Gothicmurmur

#nosferatu 2024 script

Friedrich Harding is one of those characters who understands Ellen very well. He has figured out her passionate nature — because he is exactly the same. And in this scene, of course, he is right: he senses that Ellen’s “fancies” are connected to her sexuality.

This is the moment in the film when Ellen still has no idea who Count Orlok is: to her, he is still only a shadow, a “presence.” She thinks she loves her newlywed husband: he is handsome, sweet, and gives her sex — which is what she needs… Not in the quantities that would actually satisfy her, of course, but still.

But that is exactly the point: this is not enough to call Ellen and Thomas’s marriage “great love.” The motives of both are more or less transparent — and it does not look like tantric unity in eternity, or a union of energies.

(It’s the same old story: a chronic heroine and an average man)

#nosferatu 2024 script

This is what the kissing scene in the Hardings’ parlour should actually have looked like: Ellen hurting Thomas; the frightened children screaming that there is a monster in the house… Monstrosity and sexuality intertwined — exactly what Eggers was trying to say. The sexuality of the protagonist, which both she and society perceive as something terrible, something that carries an inevitable threat.

Your comment actually shows the difference between how the film is perceived by a prepared audience and by a mainstream viewer. I’m not trying to devalue Eggers’s work — I’m talking about what I see happening in the reception of the film.

A viewer with no context for Eggers’s visual language comes to the cinema; they don’t know what the film is really going to be about, and this may be the first Eggers film they have ever seen. They see a young couple kissing passionately in a parlour — and to them, it does not read as frightening, but as hot.

And this is exactly the scene that will later be used as “proof” of how deeply Ellen loved Thomas, and that “she will wait for him in heaven.” This is exactly the kind of clip that gets comments on Instagram like “I want what they have,” “me and who?”, “what a couple,” and so on.

NOSFERATU (2024) dir. robert eggers

Nosferatu: rats, anxiety and Transylvanian folk

#nosferatu 2024 script

Friedrich Harding is one of those characters who understands Ellen very well. He has figured out her passionate nature — because he is exactly the same. And in this scene, of course, he is right: he senses that Ellen’s “fancies” are connected to her sexuality.

This is the moment in the film when Ellen still has no idea who Count Orlok is: to her, he is still only a shadow, a “presence.” She thinks she loves her newlywed husband: he is handsome, sweet, and gives her sex — which is what she needs… Not in the quantities that would actually satisfy her, of course, but still.

But that is exactly the point: this is not enough to call Ellen and Thomas’s marriage “great love.” The motives of both are more or less transparent — and it does not look like tantric unity in eternity, or a union of energies.

Who is Clara talking about? Who is this “she” who might feed her to the monster? At first glance, it may seem that Clara is talking about her sister — and on the most basic, most surface-level reading of the film, that is indeed the case. But Ellen is in the room — and later in the story, it is Ellen who lets Orlok into the Harding house, condemning both Clara and Louise to be eaten. A children’s game, which the viewer is hardly likely to notice, serves as foreshadowing.

coward for not drawing orlok's shiny bald head /j

I commissioned this Nosferatu artwork, and I love it so much!!! But yes, the artist was a little bit of a coward, too 😅

Inside 'Nosferatu': A Conversation with Robert Eggers and Willem Dafoe

Also Robert Eggers: *makes the most horny and sexy scene in the cinema history

(The Scariest Monster Is Patriarchy)

One of the earliest Gothic novels, The Mysteries of Udolpho feels like a visit to the factory where all Gothic tropes were first manufactured: a persecuted heroine, a gloomy castle, ghosts of the past, family secrets, and so on. The only problem is that everything still seems to smell of fresh paint; the parts haven't even been packaged yet, let alone assembled into something truly coherent.

Ann Radcliffe hardly seems concerned with questions of plot structure or narrative economy. In 1794, she is simply enjoying the Gothic atmosphere, paying little attention to why she needs so many characters or why most of her plot threads lead nowhere.

The story revolves around Emily St. Aubert, a young woman whose father has died. Unable to inherit his property, she falls under the guardianship of her aunt and her aunt's husband, who take her to a remote castle and effectively keep her imprisoned there.

The skeleton of the plot is actually quite simple, yet Radcliffe manages to pile onto it so many mysterious, absurd, intriguing, and oddly charming elements that the audiobook runs for 37 hours (yes, I spent an entire week listening to it!). And if you approach the novel as a student of early Gothic fiction, it was probably worth it.

Radcliffe clearly wanted to write something mystical and romantic. What she ended up writing, however, is a novel about why feminism is necessary.

Watching the way Emily's older relatives treat her, you realize that young women were not considered full human beings for a very long time. And the real horror does not come from evil forces or the ghosts supposedly lurking in the castle. What is genuinely frightening is how many times Emily could have been sexually assaulted simply because some man decided he no longer wished to protect her. Her safety depends entirely on the goodwill of whichever man currently has authority over her—and on nothing else.

That is genuinely terrifying.

The only character whose antics I consistently enjoyed was the heroine's stalker, Count Morano. He is responsible for introducing a delightful dose of horny chaos into the narrative.

And no, his attempts to become a demonic Gothic lover fail completely. Morano is, at heart, a ridiculous character. He is not frightening, not tragic, and not particularly dangerous—just incredibly persistent.

🎵 If there's something strange in your Gothic plot... 🎵

Who do we call? The Dark Romance Team!

🦇 Orlok — heavy artillery, a weapon of mass Gothic destruction

🧛 Dracula — strategic seduction

🎭 The Phantom of the Opera — atmosphere engineer

🌪️ Heathcliff — toxic obsession

The Dark Romance Team descends over Tuscany to save the plot.

*Sigh* I'm tired boss....

To get this out of the way, nor the domestic release (which I own) nor the parents guide at Imdb has any warnings of that sort for this film.

But I’m not even a little bit surprised by that. That’s pretty much the mainstream interpretation of this film. I would be surprised if it were something different. But, as we’ve discussed before, it’s incorrect when it comes to Ellen and Orlok and the narrative of the film proves it, which explains why that rating isn’t official. It’s going to take a long time for this film to be recognized and appreciated for what it truly is, and I said it many times by now.

Trigger Warning: discussions of sexual assault