Shadow of the Vampire

Name: Shadow of the Vampire
Genre: Drama, Horror
Released: December 29, 2000
Duration: 92 min
Rating: 71
Cast: John Malkovich, Willem Dafoe

2000

METASCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 31 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 87 Ratings

See All

7.5

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.5	Your Score
7.5	User Score Generally favorable reviews based on 87 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

Shadow Of The Vampire

Now Playing: Shadow Of The Vampire

Movie Details & Credits

Lions Gate Films Home Entertainment | Release Date: December 29, 2000 | R

Starring: John Malkovich, Willem Dafoe

Summary: A witty, atmospheric, and deliciously feverish tale inspired by the great German film director F. W. Murnau and the making of his unforgettable "Nosferatu." (Lions Gate Films)

Director: E. Elias Merhige

Genre(s): Drama, Horror

Rating: R

Runtime: 92 min

See All Details and Credits

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

100

Peter Travers

It's a mesmerizing spectacle. Read full review

Jay Carr

He's (Dafoe) the stuff bad dreams are made of. He's also the best movie vampire since Schreck's original. He deserves a bloody Oscar. Read full review

Lisa Schwarzbaum

Kicky, elaborately constructed fantasy. Read full review

Susan Wloszczyna

Feast upon a career-peak Willem Dafoe performance as a bat-eared fiend who is foul, funny, ferocious, forlorn and unforgettable. Read full review

TV Guide Magazine Maitland McDonagh

A creepy, clever, film buff's delight of a fantasy. Read full review

Marc Savlov

For all its stentorian performances, though, Shadow of the Vampire is a bit much, from the detailed period sets to the final, bloody scene. Read full review

Andrew O'Hehir

An academic exercise driven by adolescent ideas that never shape themselves into a narrative: in short, a movie that can never dislodge the art fatally wedged up its butt. Read full review

SEE ALL 31 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

Meth-dude

Nov 5, 2018

With strong acting performances (especially Malkovich and Dafoe), an interesting story, great cinematography and an eerie atmosphere, Shadow of the Vampire is not only one of the strongest horror movie of the 2000s, it's also one of the best vampire movie out there.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

KarthXLR

Mar 25, 2011

While Dafoe and Malkovich deliver on all fronts, the acting by a good majority of the cast is mediocre-to-bad at times. The story is very slow, boring at times. Before I forget, it's not scary either. Nothing to fear children.

0 of 5 users found this helpful05

FilipeNeto

Aug 24, 2018

This film is about another film, portraying, very fictionally, the filming of the iconic silent film "Nosferatu" (1922). The logic of the film rests on an urban myth, whereby Friedrich Murnau (the film's director) hired a true vampire to the main role. The problem with this movie is that,This film is about another film, portraying, very fictionally, the filming of the iconic silent film "Nosferatu" (1922). The logic of the film rests on an urban myth, whereby Friedrich Murnau (the film's director) hired a true vampire to the main role. The problem with this movie is that, unless you're a total movie buff, you'll hardly know "Nosferatu" well enough to know the existence of this urban myth, and this will make this movie a bit illogical and meaningless. The secret to understanding the film also goes through one or two questions that are implicitly posed. The first is easy: how far should we go in the name of art? Is the perfection of the finished work worth any sacrifice? The second question is who is the worst monster? Orlock, driven by his lust for blood, or Murnau, driven by his artistic blindness? I really enjoyed the performance of Willem Defoe, who gave life to the vampire-actor. He not only was able to recreate the gestures and affected manners of the character we see in the silent movie, as he made him mysterious and a little fatalistic in the way he thinks and behaves. John Malkovich also shone in the role of an obese filmmaker, and has a few phrases in the dialogue that are true homages to the cinematographic art. The cinematography and visual beauty of the opening credits, in shades of black and sepia, are other positive aspects of a film unable to please the general public but perfectly able to please the most skilled and knowledgeable audiences.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

ERG1008

Aug 23, 2010

Man tries to make Dracula film without Bram Stoker's consent, goes to eerie locations, gets oddball to play the vampire, things go wrong.
With a cast as decent as this & the story based on such a classic film, it's a shame this was nowhere near as good as it could have been.
It begins veryMan tries to make Dracula film without Bram Stoker's consent, goes to eerie locations, gets oddball to play the vampire, things go wrong.
With a cast as decent as this & the story based on such a classic film, it's a shame this was nowhere near as good as it could have been.
It begins very well but quickly starts to jump about & become disjointed & does seemed very rushed by the end.
Willem Dafoe is amazing as Max Schrek but they should have used him more sparingly & made him even more mysterious.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

SEE ALL 4 REVIEWS