437 Vampyr

[Mr Sausage]

Criterion of Vampyr?! Eughhhmmmm! Oh, only when I am very, very joyful is that sound emitted from by my Being.

Did...did you just come?

[a.khan]

Criterion of Vampyr?! Eughhhmmmm! Oh, only when I am very, very joyful is that sound emitted from by my Being.

Did...did you just come?

Ha ha, Mr. Sausage, that is just too hilarious! lol

[evillights]

Could Vampyr really be considered a silent film?

Your right, borderline talkie I would say.

It's a sound film.

[colinr0380]

Criterion of Vampyr?! Eughhhmmmm! Oh, only when I am very, very joyful is that sound emitted from by my Being.

Did...did you just come?

It sounded borderline talkie to me!

[Zazou dans le Metro]

Criterion of Vampyr?! Eughhhmmmm! Oh, only when I am very, very joyful is that sound emitted from by my Being.

Did...did you just come?

It sounded borderline talkie to me!

Or talkie dirtie.

[HerrSchreck]

Gasp *flump* (Sound of ambulances).

[miless]

Gasp *flump* (Sound of ambulances).

did you just pull a Michael Hutchence?

[HerrSchreck]

Pulling on him would have affected his neck inna awful, terrible sorta way haw haw.

Anyhow, it'll be interesting to see how the sales play out on these. I hope those who committed to MoC (and helped talk it into market without digi-resto) do their duty, because vs the digital whamajamming on the CC, the MoC will probably come in for some thrushing in side by sides (and the more filmic image/contrast will no doubt be completely overlooked in favor of the icecreamy boosting on the CC, though we'd all love to be proved wrong I'm sure).

Cue country singers:

"Stand by your maannnnn
Send him the cash, thats in your hannnnnd"

[Tommaso]

(and the more filmic image/contrast will no doubt be completely overlooked in favor of the icecreamy boosting on the CC, though we'd all love to be proved wrong I'm sure).

I wonder what else CC could do about the image quality. Let's face it: the film simply isn't and will never be in pristine condition, so even if they manage to remove some more scratches than MoC, it will still not be up to "Nosferatu" standard. And the blackness boosting is something that really annoys me more and more with CC, I wonder why this is so seldom pointed out in reviews (and if it is, it's often seen even as a positive thing). I got so annoyed yesterday evening watching Ozu's "Early Summer" and finding it looked like some American film again... (and that disc was another example that CC's usual "thousands instances of debris" routine doesn't work wonders if the materials are what they are).

Anyway, the real point of interest would be the extras. Has anyone seen that Dreyer documentary that will be on the CC? This seems to me the most interesting extra here, but I wonder how important it is after "My metier". I'm not sure about the Rayns commentary either, after seeing his introductions to the MoC Mizoguchis. If MoC could get Elsaesser or Bordwell(!) to do a commentary, I suspect it might be at least as good.

[jsteffe]

If MoC could get Elsaesser or Bordwell(!) to do a commentary, I suspect it might be at least as good.

I LOVE the idea of Bordwell doing a VAMPYR commentary track! I've seen him lecture on a couple of occasions, including this year, and he's a terrifically engaging speaker. Absolutely bounding with ideas and enthusiasm.

[HerrSchreck]

(and the more filmic image/contrast will no doubt be completely overlooked in favor of the icecreamy boosting on the CC, though we'd all love to be proved wrong I'm sure).

I wonder what else CC could do about the image quality. Let's face it: the film simply isn't and will never be in pristine condition, so even if they manage to remove some more scratches than MoC, it will still not be up to "Nosferatu" standard. And the blackness boosting is something that really annoys me more and more with CC, I wonder why this is so seldom pointed out in reviews (and if it is, it's often seen even as a positive thing). I got so annoyed yesterday evening watching Ozu's "Early Summer" and finding it looked like some American film again... (and that disc was another example that CC's usual "thousands instances of debris" routine doesn't work wonders if the materials are what they are).

Anyway, the real point of interest would be the extras. Has anyone seen that Dreyer documentary that will be on the CC? This seems to me the most interesting extra here, but I wonder how important it is after "My metier". I'm not sure about the Rayns commentary either, after seeing his introductions to the MoC Mizoguchis. If MoC could get Elsaesser or Bordwell(!) to do a commentary, I suspect it might be at least as good.

Well, miracles on a similar scale have been observed: I almost fell out of my chair when watching the Breistein Bridal Party At Hardanger, and noting that the source materials were torn, shrunk, decomped, etc, and were restored via twenty five years (just kidding) of digital repair.

Kidding aside, the results were simply miraculous. I sat there thinking after sinking into the film, since the transfer and image quality seemed so rich, three dimensional & pristine, that this film slept quietly and perfectly in completely forgotten, uninterrupted dry coolness for the past 80 years... and was promptly reminded that the film was completely fucked, and was only ressurrected via frame by frame scanning, and meticulous resizing, repair, etc, on the digital plane. Glorious times indeed, when used properly. The NFI deserved major kudos.

If CC works a similar miracle-- if anyone can bring Vampyr back, they can-- it would truly be wonderful. I'd say despite the scratches & composite nature of the print at the end of Koerbers resto, the film is in no worse (or not much worse) condition than say 3Penny... and look at the glorious CC results there.

Safe to say we're not in Machden en Uniform territory yet.

[Tommaso]

Well, miracles on a similar scale have been observed: I almost fell out of my chair when watching the Breistein Bridal Party At Hardanger, and noting that the source materials were torn, shrunk, decomped, etc, and were restored via twenty five years (just kidding) of digital repair.

You're right, of course. But the NFI is a state organisation, whereas CC is a private enterprise, and I can't imagine they'd clean up every single frame of "Vampyr" by hand. Too much time costing too much money. They clearly didn't do a frame-by-frame cleaning with most of their releases of old films, and for me it's not a problem, anyway. I was just thinking that one shouldn't have unreasonably high expectations (and that said, even un-cleaned the Koerber resto doesn't look bad, if the MK2 disc is any indication). One could only speculate how good "Threepenny" looked BEFORE they did further work on it. Perhaps the forthcoming German edition from absolut medien will clear this up. If it looks similar to the CC basically, I would assume that the major bits of the resto had already been done by FWMS (or whoever was in charge here, can't remember).


And yes, "Mädchen in Uniform" seems to be not great, in no way comparable to any CC effort, but I'd say this would look better if it were an MoC disc, too. I was pretty disappointed by their Jutzi "Alexanderplatz". But I'd have to see the "Mädchen" disc to see whether it is better.

[HerrSchreck]

Well, miracles on a similar scale have been observed: I almost fell out of my chair when watching the Breistein Bridal Party At Hardanger, and noting that the source materials were torn, shrunk, decomped, etc, and were restored via twenty five years (just kidding) of digital repair.

You're right, of course. But the NFI is a state organisation, whereas CC is a private enterprise, and I can't imagine they'd clean up every single frame of "Vampyr" by hand. Too much time costing too much money. They clearly didn't do a frame-by-frame cleaning with most of their releases of old films, and for me it's not a problem, anyway. I was just thinking that one shouldn't have unreasonably high expectations (and that said, even un-cleaned the Koerber resto doesn't look bad, if the MK2 disc is any indication). One could only speculate how good "Threepenny" looked BEFORE they did further work on it. Perhaps the forthcoming German edition from absolut medien will clear this up. If it looks similar to the CC basically, I would assume that the major bits of the resto had already been done by FWMS (or whoever was in charge here, can't remember).


And yes, "Mädchen in Uniform" seems to be not great, in no way comparable to any CC effort, but I'd say this would look better if it were an MoC disc, too. I was pretty disappointed by their Jutzi "Alexanderplatz". But I'd have to see the "Mädchen" disc to see whether it is better.

I tend to think of state organizations as the more financially strapped vs private, for-profit companies like CC which enjoy far wider marketing & distribution vs a small, buy-direct-from-our-museum operation like the NFI. Clearly CC is at the forefront of digital restoration and have consistently pushed the outer frontier viz demonstrating the capacity of various digital technologies individually and in tandem.

I have the old Janus edition of 3Penny, and it looked somewhere approx on a par with Vampyr & Machden. Not coincidentally all three films are of the same basic pedigree, and from the same time frame, with original negs lost a long time ago... though I've heard varying descriptions of what it was that survived on 3Penny: a surviving original neg, duplicate neg... something was obviously hidden away for posterity while herr Goebbels was on his idiotic rampage.

Point I'm trying to make is that 3Penny didn't look all that different from the older editions of Vampyr in it's pre-restoration "crappy" edition. And I'd wager that the differences between the CC Vampyr & the MK2 Vampyr will probably be somewhere around the difference between the BFI 3Penny and the CC. Approximately. I'd say the market for Vampyr is about on a par with 3Penny-- and they sure worked a miracle on 3Penny, so I wouldn't doubt the vigor that CC will go at the digital cleanup on this title. They've been straining to get this title out since at least the launch of the dvd line. I still have in my first printing of Joan of Arc a flyer-insert which says "Coming soon-- Vampyr."

Only took around 8 yrs.

[tryavna]

I tend to think of state organizations as the more financially strapped vs private, for-profit companies like CC which enjoy far wider marketing & distribution vs a small, buy-direct-from-our-museum operation like the NFI.

It probably depends on whether or not the state organization receives a special grant earmarked specifically for the restoration of a given film (or films). The Treasures from the American Film Archives boxsets would be examples of this, especially in terms of how (relatively) quickly the third set followed the second. Otherwise, I tend to agree with Schreck. In today's climate, for-profit companies seem to enjoy much more flexibility. The market has spoken, I guess.

Anyway, you guys have really gotten me excited about Bridal Party -- and annoyed that the weak dollar and a cash-strapped summer means I probably won't be able to pick up a copy for a few months.

[MichaelB]

I tend to think of state organizations as the more financially strapped vs private, for-profit companies like CC which enjoy far wider marketing & distribution vs a small, buy-direct-from-our-museum operation like the NFI.

This is absolutely true - and one of the reasons why state organisations get subsidy in the first place, because (by and large) they can't compete in the open market to the same extent.

Film institutes with a heavy-duty preservation remit are a particularly good example: the bulk of their funds will probably be spent on something deeply unglamorous such as preserving, stabilising and duplicating their collections (i.e. vital activities whose effects are almost entirely invisible to the outside world) - and the chances are that they won't own the rights to most of their material in the first place, thus preventing them from making much money even if they decided to exploit them commercially.

[markhax]

If MoC could get Elsaesser or Bordwell(!) to do a commentary, I suspect it might be at least as good.

I LOVE the idea of Bordwell doing a VAMPYR commentary track! I've seen him lecture on a couple of occasions, including this year, and he's a terrifically engaging speaker. Absolutely bounding with ideas and enthusiasm.

Yes, Bordwell on Dreyer would be a dream! I love his monograph on Dreyer, and his commentary on the CC Alexander Nevsky is one of the most illuminating and substantive I've heard on any DVD.

[PimpPanda]

I saw a restored version of this a few months ago and it looked great. Pretty awesome film!

[Kinsayder]

Could that cover be a hint that they have found the lost shot to which this image belongs? David Rudkin discusses it in his BFI booklet on the film:

Gisèle lies on a pew-like bench before a dark-panelled wall. Somewhere hereabouts must have come the much-cited shot of her lying here, dwarfed by the monstrous shadow of a scythe. Another of Vampyr's iconic images, it was present at least in the programme for the Berlin première, but is missing from both the 'BFI' and 'Jorgensen' prints, and apart from its appearance in books, seems to be lost.

He adds in a footnote:

It may surface in the restored German version of the film, at present in preparation.

[HerrSchreck]

Well this is the actual image (with a font I far prefer):

.

As I mentioned over on the MoC Vampyr thread, the CC cover font reminds of this supernotorious abomination (which I'm a bit baffled as to why CC would eradicate that supercool, graffiti-type font from the film itself, to hint at that awful Shepard disc, generally agreed to be one of the worst sub-fonting in all homevid-dom):

.

If that scene has been hereofore considered lost/just now recovered, then I must be going nuts, because I could swear I saw the clip where that scene occurs... trailer like, the graf-type font seemed to wipe across the screen, one letter after another in rapid succession uuntil the word vampyr was spelled.

I've been waiting in agony for the rapture of the premium corrected CC/Moc release (either/or/and) on this film for so long that I must have dreamt I saw the trailer. But something tells me not. Maybe in Kingdom of Shadows, or somesuch type documentary, or maybe a Dreyer doc?

After all, isn't this a straight HD telecine of the Bologna/Munich resto by Koerber which was done almost 10 yrs ago? Rudkin may be talking about the digital treatment then in preparation, as the restoration was complete 6 yrs prior to that booklet's appearance.

I wonder if he had seen the Koerber restoration at that time... I don't think the MK2-- the first home vid product to present this restoration, albeit cropped to 1.33/1 ar-- was available yet... so he has since probably had his question answered. There'll be no content surprises for anyone whose seen the Koerber restoration over the past 9-plus yrs.

[bollibasher]

The word VAMPYR in that graffiti font does fade in and out as you say but it is as the title at the very beginning of the film (in the restored version), that is what you are thinking of. The fact that it is superimposed on top of that image above is the product of some clever photoshopper I think, it originally a plain still as shown in the original programme.

Rudkin had not seen the Koerber restoration when writing the book, his commentary is based on the two prints he had access to (the 'BFI' and 'Jorgensen' prints as in the quote above), and is a comparison between the two speculating what the correct order of shots should be and which scenes are missing from each print (along with many other very insightful analyses as well).

So no, this scene with the sycthe shadow has not been rediscovered. But the film is still amazing

xx

[HerrSchreck]

The word VAMPYR in that graffiti font does fade in and out as you say but it is as the title at the very beginning of the film (in the restored version), that is what you are thinking of. The fact that it is superimposed on top of that image above is the product of some clever photoshopper I think, it originally a plain still as shown in the original programme.

Rudkin had not seen the Koerber restoration when writing the book, his analysis is based on the two prints he had access to, one at the BFI and another he calls the Jurgenson print or something like that, and is a comparison between the two speculating what the correct order of shots should be and which scenes are missing from each print (and many other very insightful analyses as well).

So no, this scene with the sycthe shadow has not been rediscovered. But the film is still amazing

No-- not a clever photoshopper. It's absolutely a vintage piece of material. I've seen the image of the graf-type logo for too long (years & years) and in too many places for it to be some webgeek "Fake Criterion Covers"type thingy. Across the globe, from film reference societies to greencine to silliness like horror-wood, the image is part of the surviving promo materials from the film-- either from a trailer, lobby card, or press material.

In fact you can even see it for sale with other vintage stills from ARCHIVFILM ENTERTAINMENT GROUP

And yes, we all knew the prints Rudkin had already seen. Kinsayder opened the discussion with that. That's not the question-- the question was what edition of the Koerber resto that Rudkin stated was in "preparation"? i e he was clearly writing in anticipation of seeing something that he felt would supercede the 2 prints mentioned in Kinsayders post-- what edition was that?.

In other words what was he anticipating that was "in preparation" when Rudkin wrote:

It may surface in the restored German version of the film, at present in preparation.

My hunch is he was waiting on the MK2 which would be the first to come out, and had been out for at least a year now, probably more.

[zedz]

Well this is the actual image (with a font I far prefer):

Are we sure this is actually from a deleted or missing filmed scene and not just a publicity shot? If it appeared in the programme for the premiere, it was almost certainly the latter. They wouldn't have been clipping frames from the print or taking screen grabs! Maybe this film simply had a particularly creative and in-tune stills photographer?

I agree about the font: trad goth doesn't do the film any favours. But if it sells more copies, more power to Criterion.

[HerrSchreck]

My hunch was always that it was definitely publicity related and not in the film-- I think it was an element from a vintage trailer. If not, then it's a publicity still of some kind.

[MichaelB]

It certainly has the feel of a publicity still - how would that situation arise (i.e. the shadow of the scythe being cast indoors) in the context of the actual film?

(Granted, it's not exactly a conventional narrative feature, but still...)

[Kinsayder]

There are many inexplicable shadows in this film. But I agree that it would seem out of place (overly symbolic) in any of the sequences where it might plausibly fit. Looking at the mk2 edition, there is only one shot of Gisèle lying on the bench, and her pose is slightly different (no scythe of course)...