Polanski stars himself as the main character: a man who rents the apartment of a dead woman - who apparently jumped from her window.

Strangely enough, Polanski's character starts to identify with the dead woman little by little as he starts to live in the same environment... the same apartment, the same neighbours, the same window, the same talk... and - guess what! - maybe she did not commit suicide after all...

But this is just the beginning. To reveal more, it would be unthinkable.

Why is this a great film? A first rate screenplay (beautifully constructed), amazing actors (Shelley Winters and Melvyn Douglas are great!), and...

...The sets! The bulding (a parisian quartier) is absolutely fantastic. Like REAR WINDOW, it was entirely built in a sound stage - incredible!!! - allowing Mr.Polanski enough freedom to put the camera wherever he wanted.

But the great thing about this film is that (like in a state of paranoia) you never know what is truth or what is imagined. The main character starts to see, hear and discover things that may actually be true! - only at the end (with a finalle that makes perfect sense) you'll discover the truth behind it all.

After those beautiful sets, comes the cinematography by one of the top Directors of Photography: Sven Nykvist (PERSONA, CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS, ANOTHER WOMAN, CRIES AND WHISPERS, AUTUMN SONATA, and many other works)... this film has one of the best studio cinematographies I have ever seen. The music is also beautiful and you will love it from the moment it begins. Also a great achevement is sound design.

This is one of those great films where mood and atmosphere set an exemple for what to do in a film - a work where everything is right.

Unfortunately, the DVD only comes with the trailer (which is also beautiful). No photos, no commentary (I was hoping this DVD would come with a commentary by Mr.Polanski), not even a small interview with anybody. Too bad if you consider the quality of the craftsmanship of this work.

But at this incredible low price... one cannot complaint.

One of Polanski's best -- but be prepared
When this film came out in 1976, critical reaction was strongly negative. Only one writer I can recall -- Penelope Gilliatt in the New Yorker magazine -- had the insight to see beyond the general weirdness, focusing on the title character's increasing paranoia and alienation.

The unnerving plot gets underway when Trelkovsky, played disarmingly by Polanski, moves into a creepy Parisian apartment building, into a flat in which the previous tenant committed suicide. Trelkovsky gradually grows suspicious that some of his disgruntled, crabby neighbors would like to see him do the same thing. The outstanding cast includes Melvyn Douglas, Jo Van Fleet, Shelley Winters and Isabelle Adjani, all seemingly having a great time with an utterly mesmerizing story.

The film has high production values, including gorgeous, moody photography by the great Sven Nykvist (who often photographed for Ingmar Bergman), and an appropriately eerie score by Philippe Sarde. The DVD transfer is beautifully clear.

Not everyone will warm up to the bizarre, shocking ending -- and I can't possibly give away any of the details -- but suffice to say that it shows Polanski in a way that few have seen him. For all the attention that "Chinatown" gave this director in 1974, this film, coming two years later, is just about as striking in a completely different vein.

I'd go crazy too if shelly winters was my landlord
polanski films should be watched chronologically. the tenant stars polanski and documents his ascent into madness. after taking the flat of a girl who committed suicide, polanski, due to his own isolation and psychosis, begins to question his own sanity and blames it on everone else. the beauty here is that the film never allows the audience know what is real and what is concocted until its climax that, at first, resembles a comedy of errors, but develops into an incredily eerie disposition.

i will have the galouises please, i don't care for marlboro either

Movin' On Up.........
Original. Witty. Ironic. Creepy. Thoughtful. Detailed. VERY KAFKAESQUE.......For anyone who has ever felt like they had to be quiet when coming or going from their apartment...... ... Read more

Reviews (15)

Stunning and Passionate
Queen Margot relates the events preceding and following the notorious St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre (August 24, 1572). France is gripped with skirmishes between Roman Catholics and Protestants (Huguenots), leading to the doomed marriage between the royals, Catholic Margot (Adjani) and the Protestant King of Navarre, Henri (Auteuil). Following the wedding, Margot's mother, Queen Catherine de Medici, wages a Protestant slaughter in the streets of Paris and imprisons Margot and Henri. This epic history is used as a backdrop to tell the more intimate story of the coalition between Margot and her husband, as well as her relationship with her Protestant lover (Vincent Perez).

The acting, costumes, and cinematography are all first-rate. Accordingly, the movie received an Oscar nomination for best costume design, and it won 5 Cesars (the French equivalent of the Oscar), including best actress for Adjani. The director (Patrice Chéreau) succeeds brilliantly because he manages to make the film urgent, unlike most historical dramas, by focusing on the passion involved in the characters' lives. Queen Margot is also surprisingly bloody and realistic for such a picture, and the slaughter is depicted rather graphically. The only debit of the film is the overly complex and sometimes confusing political machinations that drive the narrative. However, the confused viewer should not worry about the details and enjoy the overall feel and emotion of the film. Highly recommended.

Fabulous historical fiction......
Isabel Adjani (Camile Claudel) and Vincent Perez (Swept From the Sea, Indochine) star as lovers in this film set in the time of Henri IV of France (mid-late 16th Century). If you don't like the sight of blood, you may want to avoid the film--the St Bartholmew's Day massacre (Aug. 24) is a big event--but if you love history--especially European history--especially French history--this film will prove interesting.

Queen Margot (Adjani) was a real person who was forced to marry the Spanish prince who became Henri IV (Daniel Auteil). Henri was from the Bourbon branch of the French family and on the day of his marriage to Margot, he converted to Catholicism. It was he who said, "Paris is worth a Mass."

Margot did not love Henri, and eventually he divorced her for her wanton ways and married Marie who is well remembered as his wife and widow and a co-ruler of France. While she was married to Henri, Margot is reputed to have been involved with many men. This story is a tale of the times from her perspective and reveals her affair with an ordinary soldier who happened to be in Paris the day Protestant Huguenots were massacred, and whom she saved from a vicious mob--according to this part of the story which may be fictionalize to some extent.

This is a passionate film, and years later memory bubbles of some of the more dramtic scenes pop into my mind. I am happy to see it out on DVD at last.

history with healthy doses of lust, intrigue, & brutality
From a story by Alexander Dumas, the famous nineteenth century Afro-French writer (Count of Monte Cristo, Man in the Iron Mask, Three Musketeers, etc). I actually came upon this film only because it had Jean-Hughes Anglade from Nikita and Killing Zoe. He is wonderful but the real scene stealer is Isabelle Adjani! You would never have noticed that she was well over 38 years old when then film was made, she looks so much better than she did 16 years earlier in Herzog's Nosferatu remake. Adjani is absolutely captivating, she has a screen presence that can only be compared to the likes of Ingrid Bergman or Gong Li. If you really like her, check out Camille Claudel which is probably her only other really good film.

La Reine Margot is a luscious political adventure set around the event of the terrible true-to-life St. Bartholomew's Day massacre of 1572. The supporting cast, including Anglade as Charles IX, and Vincent Perez as Adjani's lover La Mole, is consistently superb. If you haven't seen this, you are definitely missing out. La Reine Margot probably helped to influence the similar medieval themed queen epics Elizabeth (1998, UK) and Suriyothai (2001, Thailand), both of which should definitely be checked out if you enjoyed this one. One of the best films of the 1990s.

A beautiful film done a huge disservice
Queen Margot is one of the more beautiful french films you are likely to see - right up there with Tous Les Matins du Monde and La Belle Noiseuse. The story is well executed, the direction excellent, the acting top notch, the actors all exquisitely beautiful, the art departments are spectacular and the lighting and cinematography are outstanding. So why on earth did Miramax decide to put out such a horribly bad DVD transfer of this glorious film? From the opening credits, the amount of digital artifacting in the blacks is horrific - the frames literally freeze when there is no movement on screen - the audio is hollow and without depth - and picture detailing is washed out. Now, you will likely get used to these appalling bad choices on the part of the distribution company who decided to save a few bucks on a decent DVD encoding and still get wrapped up in the stunningly beautiful Isabelle Adajani (who was over 40 at the time of this film's lensing!) and the truly compelling storytelling going on in this film. However, it's just such a disappointment to see a company reknown for it's sensitivity to the "art film" genre make such a crassly ignorant decision as this one. Let's all hope that Criterion decides to honor this truly deserving film with a DVD transfer worthy of it's filmmakers. 5 stars for the film and 0 stars for the DVD itself = 3 stars overall - worth renting for those who haven't seen it, worth owning for those of us who love it and for those who can live without, wait until a proper DVD is put out!

A POWERFUL AND SEDUCTIVE WORK OF HISTORICAL FICTION...
Based upon a romantic work of historical fiction by Alexandre Dumas, "Marguerite De Valois", this is yet another triumphant period piece by Miramax Films. Critically acclaimed, the film is the winner of five Cesar Awards, as well as the prestigious Cannes Film Festival Jury Prize.

The film is set in medieval Catholic France during the reign of Charles IX. There has been unrest between the Catholic majority and the Protestant (Huguenot) minority. It is August 24, 1572, a day that will live in infamy. The day begins auspiciously enough, as it is the wedding day for Margot, the sister of Charles IX. It is an arranged marriage between Catholic Margot and Protestant Henri de Bourbon, the King of Navarre, a province in France. It is a marriage that is supposed to quell the unrest between these two warring religions. As such, many Protestants travel to Paris to see the union between these two royal personages.

After the wedding, the evil and power hungry Dowager Queen, Catherine de Medici, mother to Charles IX and his two younger brothers, Anjou and Alencon, as well as Margot, sets in motion a series of intrigues and plots and reveals what her true motives were in arranging this marriage, motives that the King of Navarre already suspects. Far from being a merger to unite Catholics and Protestants, it is a call to arms against the Protestants, resulting in the infamous St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, in which over six thousand unsuspecting Protestant men, women, and children were brutally slain.

Margot, who initially dislikes her husband and is known for her wantonness, does make a pact with him to be his ally. When the carnage begins she is appalled but is soon drawn into her family's plots and intrigues. She realizes, however, that her survival, as well as that of her husband, depends upon her new lover, La Mole, son of Coligny, the King's slain advisor. Thereafter, Catherine de Medici continues to plot against the King of Navarre, seeking his death. Margot spends most of the film trying to keep her mother and brothers in check and her husband safe, while satisfying herself with La Mole.

Isabelle Adjani is stunning in the role of Margot. Luminous and looking ethereally beautiful, she is simply magnificent. Daniel Auteuil is terrific as the beleaguered King of Navarre. He infuses the role with a warmth and humanity that makes the viewer instinctively root for him. Jean-Hugues Anglade is excellent as Charles IX, a weak king dominated by his ruthless, grasping mother who would rather see her favorite son, Anjou, on the throne. Anglade makes the role three dimensional as he adds a certain sensitivity to the role. Pascal Greggory, who plays Anjou, adds a certain delicious creepiness to the role of the envious younger brother who longs for his brother's death so that he can wear the crown. Virna Lisi is a commanding presence as the evil Catherine de Medici, who would willingly sacrifice her children for power and see so many of her plans go awry. Last but not least, Vincent Perez is excellent as handsome and loyal La Mole.

Potential viewers of this French language film should be aware that it is an extremely violent film, due to the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre. It is also sexually explicit, with frontal nudity scenes. Moreover, while the DVD provides wide screen format, excellent audio and visuals, as well as scene selections and subtitles, it does not offer any extras. Notwithstanding this, the film is one that all those who enjoy period films or historical fiction will, undoubtedly, enjoy. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

Its not about love for an Officer
Isabelle Adjani plays an obsessed woman who will go to any length to get the attention of Officer Pinson in the story of Adele H. However, what becomes apparent is it's not he who she is taken with but rather the idea of love and the sacrifice. Truffaut wrote Officer Pinson as an unworthy character to show Adele as a woman who wanted to proclaim the purity of her love. And as the film moves on you begin to feel for the bothered Officer because it becomes a joke really, that she chose him; it could have been anybody, by proving the purity of her heart she can prove her moral superiority to her father Victor Hugo, the most famous man in the world. I enjoyed this film and think its the funniest of Truffauts' films at times because Adele goes all out; there is nothing she will not stoop to and she is extremely devious. The real Adele Hugo was much older when she made this trip across the ocean to Halifax and lived to be 85 years old spending 40 years in an asylum writing in her diary in a secret code, later the diary was discovered in a New York historical library and with much struggle Truffaut brought her story to film. The film has great depth and if you like history and great cinematography you wont be disappointed. The story of Adele H relies on the point of view of one character who is completely strung out and it is a tribute to Truffauts' genius that he was able to pull it off. The film is haunting because it is a conversion narrative about a woman realizing herself in self-destruction. This is a frighteningly intelligent film.

Flawed Truffaut, Flawless Adjani.
Being a fan of Truffaut and having seen such great movies of his as THE BRIDE WORE BLACK, THE 400 BLOWS, and THE WILD CHILD i expected this film to be as great but unfortunatly it was not as great as the ones i have mentioned but it is not one of Truffaut's worst either. It manages to make the cut because of great direction, cinematography, costumes, sets, locations, and most of all because of Isabelle Adjani's great and haunting performance, a performance for which she was nominated for the Academy Award for best actress and an award she should have won but which she lost to Louise Fletcher for ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST. She portrays the daughter of Victor Hugo, Adele Hugo (hence the H in the title). The story is based on true events which were recorded in a diary the real Adele kept. Adele falls in love with a soldier she met in France and soon after he leaves her and goes to Halifax, Nova Scotia. The movie begins by showing us Adele arriving in Nova Scotia and from then on we see her try to win her love back but he reveals he had no serious intentions with her and she becomes obsessed with getting him back. She has little pride and dignity and she does what she has to do to get him back and we see her suffer and through journal entries and letters we understand what she is going through psychologically. But for some reason the movie never becomes totally emotioanlly involving which is the problem. If it had it would have been a masterpiece. I think this might be due to the script in some way. But if not for Adjani this might have been a mediocre movie. You can't take your eyes off her delicate beauty. As Truffaut once said "you could make a movie about just her face." Also look for a cameo by Truffaut as a soldier who runs into Adjani on the street.

One of the major achievements of Truffaut!
This is a must in your collection. The charismatic and sideral beauty of Isabelle Adjani enriches itself for her gifted talent as actress .
I don't think in any other actress in that age (with the exception of Shygulla or Jill Claybourgh ) who were capable to win the this defiant performance . This role is hyper difficult and Adjani carries to cosmical levels.
The story turns around the hopeless relation between Adele and a french officer. She leaves everything in France for join him : but the result is useless.
The slow of the progressive madness of Adele is told with such richeness of creative talent , that you wonder why Adjani didn't win the Academy Award with this one.
The picture is perfect in every little detail. A winner and one of the most perfect french films in the seventies.

Wow
This movie is a life story of Adele Hugo, the daughter of the famous Victor Hugo.
You must watch this movie and learn what True Love really is!

I'd give my both arms for a wife like Adele yet the man she was obsessed with didn't care at all about her!

A must see movie!

A wonderful French movie with a beautiful actress!
Isabelle Adjani again takes on a role of the rejected lover. This is the true story of Victor Hugo's daughter Adele, who enamoured of a military man, follows him to Halifax and refuses to accept his rejection. She does a fine job of depicting a young lady who has gone off the edge. The story is reminiscent of her portrayal of Camille Claudel, another excellent movie. Isabelle Adjani is beautiful to look at and does a fine job of portraying Adele. I enjoyed this film very much. For those who do not understand French, there are moments when English is used throughout the film. The subtitles do justice to the French. ... Read more

Reviews (20)

A Classic, Period!
One of Isabelle Adjani's best qualities is that no matter what character she plays, she's always convincing. 1988's "Camille Claudel" is probably her most passionate, convincing performance. From the film's moving start, to its tragic end, there is never a dull moment. Easily handling a full range of emotions, Adjani manages to charm us, sadden us and even frighten us. This is a long movie but never once did I tire of it or lose intrest. Before this movie, I had no idea who Camille Claudel was. After seeing it, I was moved to find out as much about her and her sculptures as I possibly could. Along with Adjani, Gerard Depardieu deserves credit for his outstanding performance as Rodin. Production values are meticulous right down to the smallest details. While several great movies come out every year, very few "classics" manage to break through. "Camille Claudel" is one of those who thank God, managed to do so.

Good!
Camille Claudel is a must-see. There are various topics in it that make this film interesting: the struggle of women artists of that time; the influence of Rodin on her artistic and personal life; her father's support and insight for his daughter; insanity as product of social misconception on females' role in the art world.

Great acting and a superb story. The only drawback is that it seems to be told entirely by the 'pro-Claudel's side of view'. In spite of that, this is still a movie that has depth and gives an accurate picture of that passion and conflict for being a fine artist.

Passionate, Creative and Tragic, A True Art Movie
I began watching this film on a late night of insomnia....it didn't help me to sleep and that's a good thing!

Isabelle Adjani artfully plays real life French sculpturess, Camille Claudel. She displays pure emotion and passionate reactions such that she is completely believable as the tragic yet talented Claudel. Claudel becomes Auguste Rodin's assistant and eventual lover/muse. They fight and compete for fame together and seperately with Claudel always the more talented but underscored by Rodin's jealously and fierce connections to the art world. In the end Claudel succumbs to a broken and ravaged heart betrayed in many ways by her one true love, Rodin.

I recently returned from a trip to Paris and having seen first hand the sculptures created by Claudel and Rodin I am even more impressed with this tragic story of talented yet conflicted artists. To see the obvious gentleness with which Claudel can carve marble and to feel the warmth that stems from a slab of cold stone left me mesmerized by her talent. Rodin appears clumsy and inept next to her creations despite his world reknown fame. I will always wonder what a woman of her talent could have created had she been alive today and not under the influence of an egotistical maniac!

'Camille' est magnifique!
As a French major, this is an excellent film. The language is clear (the nudity is a little inappropriate for some ages, though). I've seen this film twice some months apart and each time it was certainly engaging.

The pace was a little frustrating near the end, but considering the topic at hand (the demise of a promising artist), it is understandable. What does make an impression are the images. Many of the scenes have almost a photographic quality - very nice cinematography. The relationship between Camille and Rodin is very full of little nuances that keep the viewer engaged, too.

This is a great film for pleasure, an art classroom or a history class. Obviously, francophiles would love it, were they to see it!

Good Movie
I saw the movie on cable and it was a fascinating story about the sculptress Camille Claudel and her lover Renoir. She was a talented artist in the beginning with ambitions. Then she gets involved with Renoir, a womanizing artist and a married man. She forgets herself in his world and when he doesn't choose between her and his wife, she leaves feeling as if he is at fault for her waning popularity. Claudel was a talented artist of her day when women were considered second-class citizens and encouraged by her father to be the person she was. Unfortunately, she came across disappointment and mental distress when her relationship with Renoir ended. While she was his mistress, she wasn't herself, and without him, she lost her spirit. Her brother, who was considered the troublemaker, made himself a well-known person in diplomacy and literature. The movie examines the close relationship between Paul and his sister. It was sad that her relationship with her mother was never restored. She always felt she was a threat to her because of her work. Her father was supportive through and through. What disappointed him was the daughter that changed into someone else's shadow. Camille was a gifted woman of her time. Had she kept her sanity and let go of the demons, she would have maintained high status as Collette. The movie was a very interesting movie to watch. ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Werner Herzog creates the ultimate vampire.
Nosferatu was originally a German expressionist film, much in the style of "The Cabinet of Dr. Calgari. Moody, extremley gothic, and very scary, shot in Germany in 1922. Max Schreck played the part of Nosferatu, aka Count Orlok, the ugliest, scariest Dracula in cinematic history. Orlak is tall and skinny, shriveled, actually, with elongated limbs, and long, sharp claws for hands. He is ancient as well. We have no leading man type here, a la Christopher Lee, who was actually a sex symbol back in the late sixties, or handsome Bela, Frank Langella, or more recently, Gary Oldman. Orlak is the combination of an evil old man, mixed with a rodent. His ears are batlike, his eyes, wide and scary, a beak nose, and his full lips hide long, ratlike fangs. He is bald as well. Klaus Kinski captured Nosferatu to a tee, although Klaus is well, flat out not as ugly as Schrek. the story is virtually Dracula retold, including Harker's trip to Transylvania, the Count buying Real Estate, the Count lusting after Lucy, and Lucy's sacrifice. There is a hidden eroticism in the final scene with Lucy that must be seen to be believed. Lucy, by the way, is portrayed by the ever sexy Isabelle Adjani, and she portays a perfect damsel in distress, who knows what she must do. The contrast in Lucy's beauty, compared to Orlak's hideous repulsiveness, only adds to the erotic chemistry that is on the screen during their scenes together, especially when Lucy is first confronted by the lustful old vampire, and he demands her love. During the famous, final scene, we see Orlak consumate his vampiric love, in full detail. Lucy almost seems to be enjoying it. Orlak must have Lucy, even if it means that his very existance is the price to be paid, so he enjoys his night of bloodlust, and lovemaking to the fullest. The movie is atmospheric, and well acted throughout, although the Van Helsing character seems a bit powerless. Then again, aside from Lucy's sacrificial beauty, what can stop the evil Count Orlak.....Highly recommended.

Cerebral, dream-like horror
Nosferatu unfolds like a languorous, disturbing dream. The images have an hallucinogenic, archetypal quality: mummified human remains in an ancient tomb; the figure of a woman sitting on a beach studded with tombstones; a dead sea-captain lashed to the wheel of a deserted sailing ship.

Like Kubrick's The Shining, Nosferatu is less a standard genre film than a singular expression of a filmmaker's vision. Writer-director Werner Herzog began with F.W. Murnau's expressionist classic, mixed in elements from Bram Stoker's novel Dracula, then set about creating a meditation on the vampire myth. What would it really mean to live forever, and be compelled to feed on the blood of others? What of the unspeakable boredom? The longing for companionship? For normalcy? For death? As played by Klaus Kinski, Herzog's Dracula has spent hundreds, if not thousands of years alone with these thoughts. He is the ultimate poster boy for German angst. If not for the skill of his performance and Herzog's direction, he might have lapsed into self-parody.

There are shots that all but reproduce moments from the silent classic - right down to the overwrought body language. But Herzog, Kinski, and the rest of the cast (including Bruno Ganz as Jonathon Harker and Isabelle Adjani as his wife Lucy) keep it in check and keep it beautifully stylized, so it all works.

Probably due to the involvement of American studio 20th-Century Fox, Nosferatu was shot in both English and German versions. Both are on this double-sided DVD; comparing them is instructive, since there are non-trivial differences in the visual construction of both films. Most critics agree (and I concur) that the German one is superior.

Finally, to get an idea of whether you will like this - or any - Werner Herzog film, take the Armageddon-Matrix test: if you hated Armageddon because it was empty and overblown, but kind of liked The Matrix because of its ideas, then you may like Nosferatu. If, on the other hand, you thought Armageddon rocked, but only kind of liked The Matrix because it was slow in places, then don't even think about it.

Good remake!
Remakes don't get much better that this, lets give a round of applause to the drictor, it's hard to make a remake of a classic film. So the film follows the story of the orignal, some guy goes to see Dracula, who he later bits( the guy goes crazy). Dracula later takes a ship to England and starts a rampage of death. This film does not have as much action as the first but it's still fun to wach. Make-up for Dracula rocked. Worth every penny.

The Classic Art-House Version of Dracula
For our second outing between Kinski and Herzog we find that the director has chosen to remake, or rather retell, his favorite film of all time - 'Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens' by F.W. Murnau (1922), while at the same time adapting more of the original Stoker novel into the remake, using the original name of Count Dracula (Kinski) instead of Orlok and injecting his own take on the story of Dracula (in German), which for all intensive purposes is a story about 'tragedy' and Herzog has correctly identified this main theme that would help levitate this entry to one of the all time great art-house horror films with images of Kinski's vampire often filling many film magazine pages and posters. In fact, it is Herzog's most commercial and accessible film to date. It was this telling of the Dracula story that influenced Coppola to remake the Stoker novel entirely into a film. It was not the first time Coppola had been influenced by Herzog. Coppola learned from Kinski and Herzog in "Aguirre: Wraith of God" that guerilla film making while going up a jungle river would be just what he needed for his version of Conrad's "Hearts of Darkness" (Apocalypse Now).

The usual Kinski/Herzog display of frustration is more subtle in this film than all the others probably because the beautiful Isabelle Adjani keeps Kinski distracted long enough for him not get angry with Herzog's cruel daily shoots to 'get it right' and deliberately making the actors and actresses angry for their performances. Here everyone just looks deathly sick and move extremely slowly. Even Adjani looks paler than Kinski at times. For some reason this has given Herzog a more controlled approach to this film with certainly less improvisation and 'on the spot' acting than any of his other collaborations with Kinski. Here we see a mix of Herzog's favorite - Tarkovsky's slow shooting style while cutting in shots of water (Herzog uses a bat in slow motion) and some sort of strange cinematic art house presence that we would see in many of Andy Warhol's productions. Herzog also gets the lighting just right and the cinematography is sublime - watching Kinski materialize from the darkness is again some of the most memorable images in art house cinema ever. Herzog also brings coffins en masse for display. Black coffins play a major role in the design throughout the film. Later on during a plague thousands of rats covering a city become central to Herzog's eye for capturing horror (a formal dinner takes place among hundreds of rats because the diners have the plague and wish to make the best of it before they die) - again extremely visionary and talented. Adjani puts on an amazing performance while remaining stunning under all the white. In one classic scene where she is confronted by Kinski she looks and acts more scary than Kinski almost performing him off the screen. The ending is an erotic take on the original film with Kinski touching Adjani all over, but the acting is excellent. The final twist comes as a shocker and is a bit funny. The end scene is like something out of a great Western and looks spectacular. Also the strange atmosphere of holiness is found throughout this film more than in any other Herzog/Kinski collaboration. The use of Orchestral sounds makes it all the more eerie while at the same time retaining that spirited electric connection to the presentation of madness that Herzog and Kinski are so well noted for.

'Nosferatu the Vampyre' is probably one of the most original art house horror films ever made even though the subject matter has been beaten to death, however it still ranks up there as one of the best versions of Dracula you can see. The DVD transfer is good and crisp. The aspect ratio is 1.85:1 and there are a lot of extras including director's commentary. By the way you can get the Kinski/Herzog box set of 6 films for a few quid extra than this stand alone DVD. Go look for it.

Belief and Science Clash
Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht (1979)

Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht directed by Werner Herzog, is really a color remake of the 1922 film Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens directed by F.W. Murnau. There are a couple of name changes: Count Orlok became Count Dracula; Jonathan's fiancée Nina became Jonathan's wife Lucy. The original film was silent and in black and white, where the 1979 version is in color and is in German with English subtitles.

However the plot is close to Bram Stoker's book on Count Dracula which has a very similar plot line and story. F.W. Murnau bought the movie rights to the film; however these rights were owned by Bram's widow Florence and she refused to allow the use of the name and storyline. Even though Murnau had changed the major names of the main characters (Count Dracula, Thomas and his wife Ellen) and location enough similarity remained that Florence took the case to court and in July of 1925 the German court ordered all the copies of the movie destroyed. However a few copies did manage to survive.

While the film starts off slow it shows spectacular scenes of an ocean voyage, and waterfalls experienced during Jonathan (Bruno Ganz) Harker's journey to Count (Klaus Kinski) Dracula's castle. The contrast with his return trip is startling, since he was healthy when he started, but on the return is very sickly and barely alive. The Count's journey is very stark, his companions' death and rats board another ship, which glides into port with no one left alive on board except the rats. As the rats depart the ship one reminded of the story of Ben, where the rats were everywhere and out of control.
An interesting dilemma in this film is the direct confrontation of belief in the existence of the supernatural and sacramental with belief in the rationale of science. Science was believed to able to explain away rationally anything that happened out of the ordinary. Yet here it could not produce an answer for Lucy (Isabelle Adjani) Harker. The way that this was shown was that after consulting with the town physician, Lucy broke and crumbed the Eucharist around Jonathan to keep him locked into a chair in a corner all night, while she became the sacrificed lamb to save him from the Count and death. While she did this out of her love for Jonathan, her sacrifice resulted in the final demise of Count Dracula and her own death. Yet Jonathan in essence lives on to carry the legacy of the living dead, alive yet not fully. The last that is seen of Jonathan is when he is released from his imposed prison, by the removal of the broken host around him, he declares that he has much work to accomplish he mounts a horse and rides off. ... Read more

Description

It is 1850 in the beautiful town of Wismar. Jonathan Harker is about to leave on a long journey, despite desperate warnings from his wife Lucy.Upon his arrival, he is greeted by a pale, wraith-like figure with deep-sunken eyes, who identifies himself as Count Dracula. The events that transpire convince Harker that he is in the presence of a vampire.What he doesn't know is the magnitude of danger he, his wife and his town face as victims of the Nosferatu. A terrific remake of the 1922 original, "Nosferatu the Vampyre" stars Klaus Kinski as the title character, and the gorgeous Isabelle Adjani as the object of his bloodlust. Directed by Werner Herzog (Aguirre:The Wrath of God), this very unique film is a must-see for horror fans everywhere. ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Werner Herzog creates the ultimate vampire.
Nosferatu was originally a German expressionist film, much in the style of "The Cabinet of Dr. Calgari. Moody, extremley gothic, and very scary, shot in Germany in 1922. Max Schreck played the part of Nosferatu, aka Count Orlok, the ugliest, scariest Dracula in cinematic history. Orlak is tall and skinny, shriveled, actually, with elongated limbs, and long, sharp claws for hands. He is ancient as well. We have no leading man type here, a la Christopher Lee, who was actually a sex symbol back in the late sixties, or handsome Bela, Frank Langella, or more recently, Gary Oldman. Orlak is the combination of an evil old man, mixed with a rodent. His ears are batlike, his eyes, wide and scary, a beak nose, and his full lips hide long, ratlike fangs. He is bald as well. Klaus Kinski captured Nosferatu to a tee, although Klaus is well, flat out not as ugly as Schrek. the story is virtually Dracula retold, including Harker's trip to Transylvania, the Count buying Real Estate, the Count lusting after Lucy, and Lucy's sacrifice. There is a hidden eroticism in the final scene with Lucy that must be seen to be believed. Lucy, by the way, is portrayed by the ever sexy Isabelle Adjani, and she portays a perfect damsel in distress, who knows what she must do. The contrast in Lucy's beauty, compared to Orlak's hideous repulsiveness, only adds to the erotic chemistry that is on the screen during their scenes together, especially when Lucy is first confronted by the lustful old vampire, and he demands her love. During the famous, final scene, we see Orlak consumate his vampiric love, in full detail. Lucy almost seems to be enjoying it. Orlak must have Lucy, even if it means that his very existance is the price to be paid, so he enjoys his night of bloodlust, and lovemaking to the fullest. The movie is atmospheric, and well acted throughout, although the Van Helsing character seems a bit powerless. Then again, aside from Lucy's sacrificial beauty, what can stop the evil Count Orlak.....Highly recommended.

Cerebral, dream-like horror
Nosferatu unfolds like a languorous, disturbing dream. The images have an hallucinogenic, archetypal quality: mummified human remains in an ancient tomb; the figure of a woman sitting on a beach studded with tombstones; a dead sea-captain lashed to the wheel of a deserted sailing ship.

Like Kubrick's The Shining, Nosferatu is less a standard genre film than a singular expression of a filmmaker's vision. Writer-director Werner Herzog began with F.W. Murnau's expressionist classic, mixed in elements from Bram Stoker's novel Dracula, then set about creating a meditation on the vampire myth. What would it really mean to live forever, and be compelled to feed on the blood of others? What of the unspeakable boredom? The longing for companionship? For normalcy? For death? As played by Klaus Kinski, Herzog's Dracula has spent hundreds, if not thousands of years alone with these thoughts. He is the ultimate poster boy for German angst. If not for the skill of his performance and Herzog's direction, he might have lapsed into self-parody.

There are shots that all but reproduce moments from the silent classic - right down to the overwrought body language. But Herzog, Kinski, and the rest of the cast (including Bruno Ganz as Jonathon Harker and Isabelle Adjani as his wife Lucy) keep it in check and keep it beautifully stylized, so it all works.

Probably due to the involvement of American studio 20th-Century Fox, Nosferatu was shot in both English and German versions. Both are on this double-sided DVD; comparing them is instructive, since there are non-trivial differences in the visual construction of both films. Most critics agree (and I concur) that the German one is superior.

Finally, to get an idea of whether you will like this - or any - Werner Herzog film, take the Armageddon-Matrix test: if you hated Armageddon because it was empty and overblown, but kind of liked The Matrix because of its ideas, then you may like Nosferatu. If, on the other hand, you thought Armageddon rocked, but only kind of liked The Matrix because it was slow in places, then don't even think about it.

Good remake!
Remakes don't get much better that this, lets give a round of applause to the drictor, it's hard to make a remake of a classic film. So the film follows the story of the orignal, some guy goes to see Dracula, who he later bits( the guy goes crazy). Dracula later takes a ship to England and starts a rampage of death. This film does not have as much action as the first but it's still fun to wach. Make-up for Dracula rocked. Worth every penny.

The Classic Art-House Version of Dracula
For our second outing between Kinski and Herzog we find that the director has chosen to remake, or rather retell, his favorite film of all time - 'Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens' by F.W. Murnau (1922), while at the same time adapting more of the original Stoker novel into the remake, using the original name of Count Dracula (Kinski) instead of Orlok and injecting his own take on the story of Dracula (in German), which for all intensive purposes is a story about 'tragedy' and Herzog has correctly identified this main theme that would help levitate this entry to one of the all time great art-house horror films with images of Kinski's vampire often filling many film magazine pages and posters. In fact, it is Herzog's most commercial and accessible film to date. It was this telling of the Dracula story that influenced Coppola to remake the Stoker novel entirely into a film. It was not the first time Coppola had been influenced by Herzog. Coppola learned from Kinski and Herzog in "Aguirre: Wraith of God" that guerilla film making while going up a jungle river would be just what he needed for his version of Conrad's "Hearts of Darkness" (Apocalypse Now).

The usual Kinski/Herzog display of frustration is more subtle in this film than all the others probably because the beautiful Isabelle Adjani keeps Kinski distracted long enough for him not get angry with Herzog's cruel daily shoots to 'get it right' and deliberately making the actors and actresses angry for their performances. Here everyone just looks deathly sick and move extremely slowly. Even Adjani looks paler than Kinski at times. For some reason this has given Herzog a more controlled approach to this film with certainly less improvisation and 'on the spot' acting than any of his other collaborations with Kinski. Here we see a mix of Herzog's favorite - Tarkovsky's slow shooting style while cutting in shots of water (Herzog uses a bat in slow motion) and some sort of strange cinematic art house presence that we would see in many of Andy Warhol's productions. Herzog also gets the lighting just right and the cinematography is sublime - watching Kinski materialize from the darkness is again some of the most memorable images in art house cinema ever. Herzog also brings coffins en masse for display. Black coffins play a major role in the design throughout the film. Later on during a plague thousands of rats covering a city become central to Herzog's eye for capturing horror (a formal dinner takes place among hundreds of rats because the diners have the plague and wish to make the best of it before they die) - again extremely visionary and talented. Adjani puts on an amazing performance while remaining stunning under all the white. In one classic scene where she is confronted by Kinski she looks and acts more scary than Kinski almost performing him off the screen. The ending is an erotic take on the original film with Kinski touching Adjani all over, but the acting is excellent. The final twist comes as a shocker and is a bit funny. The end scene is like something out of a great Western and looks spectacular. Also the strange atmosphere of holiness is found throughout this film more than in any other Herzog/Kinski collaboration. The use of Orchestral sounds makes it all the more eerie while at the same time retaining that spirited electric connection to the presentation of madness that Herzog and Kinski are so well noted for.

'Nosferatu the Vampyre' is probably one of the most original art house horror films ever made even though the subject matter has been beaten to death, however it still ranks up there as one of the best versions of Dracula you can see. The DVD transfer is good and crisp. The aspect ratio is 1.85:1 and there are a lot of extras including director's commentary. By the way you can get the Kinski/Herzog box set of 6 films for a few quid extra than this stand alone DVD. Go look for it.

Belief and Science Clash
Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht (1979)

Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht directed by Werner Herzog, is really a color remake of the 1922 film Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens directed by F.W. Murnau. There are a couple of name changes: Count Orlok became Count Dracula; Jonathan's fiancée Nina became Jonathan's wife Lucy. The original film was silent and in black and white, where the 1979 version is in color and is in German with English subtitles.

However the plot is close to Bram Stoker's book on Count Dracula which has a very similar plot line and story. F.W. Murnau bought the movie rights to the film; however these rights were owned by Bram's widow Florence and she refused to allow the use of the name and storyline. Even though Murnau had changed the major names of the main characters (Count Dracula, Thomas and his wife Ellen) and location enough similarity remained that Florence took the case to court and in July of 1925 the German court ordered all the copies of the movie destroyed. However a few copies did manage to survive.

While the film starts off slow it shows spectacular scenes of an ocean voyage, and waterfalls experienced during Jonathan (Bruno Ganz) Harker's journey to Count (Klaus Kinski) Dracula's castle. The contrast with his return trip is startling, since he was healthy when he started, but on the return is very sickly and barely alive. The Count's journey is very stark, his companions' death and rats board another ship, which glides into port with no one left alive on board except the rats. As the rats depart the ship one reminded of the story of Ben, where the rats were everywhere and out of control.
An interesting dilemma in this film is the direct confrontation of belief in the existence of the supernatural and sacramental with belief in the rationale of science. Science was believed to able to explain away rationally anything that happened out of the ordinary. Yet here it could not produce an answer for Lucy (Isabelle Adjani) Harker. The way that this was shown was that after consulting with the town physician, Lucy broke and crumbed the Eucharist around Jonathan to keep him locked into a chair in a corner all night, while she became the sacrificed lamb to save him from the Count and death. While she did this out of her love for Jonathan, her sacrifice resulted in the final demise of Count Dracula and her own death. Yet Jonathan in essence lives on to carry the legacy of the living dead, alive yet not fully. The last that is seen of Jonathan is when he is released from his imposed prison, by the removal of the broken host around him, he declares that he has much work to accomplish he mounts a horse and rides off. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

2 Classic Weird Horror Flicks For The Price Of 1!
I've always wanted to see POSSESSION in its Director's Cut, although I've never seen it before but saw the video box in the horror section. A favorite of Dario Argento's, POSSESSION is the greatest horror allegory on divorce since David Cronenberg's THE BROOD. Sam Neill and Isabele Adjani are excellent in portraying the emotional distress of growing apart. It's also a comment on the state of Germany when the Berlin Wall was still erect and the Cold War was in full effect. As an added bonus, it's also a bizarre monster movie, kind of a psychosexual Frankenstein story. Great camerawork, music and ending! Highly recommended for open minds and strong stomachs!
I remember watching SHOCK when I was a kid on television (as BEYOND THE DOOR 2). The last half-hour of the movie has stuck out in my mind ever since. Mario Bava's final film (aided by his son Lamberto, a great director in his own right) is about possession, repressed memory, and psychological torment, with an excellent performance by Argento veteran Daria Nicolodi as the woman who experiences all of the above. Terrific music score by I Libra, a side project of Goblin; wish the CD soundtrack to this film would come out because I really love that opening theme! SHOCK is scarier upon repeated viewings and a must for Bava buffs!

"POSSESSION" & "SHOCK"....
Double features from Anchor Bay on one disc (one on each side). Side A.) is 1981's "Possession" with Sam Neill as Mark who works for a mysterious agency employing him to track down a man "in pink socks." His marriage to Anna (Isabelle Adjani) is disintegrating. They've become emotionally estranged. They also have a small son. Mark wants to save the marriage, he suspects she's having an affair, so he has her followed after she moves out. Anna has become increasingly erratic and deranged and has moved into an old run down apartment where she harbors a hideous secret. And commits grisly murder. Their son's teacher (also Adjani) is a dead-ringer for Anna---only softer and more nurturing. But Anna's situation is something else again. "Possession" is a strange horror film with Neill and (especially) Adjani going all out. The "secret" is truly astonishingly gross. But the ending will leave your jaw dropping. Recommended for lovers of challenging films and Adjani fans. She's incredible. Side B.) is Mario Bava's "Shock" from 1979. (AKA "Beyond the Door II") "Shock" concerns a woman whose first husband (a junkie who supposedly committed suicide) seemingly comes back to haunt her through her small son. Daria Nicolodi is excellent as Dora, the devoted mother who has remarried and moved back into the house where the first husband died and soon regrets it. Bava flourishes abound in a beautifully directed shocker with good set pieces and a creepy score. Scary, bloody with some bizarre nightmare sequences and a chilling ending. Both "Possession" and "Shock" are presented in good prints and are worthwhile for horror lovers. But "Possession" is not for the squeamish. Enjoy... ... Read more

Reviews (21)

Avoid the Hollywood remake and watch the original instead!
Why am I even writing this review? Why are you even reading this review? This pointless film is a perfect illustration of why we should never bother with Hollywood remakes of their superior European counterparts. This 1990s update of the French classic thriller is dull and boring and utterly conventional. If you watch it, you will instantly have that "deja-vu" feeling of having seen this sort of production countless times in countless Hollywood B-grade movies.

The original Diabolique, in the 1950s, was considered the best Hitchcockian thriller at the time not done by Hitchcock himself. High praise indeed. It is more suspenseful, more cinematographic, and better paced than the Hollywood update. There is really little reason to see the Hollywood version when the original is still around (heck, go rent/buy the Criterion DVD of the original!).

Is there anything worthwhile about the Hollywood version? Well, if you're a Sharon Stone or Isabelle Adjani fan, I suppose you might like this film somewhat. And it's in color and you don't have to read subtitles. But really, don't waste your time.

Thumbs Up For Diabolique
Despite criticism that the film is monotonous and boring, I rented the video and was pleasantly surprised. Sharon Stone seems to be getting better every film she does. The chemistry between Stone and Isabelle Adjani is great. Chaz Palminteri is the perfect bad guy and Kathy Bates was a great detective. Listen close, Bates has some of the best lines. I really enjoyed my first viewing. I liked it enough to watch a second and third time!! Big thumbs up to the entire cast for a job well done. I would recommend this movie to anyone.

Feeding the male libido
This is a sexploitation thriller but not all that bad, mainly because it is played somewhat tongue-in-cheek so that the plot absurdities might be overlooked in the interest of high camp, or at least in the interest of a mild diversion, and also because the women are diabolically diverting each in her own way.

Especially effective in a satirical performance is Sharon Stone as Nicole Horner, a duplicitous siren teaching math at a boy's boarding school. (Just the thought conjures up visions of a vampish Mary Kay Letoureau, although director Jeremiah Chechik studiously avoids that angle.) Her partner in crime is French actress Isabelle Adjani who plays Mia Baran, an ex-nun who is the owner of the school unhappily married to (after being seduced by, it appears) the school's sadistic task master Guy Baran played with a steady macho malevolence by Chazz Palminteri. Adjani, whom I recall (vividly) from Truffaut's L'Histoire d'Adele H. (1975) in which she played Victor Hugo's daughter Adele, obsessively in love with an English army lieutenant who didn't want her. The masochistic persona employed there is revisited here as Mia is used by both her husband and Nicole Horner, who is also Guy's mistress.

Coming lately onto the scene is Kathy Bates as a man-despising, middle-aged, slightly butch Nancy Drew who doesn't let a partial mastectomy slow her down as she sleuths about looking for clues. She has some fine one-liners, but perhaps the best in the film comes from Sharon Stone. Two of the school's middle-aged bores have just come upon Stone and Adjani in the courtyard. Stone's ever-present cigarette inspires this from one of the men: "Don't you know that second-hand smoke kills?" Sharon Stone maneuvers past him, blows smoke in his face, and replies, "Not reliably."

This is a remake of Les Diaboliques (1955) starring Simone Signoret which I have not seen. My guess is that the French version played it straight and made the ending at least plausible. Here we have not only a ridiculous ending but a plot in dire need of a plot doctor. I have also not seen the TV version, Reflections of Murder, starring that quintessential sex-kitten (and personal favorite) Tuesday Weld.

Bottom line: see this for Isabelle Adjani, whose over the top performance is garnished with an au naturale glimpse, and for Sharon Stone who is at her diabolical best. Be aware however that if sexual exploitation of the male libido is not your cup of tea, you will not like this movie, and even if it is, you may find the story more than a bit silly.

Diabolical
One of the most fun, clever and effective scary movies to be found is Henri Georges Clouzot's "Les Diaboliques". But there is a madness around in Hollywood that says it is always a good idea to have a go at remaking a masterpiece. Why? If it ain't broken, surely, don't fix it. Do these people somehow suppose that "Les Diaboliques was a bit of a failure, nice basic idea prevented from great movie status only by the absence of the great cinematic ideas present in this? Sometimes, in fairness, it must be said, the misguided attempt to remake classics has decent enough movies as a result. Think only of well known retreads of "Cat People", "The Thing from another World" or "Scarface". However this is emphatically not one of those movies. It's only possible value might be as am object of study to student filmmakers in how not to make a fun, clever and effective scary movie.

One distinguishing feature of the glorious original was it's remarkable lack of any attempt at naturalism or realism. It is set in a vividly imagined a nightmare dreamworld of shadows and violent emotions This tries to be more naturalistic and convincing. Tries and fails as the writer's and director's idea of naturalistic and convincing is a useless hodgehodge of tired Hollywood clichés. If it has a saving grace it is Kathy Bates as the annoyingly persistent cop (in Clouzot's film an unmistakable template for Peter Falk's Columbo: changing the sex to escape from looking like a tame takeoff of that TV icon was almost the only sensible idea in the movie). And while Bates is a class enough act to rescue many a bad film, she cannot rescue this. Sharon Stone is on autopilot, sleepwalking her way through a reprise of her standard evil and conniving act from countless better (if generally pretty terrible) films. Isabelle Adjani as the wife is an illustration of the film's imaginative cowardice: the film is transposed to the contemporary USA but they make her a Catholic/European type presumably just from a misplaced hope that that will get them a bit of the magical atmosphere of the original. Dream on. The direction, writing, cinematography and, Bates aside, acting, is wooden and hopeless. Given the wonderful ideas for dramatic tension thrown up by Clouzot, it is almost preposterously lacking in suspense and about as scary as "The Waltons". Most depressing and cynical of all is the lamentable changes to the ending to make it a bit more feel-good, a bit less dark, and infinitely, sorry, stupider. It is as if, knowing they had a turkey on their hands the makers felt they could throw it to the focus groups without shame. It remains just close enough to the ending of the origina