Previous Post - but my thesis is, Herzog's NOSFERATU (which of course was inspired by Murnau's 1929 film of the same name) set the stage in the minds of fans for the vampire films that were made in the 80s and even the 90s. I think, for example, that we wouldn't have had Lost Boys or Near Dark or Coppola's Dracula or From Dusk till Dawn if he hadn't first had Herzog's (and Murnau's before it) NOSFERATU. Agree or disagree? Also, how would you compare Herzog's version to Murnau's original?

Narratively, they're pretty much the same, although Herzog gives us more from the Dracula novel. The biggest difference between the two comes from the visuals. Herzog is able to present the scenery in ways that Murnau just couldn't with 1920s tech. The main reason early film-makers made such awesome use of shadows and things was because of the limitations of the tech. It's the whole 'mother of invention' thing. Herzog was amazing when it came to filming landscapes. You can see it in his other films, as well.

Kinski is great in the role. His Dracula is much more human than previous versions, but I think audiences started demanding this from about the 60s, onward (Dark Shadows spawned this). I kind of like Kinski more than Legosi... maybe.

I'm not so sure how much influence Murnau or Herzog had in Lost Boys. I really tend to see Lost Boys as the Brady Bunch of vampire movies (in a good way, I assure you). Max trying to "somehow form a family." But the movie probably owes more to the Peter Pan story than either of the Nosferatus. It's all about youth and coming of age. It might be the first "young sexy" vampire movie, which gave us Buffy and (shudders) Twilight and Diaries.