User Reviews

First off, I am reviewing the "43 minute condensed version" that is found on KINO's "Cabinet of Dr. Caligari," so this is the longest version currently available on video.

It's hard to talk plot line since I have no idea how the somewhat tenuous plot of this version compares to the apparently complete version locked up in Germany, but I can say that the subtitle "A Tale of a Vampire" is erroneous as there is no vampire in this film. The original subtitle is "Tragedy of a Strange House," which is much more accurate to the film in the version I own.

While there is very little to go on story-wise, the set design and imagery is fantastic! While of course, the sets look like painted cardboard (because they are), one must ignore that fact and look at the pure artistry put into the set design. There are some truly disturbing images, such as a skeleton with a clock for a head. And while actual camera movement is absent, this is an early example of a film that allows some action to occur at the fringes of the lens instead of dead center (like you are watching a play). This allows for some interesting and startling entrances from Genuine herself.

Speaking of startling, there is a scene in a slave market that features two women in a gauze-like material. You can see their breasts clearly, one of the earliest examples of nudity in a mainstream film. The nudity isn't highlighted and isn't used for eroticism, but I was surprised to see nipples so clearly in a movie from 1920.

I also must mention the brilliant score. While it is repetitive, it isn't annoying. It seems a perfect fit for such a strange little film. I found the score to be quite complementary to the imagery, and very beautiful as well.

This may not be "Caligari," but it shouldn't be dismissed as it seems to have been by others on this forum. And in its full form--if we ever get to see it--it may just be another "Caligari." Short on plot, but a hallucinogenic, dreamlike, and fascinating trip into a strange world. Try it!

For director Robert Wiene, he yearned to duplicate his success by hiring "Caligari's" writer, set designer & cinematographer for his next project, September 1920's "Genuine: The Tale of a Vampire." Using the same framing structure, the tale has a former painter falling asleep while reading a horror novel. His dream is about his portrait of a high priestess, Genuine, hanging on his wall above him. The dreamlike quality of the movie is similar to "Caligari" with its surreal sets and tone.

The term vampire in those days in cinema meant a woman taking the financial pants off of unsuspecting men. Such was the femme fatale Genuine, the subject of Wiene's film. Unfortunately for the director and Decia Studios, "Genuine" was a colossal flop. But that didn't stop him from directing well into the 1930's, producing some classics along the way.

FYI, there is a longer 89 minute version with French intertitles. The story is allowed to develop much better, it's worth seeking out.

The same director, cinematographer and writer of "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" made this subsequent picture, "Genuine". Likewise, it is also an Expressionist film (one of the few made during Weimar Germany, contrary to what Lotte Eisner and the use by some of "expressionism" as an umbrella term for almost all German cinema of the period might suggest). Additionally, similar to "Caligari", the main body of "Genuine" is framed as a dream. Yet, I wasn't engulfed into the universe of it as I was with "Caligari".

The story, although just as peculiar, isn't as involving, which is unfortunately probably, in part, because the Kino release is only a condensed version. The framing of scenes is just as prosaic and theatrical as that in "Caligari"--if not more so. As well, the stylized acting seems more overdone and obtrusive this time. But, more importantly, the problem is the sets, which I can't see the entire version improving much upon. The Expressionist set designs are equally strange, with odd angels and geometric shapes. The production, however, leaves too much space open and unfilled, which is the largest reason that "Genuine" isn't as involving, or captivating, as "Caligari".

I thought this movie was pretty enjoyable, the atmosphere was unique and cool, the cinematography was great, and the visuals were amazing but what it failed in was story, it didnt really have such a great story, the ending was so anti climactic and dissapointing, theres a lot good about it but theres lots of bad to it too, i thought it was alright though, 5.8/10.

I’ve been wanting to give this a whirl ever since acquiring it six years ago – as part of the Kino edition of the same director’s THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI (1920). However, the result (without taking into account its obvious narrative gaps, being incomplete in this version) is nowhere near as groundbreaking or even compelling as that earlier classic – despite the comparable Expressionist look (including a clock standing in for the face of a skeleton[!] and which is still its best quality).

The plot revolves around a femme fatale called Genuine – hence, the vampire of the title is not of the blood-sucking variety – who had actually been the high priestess of some cult. Due to a clash between factions, she ends up in a slave market (featuring surprising but discreet nudity) and is eventually bought by an eccentric old man (among other things, he likes to doze off while being shaved daily!), who keeps the girl in the cellar of his ‘notorious’ mansion so as to shelter her from the vices of modern life; incidentally, one is never quite sure in which era this is all supposed to be taking place – since the dapper but doddering old man has an Arab, with painted bare chest, for a servant! The irony, then, is that the girl’s own nature – she has a feral countenance and wears a skimpy striped outfit! – is infinitely more dangerous to the young men she enslaves (one of whom sports a highly anachronistic Duran Duran hairdo!). These, in fact, are somehow driven mad (as it stands, the details aren’t very clear – particularly with respect to the old man’s nephew); when the son of his exclusive barber is similarly afflicted, the latter rouses the populace against her and – in a scene which basically replicates Cesare the somnambulist’s fate from the aforementioned THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI – she dies in the ensuing pursuit.

In conclusion, the treatment afforded the film isn’t sufficiently gripping to rate it higher than a mere curio at this juncture; besides, it’s all the more disappointing coming from Wiene (who, besides CALIGARI also made the equally influential THE HANDS OF ORLAC [1924]). By the way, another interesting effort of his – the Dostoyevsky adaptation RASKOLNIKOV (1923) – will soon be released on DVD by the budget label Alpha (under the alternate title of CRIME AND PUNISHMENT)…

partial nudity This film is currently available from archive.org, as it's in the public domain. And, it is the 43 minute version.

Apart from the unusual set and costume design that has been influenced by the German Expressionist movement, there isn't a lot to this film I would recommend. In fact, I think it's all kind of silly and trite. The story is about an irresistible woman named 'Genuine' and she apparently is so hot and wonderful that men MUST do her bidding. And, when she asks them to kill others or themselves, they do in order to prove their love and obedience towards her. This strange plots combined with LOTS of overacting (especially in the lovemaking scenes) make for a movie that is bizarre and pretty silly. I was not all that impressed and think the film won't interest anyone but the most ardent silent movie fans. Now I am probably among the most prolific reviewers of silents, and it didn't interest me a whole lot either! By the way, like many films (particularly European ones) of this era, there is some partial nudity in this film that might surprise you. Sadly, even this wasn't enough to generate any excitement in this film!

Robert Wiene repeats the techniques he used in "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" with far less success in "Genuine". His looming architectures and broad swaths of darkness are glaringly at odds with the utterly ridiculous story of the seductress-priestess-wild girl brought to unsuspecting Europe. There are some striking visual effects, such as the jungle of branches where Genuine climbs up and up to escape from her prison, but they don't add up to anything. (I should note that only fragments, adding up to about a half hour, survive of this movie; but I suspect that the parts I didn't see wouldn't have added any deeper meaning.)

This was a film that I don't really recall hearing about before looking into horror films from the 1920s. For my podcast, I'm doing Centennial Club episodes of pairing two films 100 years apart and so I was knocking off the next film from 1920 here. The synopsis on the Internet Movie Database isn't that good, but it is about a woman that uses her charm to persuade men to do things they normally wouldn't.

We start this movie in the room of a painter, William Percy (Harald Paulsen). He just completed his masterpiece of a famous heathen priestess from a legend. Percy has been moody since it has been completed. His friends are worried about him and want him to rid himself of his creation. Lord Melo (Ernst Gronau) inquires about purchasing the painting, but he's denied. Percy's two friends inform him they'll convince him to change his mind. Percy then falls asleep and the painting comes to life behind him.

It takes us to telling the story of Genuine (Fern Andra). She was the priestess of her tribe, but they're conquered by rivals. She's taken and sold into slavery. It is then she is purchased by Lord Melo, who falls in love with her. He keeps her hidden away in a room in his basement. He is doing this though to protect her, as he feels the world around them is ugly and brutal.

Every day at noon, Guyard (John Gottowt) comes to his home to cut his hair. Lord Melo doesn't have much, so it is pretty much getting it shaved where no hair is present. Guyard draws the attention of those around him and they start to inquire. The barber goes home one day inform his nephew, Florian (Hans Heinrich von Twardoski), that he's prepared for him to be his apprentice. Percy (Paulsen) also wants to visit with his grandfather he hasn't seen in some time. Lord Melo agrees, but is curious to how Genuine will react.

It all comes to a head though when Guyard is summoned before the magistrate due to the townspeople being nosey. He sends Florian to cut Lord Melo's hair for disastrous results. Genuine discovers how to escape and she involves herself in everything that is happening where she uses her charm to make Florian as well as Percy do things they normally wouldn't and it gets out of hand.

Now my original viewing of this was a 44 minute cut I have on DVD. I happened to check YouTube to find the full 88 minute cut available and have now watched both. I'm glad that I did, because some of my problems were resolved with that second viewing. Not all of them though.

I would have to say that my issue with this movie is that I don't really think this woman is a vampire. There's a scene where we see that after Percy's encounter with her, he does look quite wild and pale like he could have had blood drained from him. We don't get any indications that happened. It is possible that she could be more of an energy sucking vampire. I actually think though it is more that what he did bothers him so deeply as well as his love for Genuine and fearing he's lost that. The men that she messed with do seem to be at their wits end after their encounters for sure. If anything, I would say that she is more of a witch. It makes more sense as the priestess of a tribe of people that were wild and she has the ability to make these men do what she says or they lose their mind for not doing so. I really just think she's using her sexually as a weapon and this is how the men that created this are explaining it.

Regardless of what Genuine really is I think this movie does a really good job of creating a dream like atmosphere. This doesn't do as well in creating that dream-like atmosphere with the sets like the director Robert Weine did with his other film from this year, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. Both are German Expressionism, but I just think that other film is stronger in what it's doing there if I'm going to be perfectly honest. That's not to say this doesn't do similar things though.

After my second viewing, I did find this a bit more entertaining. A lot of it now is that I understand what the movie is getting at. I like this idea of telling us this legend through a dream that Percy is having. Everyone that is at his place before he goes to sleep is players in that story. I do think it is a bit problematic though. I still found myself bored during the latter half of the film. I also didn't like the ending to the legend that is being told. It really is a tragedy, but I still believe my misogynistic take on it stands. I was satisfied in having the book-end to how things start and where things end.

That will take me to the acting, which I thought was okay. I do think that Andra was really good here. She is taking on a strong feminine character and I really liked it. She has a good look about her and I think the costume choices also helped there. Twardowski and Paulsen play similar roles, which I thought were good. They both lose themselves in Genuine and I thought that worked to show her strength. Gronau and the rest of the cast also rounded this out for what was needed, but no one really stood out to be honest.

I've already touched on the effects slightly. We don't really get any in this movie, which doesn't surprise me with how early into cinema we are. They could do things, but this movie didn't necessarily require that. I did think that we got some interesting backdrops to some scenes, but nothing as strong like from Dr. Caligari. There is a dreamlike feel to some of the scenes, especially where Genuine is kept. I did think that her look as I said showed how wild she was. There is also a scene where we get superimposed images that are haunting someone. It is a common technique from the era, but it worked for what they needed. The cinematography was fine in my opinion as well.

The last thing to cover would be the soundtrack. I'll once again say that I don't know if the selections we're hearing are the ones that the movie intended, but I dug what was used here. They did get a bit repetitive, as it felt like they used a couple of them over and over again, but I do have to reiterate that it worked. The selections were unnerving and really made me feel uncomfortable. This also seemed to help the atmosphere of the movie.

Now with that said, this isn't my favorite from this year or from Wiene. I do think there are some interesting aspects to it. I like how strong of a character that Andra is with her portrayal of Genuine. This does have a misogynistic take on it, which I can't fault the movie too much due to how long ago it came out. I had some issues with character development and story, but that was cleared up by viewing the longer version. I still found it to be boring though during the latter part. The visuals are fine and the DVD I have has a solid soundtrack to accompany it. I would still say that this is above average though. There are some good elements, but just lacking a bit.

7.5/10

I caught this years back at the Paris Cinematheque hoping to find something of interest from the director of Caligari. It was a disappointment in just about every way for me. First, the film at its original length seemed to go on forever. The elements were there, granted, but they didn't combine as they did in the previous film. I had the feeling of watching a film that was going through all the necessary steps but missing all the points. It was more an exercise in style which blindly followed all the guidelines but missed going anywhere. On the other hand, and perhaps unfairly to subsequent films, "Caligari" was a one-of-a-kinder that left no space for a sequel. Period.

Curtis Stotlar

...yes, it's from the same director, Robert Wiene, whose landmark THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI was released earlier the very same year, 1920; and, yes, much of the same cinematic technique created for CALIGARI was used here as well. The main differences between the two utterly defeat any chance that GENUINE, at least in the 43-minute "condensation" that appears on the 2002 Kino DVD release, would ever be a tenth as watchable as CALIGARI (or, for that matter, THE HEARTS OF AGE, Orson Welles' self-described "amusement" that spoofed all the surrealist silent European cinema concocted by Wiene, F.W. Murnau, Salvador Dali and the like). First, the sets and makeup of the players are not as flamboyantly odd this time around. Second, the pacing is far too slow for the story. Third, the story is itself far too bizarre and convoluted for a casual viewer to find any interest in; CALIGARI's is relatively straightforward in comparison. If you want a pre-NOSFERATU take on vampires, track down the DVD of LES VAMPIRES instead...

Genuine was directed by Robert Weine, and released the same year as his more much famous film The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari, which vastly overshadowed it.

This is much more of an abstract fantasy artfilm, as opposed Caligari.

And the background scenery just doesn't have that stylistic pop that the latter film did.

So it's not surprising that this film has since become lost in obscurity.

The story centers around a tribal priestess who was captured and sold as a slave to a wealthy hermit.

The hermit keeps her locked away from the world in a basement oasis...but she yearns for love and freedom.

Things take a turn when the estranged son of the wealthy "barber" returns home.

He and Genuine immediately fall in love with one another...and, well...the old man ends up dead.

Now, they control his empire together...but the townsfolk have become suspicious.

So their fate lies at the hands of the lynch mob that is forming at their doorstep...

It's a bit hard to follow along with, which might be another reason it failed to garner as much popularity as did Caligari.

I think it is have been suggested that everything was going on in the head of the guy in the white suit...the guy whose father claimed Genuine was a witch...which inevitably leads to the formation of the lynch mob at the end.

There are a couple of odd scenes incorporated into the film that I didn't really know what to make of...which led me to become slightly confused about certain aspects of the narrative.

And the "vampire" subtitle doesn't make much sense, either.

Because she doesn't seem to be a vampire in any way shape or form...and noone ever accuses her of being a vampire...though I suppose you could argue she does have a lustful allure akin to most of the classic cinematic vampires.

When all is said and done, it's not necessarily a bad film.

But it's not great either.

I feel like if they had lengthened it a little, in order to develop the story a little more...it would have been better.

Because as it is, it's really just kind of mediocre...especially in the shadow of a beast like The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari.

The highlight here, for me, was the actress playing Genuine.

She is pretty badass.

But the whole fantastical otherworldly quality that the film has is cool too.

In the end, however, you can't help but feel like you just sat through a relatively "meh" experience.

4.5 out of 10.

Regardless of this silent-era picture now being almost 100 years old, it's still not worth more than a 2-star rating, in my books.

Believe me, this German export was pretty bloody awful (even when I took into account it being a product of cinema's by-gone days).

For one thing - Had the leading actress, Fern Andra (who played the title character, Genuine) been even marginally attractive, then, yes, that would've certainly helped this nonsensical film at least rise above its sub-par mediocrity.

But this actress (with her frizzy hair and bug eyes) had to be one of the absolute, most dog-ugly dames imaginable, regardless of the era of fashion that she represented.

It's especially when you take into consideration that the Genuine character was supposed to be an irresistible seductress (aka. vamp-ire), where all the men were literally falling head-over-heels in love with her (and actually quite willing to commit murder, if she so commanded) that her decidedly cheap and somewhat creepy looks rendered her (along with the rest of the movie) as being repulsive rather than attractive.

Besides not being even slightly entertaining (even from a nostalgic point of view), I found this moldie-oldie, with its ridiculously exaggerated acting, to be nothing but a stale, old joke told in very bad taste.

Thank goodness this film only had a running time of just 43 minutes.

I've just viewed the Image DVD of CALIGARI, with commentary by Mike Budd. This DVD also includes excerpts from GENUINE. While the snippets included are pretty strange and disconnected, they show a major similarity between the two films -- that is, the "frame" structure of the story. CALIGARI's frame is that it is a story told by a madman. In GENUINE, it appears that the story is a "dream" experienced by a young man who has fallen asleep reading his favorite novel. What I saw of GENUINE makes it seem the young man's favorite author was Sacher-Masoch. See also how Genuine messes up the young man's hair in a rush of passion -- shades of John Barrymore's transition scenes from DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE?

Watching this late at night, I kept dozing off and then rewinding to see what I'd missed. This woman who is sometimes seen as a vampire, has incredible power over men. She can get them to do what she wants, even to the point of killing themselves or others. She was kidnapped and sold into slavery and has this rage and craziness in her eyes. Men can't resist her and fall into her traps. We don't know what her motives are other than to seek revenge on those who put her in this position. There is a lot of overacting (a hallmark of the silent cinema anyway) and very little plot. Robert Wiene ("The Cabinet of Dr. Caligary") is just getting started and some of the cinematography is interesting. But over all, it just doesn't do much to captivate the viewer.

Since watching 'Genuine' in its entirety is essentially impossible at this point, we are left with a 45-minute condensed version which is possibly the main issue with this film.

Genuine, released in 1920, was director Robert Weine's immediate follow-up to the successful 'The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari'. A film that successfully showcased Germany's rising expressionist movement. Genuine follows a similar set design to Cabinet, with sets consisting of contorted shapes and lines as well as colourful tinting.

While is may be visually intriguing, this is really the only thing going for this film. Since almost exactly half of the footage is missing in the condensed version, the plot becomes quite difficult to follow, although the basic synopsis is simple - Genuine is essentially a succubus-type 'vampire' who seduces men in their dreams.

Other than Genuine, the other characters are more or less completely forgettable unlike those in Caligari. This really could have been a great film, but the plot isn't all that strong (the cut footage doesn't help this) and the characters are forgettable. The visuals are interesting however - especially for fans of Caligari or German expressionist art.

4/10