437 Vampyr

Message

TheGodfather · #101 Post by **TheGodfather** » Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:53 pm

HerrSchreck wrote:Beautiful...

It really is. The difference between the two versions is almost unbelievable.
Can`t wait to get my copy and finally see it.

What A Disgrace · Sun Jul 06, 2008 12:52 am

Still getting the MoC, but this is a remarkable package. If I fall in love with this film, I might just buy it for the enormous book included within.

aox · #103 Post by **aox** » Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:11 am

kaujot wrote:Beaver

forgive my ignorance, but why are some scenes different and different shots used to compare? e.g. the old man, 'there's are no child here'.

Darth Lavender · #104 Post by **Darth Lavender** » Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:33 am

I think it's described in more detail earlier in the thread, but basically (I could be wrong) Vampyr, like many early sound films, had dialogue scenes filmed a few times in a few different languages.

Meanwhile, color me VERY impressed with that whole package. Just cancelled my Amazon UK pre-order and added the Criterion to my Amazon US shopping basket.

One question, though; do the deleted scenes (mentioned for the MoC release) make any appearance on the Criterion?

Other than those, it seems the MoC's only extras not on the Criterion is the del Torro commentary,a featurette on Baron de Guinzberg and a bigger booklet?

#105 Post by **domino harvey** » Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:40 am

Darth Lavender wrote:One question, though; do the deleted scenes (mentioned for the MoC release) make any appearance on the Criterion?

They're included in the Casper video essay, the MOC just has them for separate viewing apart from the essay.

As for the question on different shots, the "There's no child here" is the subtitle capture, meaning Gary matches up the shots that contain the same subtitle, which doesn't necessarily result in the same frame being captured.

Michael · #106 Post by **Michael** » Sun Jul 06, 2008 12:40 pm

HerrSchreck wrote:Beautiful...

Indeed! Perhaps it will topple Usher for you.

HerrSchreck · #107 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Sun Jul 06, 2008 3:33 pm

Nah. I've known Vampyr for many years... the emotional impact doesn't conk me like Usher.

I do see Dreyers film as hugely influenced by Usher, though.

#108 Post by **cdnchris** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 6:27 pm

Vampyr

I hate the grading system I use already, but right off I will say the image looks fantastic and I was quite surprised how well it turned out. The print of course shows quite a bit of damage, but this is the cleanest I've seen the film. I think many will be happy.

aox · #109 Post by **aox** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:34 pm

cdnchris wrote:I hate the grading system I use already, but right off I will say the image looks fantastic and I was quite surprised how well it turned out. The print of course shows quite a bit of damage, but this is the cleanest I've seen the film. I think many will be happy.

Well, I am sure most people are smart enough to understand that an old film from the 30s is never going to look as crisp and clear as the last Star Wars film and be a 10/10.

Tootletron · #110 Post by **Tootletron** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:38 pm

cdnchris wrote:Vampyr

Ahaha, little error:

73 | 1932 Minutes

#111 Post by **cdnchris** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:43 pm

It's a long damn film

Thanks and corrected.

#112 Post by **domino harvey** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:46 pm

aox wrote:Well, I am sure most people are smart enough to understand that an old film from the 30s is never going to look as crisp and clear as the last Star Wars film and be a 10/10.

How do you explain this part of his review then?

CriterionForum.org Vampyr Review wrote:Unfortunately, this DVD's picture quality lacks the crisp and clear presentation of the last Star Wars film, and that is simply not understandable.

dr. calamari · #113 Post by **dr. calamari** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:29 pm

domino harvey wrote:
aox wrote:Well, I am sure most people are smart enough to understand that an old film from the 30s is never going to look as crisp and clear as the last Star Wars film and be a 10/10.
How do you explain this part of his review then?
CriterionForum.org Vampyr Review wrote:Unfortunately, this DVD's picture quality lacks the crisp and clear presentation of the last Star Wars film, and that is simply not understandable.

#-o Well, not everyone gets it, I guess... the kind of person who would expect this is the same sort of person who, upon being told it's raining soup, would run outside with a fork.

#114 Post by **Finch** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:51 pm

cdnchris, thanks for that review. Pretty much what I expected in terms of image and audio. I love the package that Criterion have put together for this release and the supplements they've provided sound substantial enough for me (I've always enjoyed Kim Newman and Mark LeFanu's reviews/essays). Most of all, I'm looking forward to seeing the film in its proper form at last (I gave up on the Image Entertainment disc after 10 minutes). In this instance, I'm going with the Criterion and won't double-dip on the MoC: there are 12 other films and the Looney Tunes Vol 6 set I want to get in September and October, and I just can't afford it financially to buy the same film in two editions at the moment. Criterion's disc is out 4 weeks earlier and their package appeals to me much more overall (I must be one of the two or three forum members who does NOT like MoC's revised artwork).

Kinsayder · #115 Post by **Kinsayder** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 12:56 am

cdnchris wrote:Vampyr

What a strange painting Dreyer has chosen to place behind Gray in capture 5 of that review. What is that the man in the painting (who resembles Gray) is holding? A weapon of some sort? It seems to echo the shape of the scythe in the opening scene.

HerrSchreck · #116 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 2:02 am

I believe it's a self portrait of the artist sketching himself, with sheets of paper before him, charcoal in hand, and looking directly into the picture/mirror, from which he is sketching/painting.

Given Alan Grey's self-determined journey into fear, and the dreamlike, inside your head-like nature of the film, that's pretty self explanatory.

Kinsayder · #117 Post by **Kinsayder** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 2:06 am

Ah yes, I see it now. There are so many fascinating details in this film.

HerrSchreck · #118 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:35 pm

(Wipes the sweat)

FINALLY. IN. HAND.

(Collapses at work.)

Now I hafta keep my promise to Nick for the MoC...

tavernier · #119 Post by **tavernier** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:36 pm

That conjures up a nasty image.

HerrSchreck · #120 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:03 pm

You're a sick man, Tav.

(My comment ties to my running narrative in the Satantango thread re me in Kims looking for Vamp all week, each day walking out w something else until it finally arrived today.)

HerrSchreck · #121 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:40 pm

The transfer is a knockout, and so is the soundtrack. It's literally like seeing the film all over again. The skull that many people missed (which is also reprinted on the inside sleeve of the digipak) is mounted up on the wall near the door that Gray goes thru to enter the room at just after 16 minutes, the room he enters just after exiting the previous room filled with skulls and tiny skeletons & mummies, books, etc. Then a little later when the old man lets Gray out of the chateau after telling him "No dogs and no children here!"-- and then opens the door to let the old female vamp in from the side door (it just occurred to me for the first time how much she resembles the witch-- Herlof's Marte-- in Ordet.. sort of a sinister, malevolent version of Herlofs Marte), there's a cut back to this skull in c/u, and the eyes light up from inside.

This is such a wonderful re-experience of the film, one of the best I've ever had in all my experience with home video. CC have not overdone the digital processing of the film.. it looks very filmlike, the transfer expresses the condition of the film reels/photochemical restoration in 99.

So many more things become visible, even beyond the opening up of the framing to full 1.20... watch at exactly 16.00 in the film, the reflection caught in the shuttered window... you see the operator turning the wheel to pan the camera. So many more details are heard in Zellers absolutely sublime score (it's truly one of my favorite scores in all cinema).

I was feeling very (indulgent exhale, buffs nails on lapel, studies them luxuriously in the light) happy with myself reading the booklet... dismissing the style and practice of german expressionism and it's practitioners, Kim Newman says the film Vampyr most resembles (among other French titles, but the following is first on his list of primary influences) is Epstein's Fall of the House of Usher. I am no longer a lone voice viz this assertion.

Yea Kim! You go boy!

Gregor Samsa · #122 Post by **Gregor Samsa** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:11 am

This arrived today---very nice package. I haven't had time to watch the actual movie yet, but its worth noting that the screenplay is a new combination between an earlier English translation (Oliver Stallybrass) and restored sections from the final French draft, indicated in itallics. Very cool.

dadaistnun · #123 Post by **dadaistnun** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:16 pm

Dave Kehr in the NYT.

Michael · #124 Post by **Michael** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:41 pm

I remain utterly destroyed by Vampyr since last night. My god. Even after having seen the Image disc three times before, it was really like watching the film for the first time. So enthereally beautiful. A dreamy, icy sigh of death, loss and longing.

reaky · #125 Post by **reaky** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:12 pm

Anybody in a position to compare the transfer with the MK2 (aspect ratio aside)?

Internal Resources

External Sites

Specialty Labels

Site Menu

437 Vampyr