25 Vampyr

[s.j. bagley]

i imagine the extras will be significantly different than the criterion release, which i imagine will warrant me buying this version as well.
(and, truth be told, after reading how much of a pain it's been for moc, i rather feel obliged to buy it, regardless.)

[peerpee]

This thread title needs changing from 50 to 25. Fanks!

[Awesome Welles]

Is the release date August 2022? Looking forward to this.

I think the new artwork is more reflective of the period (poster wise) whereas the old image (which I liked very much, though had a problem with the space at the top) looked much more... timeless. Has this been totally rubbished or will it feature on the inside or on the booklet? It'd be a shame to lose it.

[peerpee]

Might be on the book cover, or a frontispiece inside.

Did you find a sturdier replacement for the big cases yet?

We've ditched the big cases. Future represses of titles that previously used the big case will be housed in our normal thickness Amaray cases. The large books fit, snugly, but satisfactorily enough in the normal Amarays. We really wished we'd done that all along -- but who was to know those Scanavo cases were so brittle?

So far, only KWAIDAN and NOSFERATU have been repressed in the normal sized boxes. (SANSHO DAYU, TABU, EDVARD MUNCH will eventually be rehoused also.)

I love my Nosferatu big chunky book and I'm hoping for a Vampyr to match it.

We'll be doing an 80-page perfectly bound book for VAMPYR (ie. like NOSFERATU). Good to hear that you love your NOSFERATU book!

[foggy eyes]

Was told about this today:

Del Toro's passion for classic monster movies is of such magnitude that he interrupted editing "Hellboy II: The Golden Army" to record an audio commentary for a DVD reissue of 1932's "Vampyr."

Criterion don't have a Del Toro commentary listed. It sounds like a terrible idea to me, but is it likely to crop up on either release?

[a.khan]

That should get the fanboys to pick up "Vampyr," then go: WTF?!?

Yes, I want this to happen.

[reaky]

classic monster movie

Now that kind of come-on is a little misleading.

[What A Disgrace]

Up for pre-order at Amazon UK. August 25 release, 19.99 retail (14.99 after discount), no other details.

[Narshty]

Specs, courtesy of Amazon.co.uk:

The first sound-film by one of the greatest of all filmmakers, Vampyr offers a sensual immediacy that few, if any, works of cinema can claim to match. Legendary director Carl Theodor Dreyer leads the viewer, as though guided in a trance, through a realm akin to a waking-dream, a zone positioned somewhere between reality and the supernatural. Traveller Allan Gray (arrestingly depicted by Julian West, aka the secretive real-life Baron Nicolas de Gunzburg) arrives at a countryside inn seemingly beckoned by haunted forces. His growing acquaintance with the family who reside there soon opens up a network of uncanny associations between the dead and the living, of ghostly lore and demonology, which pull Gray ever deeper into an unsettling, and upsetting, mystery. At its core: troubled Gisèle, chaste daughter and sexual incarnation, portrayed by the great, cursed Sybille Schmitz (Diary of a Lost Girl, and inspiration for Fassbinder's Veronika Voss.) Before the candles of Vampyr exhaust themselves, Allan Gray and the viewer alike come eye-to-eye with Fate in the face of dear dying Sybille, in the blasphemed bodies of horrific bat-men, in the charged and mortal act of asphyxiation eye-to-eye with Death, the supreme vampire. Deemed by Alfred Hitchcock 'the only film worth watching... twice',Vampyr's influence has become, by now, incalculable. Long out of circulation in an acceptable transfer, The Masters of Cinema Series is proud to present Dreyer's truly terrifying film in its film restored form for the first time in the UK.

SPECIAL FEATURES
- New, high-definition transfer of the Martin Koerber / Cineteca di Bologna film restoration in its original aspect ratio (1.19:1)
- New and improved English subtitle translation
- Full-length audio commentary featuring film scholar Tony Rayns
- Full-length audio commentary featuring Oscar-winning director Guillermo del Toro talking about one of his favourite films.
- Two deleted scenes, removed by the German censor in 1932.
- Carl Th. Dreyer (1966) a documentary by Jörgen Roos
- Visual essay by scholar Casper Tybjerg on Dreyer's Vampyr influences
- The Baron, a short MoC documentary about Baron Nicolas de Gunzberg
- Inspiration for the film - Sheridan Le Fanu's Carmilla - as an on-disc pdf.
- 80-page book featuring rare production stills, a facsimile reproduction of the 1932 Danish film programme, writing by Tom Milne (The Cinema of Carl Dreyer), Jean and Dale Drum (My Only Great Passion: The Life and Films of Carl Th. Dreyer), and Martin Koerber (film restorer).

[domino harvey]

Also posted in the Criterion thread, here's a textual Venn Diagram between MOC and Criterion:

Shared features (both MOC + Criterion)
- Full-length audio commentary featuring film scholar Tony Rayns
- Carl Th. Dreyer (1966) a documentary by Jörgen Roos
-Visual essay by scholar Casper Tybjerg on Dreyer's Vampyr influences

Criterion-exclusive
• A 1958 radio broadcast of Dreyer reading an essay about filmmaking
• A booklet featuring new essays by Mark Le Fanu and Kim Newman, Martin Koerber on the restoration, and an archival interview with producer and star Nicolas de Gunzburg, as well as a book featuring Dreyer and Christen Jul’s original screenplay and Sheridan Le Fanu 1871 story “Carmilla,” a source for the film.

MOC-exclusive
- Full-length audio commentary featuring Oscar-winning director Guillermo del Toro talking about one of his favourite films.
- Two deleted scenes, removed by the German censor in 1932.
- The Baron, a short MoC documentary about Baron Nicolas de Gunzberg
- Inspiration for the film - Sheridan Le Fanu's Carmilla - as an on-disc pdf.
- 80-page book featuring rare production stills, a facsimile reproduction of the 1932 Danish film programme, writing by Tom Milne (The Cinema of Carl Dreyer), Jean and Dale Drum (My Only Great Passion: The Life and Films of Carl Th. Dreyer), and Martin Koerber (film restorer).

[Tommaso]

Brilliant! I never thought MoC would come up with that amount of extras, but am very happy to see this, especially the 1966 docu which I feared would only be on the CC. TWO audiocommentaries, and I seriously think that Del Toro's will be great. Also that Gunzberg documentary... Honestly, I can't see why CC should be preferred on this one, unless they manage to seriously improve on the existing image quality as provided by Koerber.

[What A Disgrace]

I am getting the MoC edition. And going to work today (finally!) with a huge, stupid grin.

[jules]

Looks like MoC edition is beating CC in extras department.

[Zazou dans le Metro]

Looks like MoC edition is beating CC in extras department.

If Del Toro's commentary is seen as a plus point. Undoubtedly this will in terms of marketing but has made me cross the floor to Criterion on this one.

[HerrSchreck]

No disrespect to Nick and Evilaieghts, but the delToro is indeed a bit of a "wut?"

That said I'm truly tossed. I'll probubby get them both inna long run. The de Gunzberg stuff has got me innarested.

[foggy eyes]

If Del Toro's commentary is seen as a plus point. Undoubtedly this will in terms of marketing but has made me cross the floor to Criterion on this one.

I dunno, you could always not listen to it! All in all though, a rather odd decision - must be a case of MoC having no choice but to bring out the big guns in order to compete with Criterion.

[foliagecop]

I have to admit to being surprised at the quiet contempt (and seeming disgust, at times) shown towards the inclusion of Del Toro's commentary on the MoC version. Bottom line, the guy loves the film and wants to talk about it. When it comes down to it, isn't that why we're all here?

It may be unintentional, but the dismissive comments come across as a kind of film snobbery - the expectation, and belief, that our sacred cows should only come accompanied by acredited experts.

I'd hate to think snobbery plays a part in this. This forum is full of cineastes and buffs whose interests run the whole gamut of film. We should be able to accept a Del Toro appreciation as much as we accept Tony Rayns'.

So why the dismissiveness?

[Michael Kerpan]

Until one knows what Del Toro has to say about the film, it seems stupid to dismiss his thoughts out of hand. (Or have people heard him comment at length on other classic films already?)

[HerrSchreck]

I have to admit to being surprised at the quiet contempt (and seeming disgust, at times) shown towards the inclusion of Del Toro's commentary on the MoC version. Bottom line, the guy loves the film and wants to talk about it. When it comes down to it, isn't that why we're all here?

It may be unintentional, but the dismissive comments come across as a kind of film snobbery - the expectation, and belief, that our sacred cows should only come accompanied by acredited experts.

I'd hate to think snobbery plays a part in this. This forum is full of cineastes and buffs whose interests run the whole gamut of film. We should be able to accept a Del Toro appreciation as much as we accept Tony Rayns'.

So why the dismissiveness?

It'd be pretty hard to fobsnob on Moc.. the dudes traffic in Pure Excellence. And the pretty much almost completely escape criticism around here because they truly abound in mostexcellentness.

That said, I don't think anybody's being "dismissive" per se... certainly not disgust! I don't think this is criticism-- it's just a soft giggle.

If I might speculate on the reasons.. it's just a bit out of left field. First of all it's Gulliermo del Toro-- not the biggest brand name in the arthouse circuit. He makes comic book films-- not neccesarily bad ones (maybe they are, I dont really watch his sorta stuff). But over an above that-- "why him?" is I'm sure driving a lot of folks who are like "lol wut?" Yes he's a director, and yes he loves the film (I trust), but certainly he's not the only one who loves it. Wouldn't it be kinda wuttish if Michael McCullers was selected for CC's commentary on The Human Condition Trilogy (or something). Usually it's gotta be a a little more than "working director likes film = expert commentary". It's a little, as someone above mentioned, like the Bogdonavich "wut"... the guy is everywhere in Commentaryland, and folks are annoyed by his selection-- and he made some decent films for a few minutes while he was sane and gravity didnt take his face south of Antartica.

But that said, Del T may totally knock it outa the park and deliver the goods in miles of eighteen wheelers. It's just a little bit of a new setup for Moc/CC commentaryville. Who knows, it may be something that works well vs the usual setup of (find pretentious old director/critic with arthouse snob cachet) + (make sure he is at the top of the snob heap) = (sign him to do commentary). Because I can tell you personally, that standard route has led me to totally ignore commentaries for the most part. Someone less self-obsessed and more riled up (think Kalat) salts my plate. So MoC may be doing the thing that may breathe life into the arthouse-label commentaries. Audition based on commentary, not on resume. I'm all for it.

(And of course, more than anything critforumdotorg is composed of snobassed techdweeb bastards eager to chew the bones of public failure. Because they think who the hell they are.)

[Gigi M.]

It looks like a lot extras for just 1 disc. The Criterion is probably going to have a higher bitrate, meaning a possible better image.

Nick is this a double discer?

[MadJack]

I was always going to go for the MoC, and this just confirms it even more. To be honest, it seems the only real sticking point would be whether one would want the deleted scenes (MoC) or Dreyer reading an essay about the film (CC).

[HerrSchreck]

And absolutely the deleted scenes have got me drooling. Imho the MoC is the better package. Imagewise, time will tell.

[MichaelB]

But that said, Del T may totally knock it outa the park and deliver the goods in miles of eighteen wheelers. It's just a little bit of a new setup for Moc/CC commentaryville. Who knows, it may be something that works well vs the usual setup of (find pretentious old director/critic with arthouse snob cachet) + (make sure he is at the top of the snob heap) = (sign him to do commentary). Because I can tell you personally, that standard route has led me to totally ignore commentaries for the most part. Someone less self-obsessed and more riled up (think Kalat) salts my plate. So MoC may be doing the thing that may breathe life into the arthouse-label commentaries. Audition based on commentary, not on resume. I'm all for it.

I completely agree with this on principle (I'm also much more inclined to listen to a commentary if I think it's going to be unpredictable), but I also think that Del Toro is potentially a superb choice - not least because he's one of the few current directors who has genuinely managed to straddle the arthouse/mainstream genre market and produce convincing work in both.

And for all its undoubted genius, Vampyr is also a horror film at base, and exploits the same kind of cliches that Del Toro has been repackaging to such great effect in films like The Devil's Backbone. Certainly, his track record has earned him the right to a fair hearing.

It looks like a lot extras for just 1 disc. The Criterion is probably going to have a higher bitrate, meaning a possible better image.

Bear in mind that Vampyr itself isn't exactly Satantango when it comes to running time, and on the basis of those specs it seems entirely possible to me that everything can be crammed onto one disc without sacrificing bitrate. Another commentary, two deleted scenes and a documentary (all presumably short) aren't likely to do too much damage.

[Gigi M.]

Hopefully you're right, and MoC's package is looking better to my eyes.

[Ledos]

Looks like MoC edition is beating CC in extras department.

If Del Toro's commentary is seen as a plus point.

And the most substantial extra: the two extra scenes.