437 Vampyr

[Michael]

The first half when Gray settles into the town, I LOVE IT. But when that book gets discovered, all of sudden the film breaks up into multiple and very wordy intertitles, with the need to explain the monster. It really put the halt on the film's river of surreal, hypnotic images - slapping you out of the sleep, forcing you to sit up. I'm eager to see what CC/MCO does with or about the intertitles.

[HerrSchreck]

It was also nice Michael for once to hear someone properly associating Vampyr with a film that is actually part of it's cinematic parentage, Menilmontant/French Impressionism.

Dreyers film is forever and incorrectly lumped as an expressionist film which is wrong wrong wrong.

[Tommaso]

I'm eager to see what CC/MCO does with or about the intertitles.

I haven't got the Shepard, but in the Koerber version these titles are done in a nice, medieval-looking font, and for me they not only don't distract from the experience, but might even add an additional bit of mystery. In a way, they help a little to place the film in some sort of 'reality' which of course is immediately broken up again by the completely trance-like world of the film, and might thus highlight the latter. The device, as tryavna notes, is conventional, but in contrast to your usual vampire film doesn't assist the viewer in confirming his or her reality.

[Kinsayder]

The excerpts from the book also link the film to its literary heritage (the diary in Stoker's Dracula and Spielsdorf's monologue in Le Fanu's Carmilla); and they serve to punctuate the events of the night in a more effective way than, say, the development of a romantic subplot between Gray and Gisèle (which may have been beyond the acting ability of Baron Nick anyway).

As Tommaso remarks, in the Koerber version the text is depicted not by means of conventional intertitles, but shots which pan down the pages of the old book. The pages are mottled and stained, giving a certain texture to these shots beyond their explanatory purpose:

[HerrSchreck]

See that's the first time I'm seeing these shots, as I held off the MK2 knowing what was coming and didnt want to duplicate the title yet again in my collection, so I stuck with the Image until the MoC/CC. Therefore I've never 'properly' seen the film as I also always missed it in retrospectives.

[denti alligator]

in the Koerber version these titles are done in a nice, medieval-looking font

From the cap it looks like a somewhat "modern" Roman type, which is strange, don't you think. Gothic or Germanic type would make more sense.

[Kinsayder]

Gothic or Germanic type would make more sense.

[HerrSchreck]

Just ask Shepard, who got his reputation's brains beaten in for that awful (notwithstanding huge) font in the Image release.

[Svevan]

It was also nice Michael for once to hear someone properly associating Vampyr with a film that is actually part of it's cinematic parentage, Menilmontant/French Impressionism.

Dreyers film is forever and incorrectly lumped as an expressionist film which is wrong wrong wrong.

Would you expand on this for me? I have not seen Vampyr and am wondering why you make this distinction. Where would you classify Dreyer's other work (particularly Joan of Arc)?

[HerrSchreck]

Remind me after you've seen the film.. it'll be easier then. IN the meantime I recommend picking up as much Jean Epstein, Dimitri Kirsanoff, Marcel LHerbier, etc, early Gremillion as possible.

Passion of Joan of Arc is like no other film in the world. It's in a class by itself, but has elements of Soviet Montage, Impressionism, Kammerspiel, fuck its a compendium of all the best of cinema at the time, while at the same time a compendium of none of them... it's utterly unique.

[denti alligator]

Gothic or Germanic type would make more sense.

Of course, for us, but not for a German audience in the 1930s. If I'm not mistaken the Fraktur type was not reintroduced until the Nazi era, but it wasn't too long before that it was the only typeface German was printed in.

[Tommaso]

From the cap it looks like a somewhat "modern" Roman type, which is strange, don't you think. Gothic or Germanic type would make more sense.

Right, I was irritated when I saw that cap, too, because I could have sworn that at least some bits (perhaps only the headlines?) were in Fraktur. And indeed one would have expected it to be like that. And I find it hard to speak of a re-introduction of the Fraktur type by the Nazis, although it can be argued that it became much more common again then. Looking at my bookshelf of books printed in the 20s, there's a fairly huge amount still printed in Fraktur (books by authors as different as Goethe, Keyserling, or Meyrink), and of course everyone at that time would have been able to read it. Another indication is the use of that type in silent films from the 20s, though there it seems to often indicate the 'old' or the 'heroic'.

[HerrSchreck]

I may be one of the few westerners (though probably not) who never had a problem reading Fraktur font. From the first moment I encountered it as a block of text, it took no more than a one minute adjustment. Now excuse me while I examine my fingernails, exhale on them, and buff them on my lapel.

Seriously though, I never understood why David Shepards version took hits because the font was "incomprehensible" (the electronic version uses a cornball electronic GIGANTIC Fraktur approximation).

Dave I'd certainly agree that Vampyr employs some wild touches, i e lighting masks, uses of shadows, not to mention the reversing of the film (and great narrative stuff like the camera in the coffin from the dead guy's pov).. but I'd say it's overall sense of moodiness and gloom more formally slots into impressionism than expressionism, that's for sure. There was a time when I had no doubt that Vampyr was inspired by Epsteins Usher: using the nocturnal, shadowy gloom of Impressionism towards gothic ends. You can see how perfect the results were!

And I may be unique in that Vampyr has never been scary to me.. moody and mildly creepy in parts. It casts quite a spell, however. I'm just so overjoyed that the time of it's real release is finally upon us, after all these years, and we get 2 to own.

[Kinsayder]

Right, I was irritated when I saw that cap, too, because I could have sworn that at least some bits (perhaps only the headlines?) were in Fraktur. And indeed one would have expected it to be like that.

No. There is no Fraktur in the headings or on the title page of the book, or anywhere else in the film -- at least none that I have been able to find in the Koerber version. The date on the book, incidentally, is 1770 (MDCCLXX).

Of course, the film is not set in Germany but Courtempierre, France; the author of the book has a French name (Paul Bonnat); and the font used is consistent with French and English books of that period. If it looked unusual and "foreign" to German filmgoers in 1932, that may have been the intention.

[denti alligator]

Of course, the film is not set in Germany but Courtempierre, France; the author of the book has a French name (Paul Bonnat); and the font used is consistent with French and English books of that period. If it looked unusual and "foreign" to German filmgoers in 1932, that may have been the intention.

Alright, that makes perfect sense, except that it's the German language. French always appears in Roman type face, even in German Fraktur texts. It's a bit of a disjunct.

Tom, as for Fraktur being reintroduced in the Nazi era: yes, that was a generalization. But there does seem to have been a trend toward Roman type in the Weimar era (which isn't to say Fraktur disappeared), which then shifted back to Fraktur (a very "German" typeface) with the Nazis. I'd be curious to know the history of this, actually, but that's totally OT.

OT EDIT: It turns out the Nazis were the ones who actually got rid of Fraktur, surprisingly:

(from wikipedia):

Ein Erlass des NS-Regimes aus dem Jahre 1941 erklärte die Antiqua zur „Normalschrift“, die Fraktur galt fortan als „offiziell unerwünscht“, so dass NSDAP-treue Zeitungen und Verlage schnell zum durchgehenden Gebrauch der lateinischen Schrift übergingen.[1] Der Duden erschien 1941 letztmalig in Fraktur. Dennoch wird die Frakturschrift seit den 1970er Jahren fälschlicherweise mit der Regierungszeit der Nationalsozialisten in Verbindung gebracht.

The last sentence explains that it is common (though inaccurate) to associate Fraktur with the Nazis.

The history of the Roman vs Fraktur debate can be found here.

[Galen Young]

I'd be curious to know the history of this, actually, but that's totally OT.

Sorry to go further off topic, but the best book on this subject that I know of is Blackletter: Type and National Identity -- not sure if it's still in print or not, but it's definitely worth checking out if you want to know more.

[Robin Davies]

I must admit I was a little disappointed with Vampyr when I first saw it. This is because I had seen so many wonderfully evocative stills in horror film books that my expectations were probably higher than any film could deliver. (In fact I can't think of any movie that has produced such a haunting set of still images as Vampyr). The fantasy writer Thomas Ligotti said very much the same thing. It was only after I finally taped the film from a rare TV screening (albeit with comically mis-spelled subtitles) and was able to watch it again that it really began to live up to its reputation.

[Tommaso]

The last sentence explains that it is common (though inaccurate) to associate Fraktur with the Nazis.

Thanks, denti, that is interesting, and it's also interesting to see that it is only since the 70s that Fraktur was associated with the Nazis. I guess it shows a lot about the perception of Weimar (and later) culture by the post-68 generation in Germany in general. Lots of one-sidedness and generalizations that are still not overcome totally today, but I better not elaborate on this here (not just for going totally off topic...).

[HerrSchreck]

You can see Fraktur in pre- 1933 most famously in M, the posters, etc.

[HerrSchreck]

Fangoria.com reviews the set.

[Tootletron]

Fangoria.com reviews the set.

Man they really try to drive it home that they think Vampyr is a chore to watch.

[HerrSchreck]

They're doing a service to 90% of the planet, who does indeed respond this way to the film, which completely gasses all over their expectations for an early-30's Vampire film. Friends of mine who are hardcore seasoned cineastes simply cannot sit thru this film beyond the "dancing shadows" sequence.

You either have it in you or you don't. I have loved this film to death forever. But I understand the caveats.

[domino harvey]

Honestly, I didn't care for the film when I first saw it, but I was also well aware that my frustrations with the Image disc could easily have hampered my viewing experience to such a degree that my response might have been tainted, which is why I'm eager to watch the film again without such distractions to discover if the film or the presentation were to blame for my negative response.

[kaujot]

Beaver

[HerrSchreck]

Beautiful...