The know-it-alls, those poor purveyors of Facebook, X and what not, are at it again, with one after another proclaiming that Count Orlok is not Count Dracula, that Nosferatu is not based on Bram Stoker's legendary tale.
When I was in fifth grade, a condensed version of Nosferatu was shown in class, presented under the label, The Story of Dracula. Werner Herzog/Klaus Kinski's Nosferatu uses the names from Stoker's novel, even if Kinski's visage stems from Schreck's. Kinski is not called Orlok; he is called Dracula.
Bram Stoker's widow, Florence, won a lawsuit regarding the matter. All prints of F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu were to have been purged, because her husband's novel had been adapted without permission.
It shouldn't be that hard for even the most delusional nitwits to unravel. Pay attention to the bloody story! Nosferatu, in any incarnation, by any filmmaker (and no matter the stylized tropes), is Dracula. Period. And yet, as they always do, the know-it-alls will persist, once more never knowing (or at least never admitting to) what little-to-nothing they do, in fact, know.
Rec'd a phone call this morning from a hot-headed "acquaintance" who somehow obtained my number and reminded me that there's an Orlok/Dracula division in Rob Zombie's MUNSTERS prequel. He asked me what I thought of that. I told the jackass that I'm aware of the visual homage and that THE MUNSTERS acts as its own, comedic niche. As far as NOSFERATU 1922/1979/2023/2024 go, their foundation rolls from Bram Stoker's DRACULA. NOSFERATU is DRACULA by a different name. Period. How effing hard is it to make this inference? Has a portion of the fanboy world truly switched shit for brains? I mean, come on already!
ReplyDelete