What makes an art-horror movie more shocking? What characteristics make a vampire more frightening to the audience? There are many elements of a film to be considered when determining which is more shocking. To know which vampire is more frightening it is important to analyze different aspects of the films and to understand Carroll’s theory of what makes a monster. Count Dracula is a monster that has survived for decades and is seen every year on Halloween.
Halloween is that time of year where kids can dress up as someone else whether it is fearsome or not. They go from door to door and say trick-or-treat in order to receive candy. Many people like to attend haunted houses in order to receive a rush of adrenaline by being spooked. When I was a kid and dressed up as Dracula I pictured Todd Browning’s portrayal. I wore a long cape with a white dress shirt underneath and black pants. My hair was slicked back and face was painted white. I also had fake teeth with fangs.
There are many different ideas of what makes a vampire according to Murnau and Browning. From an audiences perspective Nosferatu is seen as more mysterious and eerie. His appearance is like a dead corpse. He is frightening with his rodent-like features of two front pointy teeth, long sharp fingernails, a hunched back, busy eyebrows, creepy pointy nose, and dark eyes. Nosferatu has extensive make-up done to create an image of a monster. Nosferatu was a silent film so the director used a great deal of imagery. The shots of castle Orlok were used to set a spooky place where the vampire lurked. The movie setting is dark and has a blue tint to it creating the scenes for nighttime. The camera shots involved different angles some of which were a long oval to create drama within the scene. The horror in Nosferatu is caught by the darkness of the castle and the expressions on the characters faces. Hutter, a victim in Murnau’s Nosferatu keeps his distance from the vampire and is a little reluctant to follow him, but does because he needs the money. Most of the castle is very dark with many angular shapes throughout. The music that was used sounded like a flute that would sound higher pitched when they were getting closer to the vampire.
Todd Browning has a different take of Dracula and creates a handsome looking man who has dark hair that is slicked back. He wears suits, which create a look of normalcy. Dracula from Todd Browning’s perspective is a brighter happier man. This aspect of Dracula makes it easier to lure people into his castle. A lot of the shots incorporated background images such as; large cob webs, scary spiders, bats, and dirt throughout the castle. Also the director chooses to produce shots that made the castle look very large with big arches and sculptures inside.
According to Carroll’s view of what creates a monster would Nosferatu or Dracula be considered more scary or more of a monster? Carroll says that vampires are impure, disgusting, and fearful, which tells us they are considered monsters. Carroll views a vampire as dead/undead and the term used for this is fusion. The rats follow Nosferatu and are found in his coffin, which brings one to associate it with impurity and disgust. This is especially seen where the director chooses to have a close up shot of Nosferatu’s face and a rat coming out of his coffin. Dracula is considered a monster according to Carroll, but at first is not seen as disgusting as Nosferatu. Dracula is seen as handsome and normal. In this instance I believe Carroll would see Nosferatu as more scary and would fit his definition of a monster more closely, but later in the film it is revealed that both Nosferatu and Dracula are impure creatures that suck the life out of innocent beings in order to survive. In the end Dracula and Nosferatu are both monsters that would be frightening, disgusting, and impure. From what is seen in the two films I believe Carroll would lean toward the side that Nosferatu is scarier and monstrous because of the more frightening look the director gives to the character.
No comments:
Post a Comment