
Shadow of the Vampire
I'm going to start this review off with saying that I will never willfully see another John Malkovich
film, ever. After In the Line of Fire, Malkovich hasn't done a solid piece of believable acting.
Shadow of the Vampire was one of the most pointless films I've ever seen, with one very fine actor
and one, at best, mediocre actor. Dafoe stole the show from Malkovich, but there wasn't much of a
show to steal, at all.
The premise, if you do not know it, is that F.W. Murnau, the director of Nosferatu, digs up an 'actor'
who ends up being a real vampire and ends up killing the crew of the movie.
Very decent premise. Written by newcomer Steven Katz, this film could have been a scary, fun ride. I've
yet to read the script, but I'm sure that the director, E. Elias Merhige, followed it to a T. And
that's one of the terrible things about the script.
There are so many useless shots, reaction shots that pertain to nothing. There is no character developement
what-so-ever. The characters, especially Malkovitch's, are so bland that I actually began to fall
asleep halfway through the film, which never happens to me.
Merhige, who's never directed a mainstream film (and it shows), takes it upon himself to make sure
the audience is completely bored with the characters and the story itself. There was so much room to
breath with this script and with the actors and with the direction... and he took none of it.
The stories background was simply told in the beginning on the film, with a title card. The idea was
that Stoker's widow would not sell the rights of Dracula to Murnau and his crew, so a different story
was written, with different names of the characters, but a similar plot. This set the stage for
something frightening and real... and yet, we know it was fiction... and that's where it dies. The
story doesn't take off. It stays stagnant, plain.
Character development was my biggest problem with the film. We find out that Murnau was using Laudium,
but not why. It ends up being an excuse for Murnau's crew to find out that Max Shreck, the name of
the 'actor', is actually a vampire. It's thrown in there for no good reason, but as an excuse, and
comes off justly so.
We find out that Shreck is infatuated with a movie star named Greta Schroeder, but we never find out
why. It parallels Dracula and his love for Mina, but does not expand at all. The first camera man is
killed, we think... we actually don't find out what happens to him. A useless kill to bring in another
photographer, Cary Elwes, who's accent is so attrocious that he finally, for his own good, dropped it
halfway through his own part in the film.
I think, the only saving grace of this entire movie (besides Dafoe in that make-up) was Eddie Izzard.
I've been a fan of his for years, his stand-up comedy is brilliant, and he did such a fine job with
his acting, I actually looked forward to every part he was on camera.
His silent 'acting' was brilliant, with so much emotion and sarcasm, it was incredible.
Udo Kier was a waste. I've never liked his acting, and he should just stick to being Madonna's little
gal pal. His only good film was My Own Private Idaho. He should have stopped after that.
What Nicolas Cage saw in this film, I have no idea. I'm certain that there were redeeming qualities
in the script, and the actors attached were probably making it a lucrative investment (he was a producer).
But where they dug up this director, I have no idea.
This movie was a big, huge waste, with bad acting, bad direction, bad everything. Eddie Izzard and
Dafoe (only in make-up, not in acting) were the only saving graces to this pathetic production.
Oh, also, whenever you see that one of the producers is acting in the film he's producing? Stay away.
I'm referring to Orian Williams, another name out of left field that no one's ever heard of. How these
people get attached to these projects... whoever they have to blow, I wish someone would let me know. I
don't give great head, but I'm sure I can buy them a hooker or something.
Save your money, don't even bother renting it.
|