Nosferatu

I AM AN APPETITE2024 Ranked Brilliant representation of desire, lust, and passion as an appetitive, brutal force of nature that destroys everything around it. Germany in 1838 was infamous for being such a conservative and oppressive time, especially for women. In this case, Ellen, played amazingly by "nepo baby" Depp, embodies the societal repression of female sexuality and autonomy. Ellen's supernatural visions and her connection to Count Orlok are dismissed as hysteria and a contagious sickness—forbidden territory that shouldn’t exist and which society forbids her to embrace. Orlok isn’t hunting her but seducing her into those desires by accepting her and reminding her that he is the only one who would do so. Her desires aren’t evil, but the suppression everyone did around her is what created that destruction. This repression leads to a broader critique of the way societal norms label certain desires or freedoms as dangerous or monstrous, especially for women. By framing Orlok as a supernatural figure tied to Ellen's inner conflict, the film suggests that suppressing natural instincts can lead to their distortion into something destructive. Count Orlok is the big bad of the film, at least superficially, because this movie isn’t made for mainstream audiences who dismiss this as a rape story simply because they believe in only "good" or "bad." They forget it’s a gothic horror where good and bad blend, and it’s up to you to decide. Orlok is everything—he is desire, he is passion, he is everything lustful that’s considered evil: lust, sex, BDSM, fear, malevolence. With his grotesque appearance and parasitic nature, he is a living symbol of repressed urges, guilt, and moral corruption, but also the shame society puts on people like Ellen. His parasitic nature mirrors the way society drains vitality from individuals by forcing them to deny their true selves. This also raises the big question: does evil come from within, or is it imposed from the outside? Mainstream audiences might see Orlok as beyond evil, but the way he uses characters like Ellen or Thomas, without ever forcing or even possessing them, suggests he is nothing but a catalyst to the suppressed appetite that has been growing in them more and more. Eggers does not allow the audience to settle comfortably into traditional moral binaries. Everyone, including Friedrich, is as flawed as Orlok. Friedrich, for example, ignores Ellen's warnings and visions out of pride and a refusal to open his mind to new beliefs, rooted in the conservative mindset that leads to his family’s demise. But it’s also because men in this time don’t see women as people but as property. Friedrich is materialistic and focused on money. Thomas envies him for it, as seen in that earlier chit-chat where Thomas literally says how envious he is—not of Friedrich's wife and kids, but of his house and possessions. However, Friedrich’s possessions are nothing but nepotism, inherited from his grandfather. He didn’t earn what he owns, so he states he envies Thomas because Thomas is going down a path of actually deserving things, rather than feeling like he doesn’t own them. But Thomas also wants Friedrich's life and states it’s for Ellen, although Ellen clearly states desperately she doesn’t want it. She begs him not to leave, to stay and get freaky on the bed. So, was it really for Ellen or for Thomas’s desires? Don’t get me wrong—Thomas loves Ellen, but his desires for social status might be bigger and blinding him completely. When Ellen opens up to Thomas about her dreams, instead of caring, he suppresses it and pretends like it isn’t there, due to fear of losing that status and not being like Friedrich—someone who has a lot of stuff but didn’t work for it and treats everything like property, including his wife. Even the way Friedrich speaks about his wifr is lustful, not passionate, and when it comes to talking about her, it’s about her body and his sons—babies, babies, babies—and the ability she has to make them. So, is she any different to him than a piece of machinery? His hatred for Ellen is because Ellen is the only one who doesn’t care about that money. In this society, money = good person, so when people point out he tied her up, he responds with: "What? Money." Both Friedrich and Thomas refuse to acknowledge women’s autonomy. Even if their actions are framed as protective, they are selfish, making them partially responsible for the plague. I think many people are missing that Orlok isn’t supposed to be seen as literal but rather metaphorical, because vampires are often used to symbolize the repressed darkness in all of us and letting go of all the shame and guilt. But men in this period don’t accept that and repress, repress, and repress that side because it’s not aligned with societal norms. The corset, for example, symbolizes that tightness of everything. That’s why, when she is "possessed," she rips it off—because those feelings are erupting out of her, showing to Thomas who she really is and who he has been hiding this whole time. Thomas finally accepts his own darkness. He has been "succumbing to the darkness" of oppression and normality—of society's toxic masculinity that made him view his wife as property. But in this scene, he finally accepts the love he has for his wife and embraces his desires. Symbols and metaphors are all over this, and it pisses me off how so many people aren’t seeing it due to the fact they are watching this movie in such a literal way rather than metaphorically. So, when watching it, keep in mind these symbols: Ellen as the embodiment of the suppression of desire, both in her sexual desires and her visionary insights. Her ability to see Orlok’s true nature before anyone else underscores the idea that women’s intuition and autonomy are often dismissed or feared by patriarchal structures. Orlok as desire, lust, passion, and appetite for all the things that are considered evil but we all feel and repress due to the judgment of society. Friedrich as the conservative, oppressive, hypocritical society that despises everything that doesn’t align with their own ideologies—kind of like some of the watchers of this movie. The plague as the unsuppressed desires and ambition of society and how they can spread chaos when unleashed after being repressed. The townsfolk, with their superstitions and fear, are quick to turn on one another, showing how fear of the unknown can lead to collective moral failures. The plague becomes a physical manifestation of the town’s collective guilt and repression. Eggers uses all of this with the muted, desaturated gothic aesthetic that reflects the lifelessness of a society bound by rigid norms and fear. Shadows play a crucial role in emphasizing the blurred lines between reality and nightmare, good and evil. Ultimatly the film asks whether evil is an external force imposed upon us or something that arises from within. The film suggests the answer lies somewhere in between. Orlok’s supernatural presence externalizes the fears and desires that already exist within the characters. His influence is potent because it taps into what is already there—ambition, repression, guilt, and desire. The plague, too, can be seen as a consequence of humanity’s moral failures rather than Orlok’s actions alone. Eggers implies that evil thrives in the cracks created by repression and denial. By confronting these dark truths, as Ellen does in her sacrifice, humanity can begin to heal.