Nadja (1994)

A sometimes-interesting black and white independent art house cheapie produced by David Lynch that's sort of like a homage to "Dracula's Daughter (1936)". In New York City, another daughter of Bela Lugosi's Dracula (public domain closeups of a bearded Bela from WHITE ZOMBIE are utilized to sub for her Old Man) deals with her own vampirism and hopes to be freed from her curse, since her infamous dad was recently destroyed by Van Helsing (Peter Fonda!). The leading actress is good but Fonda is rather awkward. Of course the film finds it necessary to over-do the lesbian angle. Too many distorted camera shots at times, but worth a look for the heartfelt tribute to old Universal Horror. It's played very serious, at least ... perhaps too serious. ** out of ****

" Derek Jarman meets David Lynch " is how presenter Bill Bailey described NADJA . If I was a presenter I would have described as a big pile of art house crap but " Derek Jarman meets David Lynch " is the same difference . I've nothing against art house horror , I thought THE ADDICTION was okay while I loved the visual style of THE KEEP but there has to be a limit and NADJA goes way beyond that limit and ends up unwatchable for those of us who aren't obsessed with pretentious nonsense The story follows eponymous vampire Nadja who steps foot in America in a bizarre remake of DRACULA'S DAUGHTER . Everything in the narrative is sacrificed for the visual style and more often than not it's impossible to understand what the hell is going on since the picture fades to pixellated shots that are out of focus , cross fades , slow motion sound fade outs and other directorial tricks from Michael Almereyda . No doubt the director thought he was being clever but it makes the story unfathomable and isn't helped by some very poor performances indeed . It's impossible to believe that any of the cast - Including Peter Fonda - are professional actors A very poor film that will only appeal to art house junkies and if it wasn't for the great soundtrack by Portishead , My Bloody Valentine and The Verve this steaming pile of ostentatious excrement would have received even less than three out of ten

As I just said in my Summary, this is just a comment to comment on the comments that have been made about the movie. This is not the typical vampire movie. It's NOT action packed. It is filmed in black and white using techniques that are meant to mimic an older movie while adding a touch of modern film-making at the same time. You can see a bit of Lynch's influence in the way that Michael Almereyda directs the camera.The actors in the movie don't do their absolute best but do a very good job. And Elina Löwensohn's eyes really are hypnotic. They are truly the eyes of a real Dracula descendant. The real female Dracula would need to have those eyes and facial expressions. Casting her was a very good decision.In my opinion it's a good movie that is meant to disappoint normal vampire-movie buffs. Keep an open mind and remember that this is a real horror movie(like the older films. There are no screaming adolescents waiting to be killed in a very stupid way). It's not a terror or action movie. Now, ten years after it was released I give it an 8 out of 10

"Nadja" falls into a category of films I would describe as 'vampire movies for adults.' Viewers seeking an action-packed gorefest along the lines of "From Dusk Till Dawn" (1996) or "Blade II" (2002) should bypass "Nadja". Moody, opiated, and dreamily ethereal, it is similar in this respect to Guy Maddin's more recent "Dracula: Pages from a Virgin's Diary" (2002) and not most other modern vampire flicks. Its emphasis on the emotional and evocative rather than physical aspects of the genre puts it in the company of Tony Scott's "The Hunger" (1983) and Po-Chih Leong's "Immortality" (aka "The Wisdom of Crocodiles") (1998). Shot on black-and-white film, a dying art form, with a good musical score by Portishead, it avoids sinking into pretentiousness with occasional, self-parodying irony (example: "He says he's dying ... for a cigarette."). A major drawback to the film is director Michael Almereyda's overuse of the Pixelvision camera, a technology he has used in the past and should have left there. The acting is spotty, but that's of little importance in a film emphasizing atmosphere over character portrayal. Elina Lowensohn in the title role and Peter Fonda as Dr. Van Helsing (played as he has never been played before) do stand out from the rest of the cast. I'd rate this as 'must see' for aficionados of vampire films, if only to take a break from the less imaginative schlock that overwhelms the genre. Rating: 7/10.