This week I?ve resurrected a classic horror film, 1920?s ?The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari,? to see if it still lives up to its legacy. I then watched the most recent remake, identically titled from 2005.

I won?t feign to know too much about the history of film or the various movements of its early years. I do know, however, that the original ?Caligari? is renowned as one of the greatest expressionist films from Germany. The German Expressionist movement involved distorting the normal perception of something for emotional impact. There is no wonder as to why ?Caligari? is so praised on this account.

The story is largely the recounting by the narrator, Francis, of the events that ensued when the fair came to his small German mountain town. The ominous Dr. Caligari enters the fair with his exhibit of Cesare, a rare somnambulist, who can prophesize the future when awakened. When people die shortly after Cesare predicts, chaos strikes the town and an investigation into the doctor is launched. Ultimately, however, Francis? grip on reality becomes as distorted as the film?s sets.

Each scene is so visually bizarre and stunning, it?s as if the characters are walking around inside of Picasso paintings. Constructed almost entirely of paper, the sets are jagged, flat and warped, creating a very unsettling yet entrancing milieu. These sets cannot be done justice with just words ? you really have to see the film. The use of light and shadow is also peculiar. Most of the shadows are actually just painted onto the two-dimensional sets, and interestingly enough, there is a shadowy murder scene rather similar to the famous one of ?Nosferatu,? which came two years later.

As a silent film with half the dialogue left only implied, ?Caligari? relies on other mechanisms to heighten its intensity ? mostly its sets and score. The result is a gripping, artistic venture into the dregs of madness and obsession. Heralded as one of the earliest horror films, an expressionist masterpiece and as having an influential twist ending, the original ?The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari? maintains its place among the best. I know I won?t forget the terrifying scene of Cesare?s awakening anytime soon ?

4.5 stars out of 5

Clearly, however, 76 minutes of a silent film would drive many people as insane as the good doctor himself. Admittedly, it tests the patience, especially when the intertitles remain on the screen for much longer than seems necessary. The 2005 remake, also titled ?The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari,? is suited well for those who cannot tolerate grainy film quality or dialogue stills enough to enjoy the original.

Despite being surprisingly true to the 1920 classic, David Lee Fisher?s remake is little more than a modern duplication, reusing all the original lines and scenes with a handful of lengthened dialogues and new scenes. Yet much of the added dialogue is frustratingly blunt and suggestive of the trick ending, detracting from the surprise it created in the original. While I can understand how Fisher felt that the original was too abrupt, he overcompensated in his own version.

As in the original, the most striking aspect is the sets which is, in fact, because they are identical. As I found out in the special features afterward, the entire film was shot on a green screen with the sets digitally restored and superimposed as the backgrounds. This is truly stunning because it appears as if the original sets were being shot with much higher quality cameras. The cinematography, too, remains rather true to the original, with all cameras stationary and with the inclusion of several close-ups.

However, this issue of preservation versus creative liberty is one of the remake?s downfalls. I greatly appreciate the use of the original script, but if you?re going to add lines they should be good and appropriate, which they are not in the remake. Incongruity abounds when the exact original sets are used, but a new, incredibly dull score is added, making one wonder why they opted not to remaster the old score as well. And lastly, while the acting is generally very impressive and true to the original, the lead (Judson Pearce Morgan) often painfully drags scenes down.

Ultimately, the remake is a bit stale, which is not surprising since Fisher?s background is in video game animation rather than film directing. So while he can make the sets look astonishing, he can?t guide the actors or the composer. When the film sticks to the original it?s very compelling, as the essence of the original still remains, albeit diluted slightly. The 2005 ?Caligari? is worth a watch on the merit of that and the sets alone, especially if you haven?t the patience for the classic.

3.5 stars out of 5

So the diagnosis is in; the classic unsurprisingly trumps the remake. That?s the problem with remakes ? the burden is often just too much.

Have some classic horror film suggestions or want to educate me on Expressionism? E-mail away at [email protected].