It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

There are not many films that give you the "creeps" in true horror fashion but Klaus Kinski is a weird guy in real life and even weirder in the movies and in all of Herzogs movies he is masterful although my favourite is Fitzcarraldo this is the definitive vampire film from the photography and direction even down to the creepy movements of the Nosferatu.I visited the actual location of the movie and would encourage everyone to visit Orrava Castle in Slovakia - From the very entrance gates with their massive Iron Dragons on the doors to the winding staircase up into the castle (many people cannot make it to the top tower and have to stop half way) it truly gives you the vampire experience above and beyond any castle with the exception of perhaps Cachtice castle (Elizabeth Bathory) above the village of Visnove!The dread and true horror of this movie entranced me as a kid and I literally couldn't take my eyes off as its that visually perfect for a horror film. There are very few horror films now that give you that tingling up your back and fear to watch them in the dark but this is a masterpiece of the bizarre as are a lot of Herzogs movies and one definitely not to be missed by any serious horror fan!

Werner Herzog's Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht is a visually stunning film. The story and scenes are clearly a homage to the original Nosferatu:A Symphony Of Horror. It is a beautiful homage to F. W. Murnau's 1922 film.Klaus Kinski plays Count Dracula, (in the 1922 movie, the rights to Bram Stoker's book Dracula could not be obtained so the Count's name was changed to Orlok.) He is very much like Max Schreck, the same gaunt appearance, the same long fingernails and rat-like features.Kinski is brilliant in the role of the lonely nobleman who is doomed to an eternity of existing on the edges of society rather than being able to fully take part in it. Kinski brings a pathos to the role and you can feel a sympathy with him even though he is a rodent-like, repellent creature. Isabelle Adjani is a standout as Lucy Harker. Her lovely yet fragile presence is perfect to play the beautiful wife of Jonathan Harker, played perfectly by Bruno Ganz. Roland Topor as Renfield was a good choice as well. His crazed laugh was almost as good as Dwight Frye who played Renfield in Tod Browning's Dracula.What makes this film a classic are the lyrical, almost dreamlike scenes that show the slow but steady buildup to horror as Lucy sees her beautiful town being destroyed by the Count and the thousands of rats that he unleashed to spread disease, panic and despair. The last supper scene with the dying diners was breathtaking in it's restrained beauty and despair.This truly is a beautiful film, slow but ultimately rewarding. The musical score as perfect in setting the mood.The only gripe I have about the film was the treatment of the animals used. Apparently, the rats that were used were badly treated and so underfed that they had started to eat each other. They were also dipped into boiling water as part of a process to dye them gray and many of them died as a result. There were also allegations of other animals being mistreated as well.But despite this, it is a wonderful film and a truly unique experience to watch.

This is forty minute film with about twenty minutes of dialogue stretched out with unending images of people walking towards camera, people walking away from camera,and long meaningless pans up, down, left, right across mostly irrelevant scenery.And so much silence. I doubt that the forty minutes of storyline footage could even have been edited to make a coherent story.The characterisation was poor and untrue to my recollection of both book and 1929 original.The acting was dire - especially Van Helsing and Lucy.Allowing Jonathan Harker to survive clearly gave them a big problem on how to end the film so the final indignity was having to watch him ride off in full daylight (yes - long shot of someone riding away from camera forever it seems) to presumably become the next Count.

(84%) Without doubt one of the better Dracula based movies ever put to film. It's certainly up there with Universal's classic, Hammer's, or pretty much anything else, even Blade 3. The opening is one of out and out horror with really hideous looking deformed mummified corpses that marks one of the sharpest descents into terror ever, but thankfully for the squeamish there's some footage of fluffy kittens playing to balance out the dread. This follows the actual Dracula story quite well, and like the novel the best part is Jonathan Harker making his way toward the count and his grim fate. Klaus Kinski's is superb as the foul monster, and even though I found him very amusing in parts there's still something very creepy about the design. The stunning Isabelle Adjani is also fantastic as Lucy Harker who fits the role better than anyone else could. The only issue here is the fact that this is at its best in the first half, while the second is just not as strong, but overall this is a must-watch for all followers of Dracula: the dirty old man.