Dracula vs. Nosferatu



Ugh,so hard.

Dracula has Lugosi, but Nosferatu is far more interesting as a film. Only the scene in Dracula's castle comes close to matching the moody visuals of Nosferatu. Murnau's expressionist style makes Nosferatu linger in the mind far longer than Browning's stage-play aesthetic in Dracula.

You know the rule "show, don't tell"? Dracula tells, tells, tells, tells, tells.

I'm not a big fan of Silent Films, so Nosferatu didn't do much for me despite being very well made. Dracula is far from great, but I'll give it the win here.

I found Nosferatu much, much creepier...

UncleFok said it perfectly. Even compared to other Universal Monster films, Dracula keeps describing most things to us without ever showing them. Even Nosferatu, THE SILENT FILM, showed more while not being nearly as much of an awkward mess. Nosferatu is MUCH better.

Going to go with Dracula. Even with all it's problems, I find the movie to be more exciting than Nosferatu . Nosferatu just at one point deteriorates into a movie about the Plague and it just kills any momentum the film has.

I think I need a score to enjoy a movie because watching Dracula was tough because of how silent the film was. I need to watch it again to see if that was why I disliked it or if it was just that boring to me. Nosferatu had me on the edge of my seat and was a legitimately great film.

Love both but give me Dracula any day of the week. Dracula is more theatrical, which I love. Dracula is also more atmospheric. Lugosi's performance puts this film over Nosferatu in my opinion. As for the complaints of no score, watch the one where a score by Phillip Glass has been added. Some have criticized it, but I love it!

Nosferatu still gives me nightmares to this day, and while the 1931 Dracula is iconic, I actually prefer the Spanish language version.

I appreciate Nosferatu's significance in the history of film more so than I actually enjoy it. It's a fine film, but not really my cup of tea. Dracula 1931 is much more up my alley.