criterionforum.org

I've got a full set of French VAMPYR stills from 1932 with Dreyer's business card taped to the back of each. This scythe still (the one in question) is one of these production stills, but it does not have the "VAMPYR" text on it.

peerpee wrote:I've got a full set of French VAMPYR stills from 1932 with Dreyer's business card taped to the back of each. This scythe still (the one in question) is one of these production stills, but it does not have the "VAMPYR" text on it.

(Seethes with jealousy)

HerrSchreck wrote:...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.

I don't really understand what this question really equates to? I don't think he's particularly referring to a 'dvd' edition, he is simply saying that while he was writing the book Koerber was preparing a restored version of the film that was yet to be seen publicly. xx

Rudkin's statement is puzzling since the book was published in 2005, when the restoration he refers to as being 'in preparation' had been finished for six years. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is that the text was written several years before being published and then, for strange reasons, not updated for the book's publication. Otherwise there would be no excuse for not seeking out an opportunity to watch the restored version instead of referring to obsolete VHS releases.

On page 28 of his book, Rudkin references an article by Martin Koerber that wasn't published until 2000, two years after the restoration of the German version was complete and had been broadcast on Arte TV (Nov 1998); then further down the same page he says "We await Koerber's restoration..." Puzzling indeed.

bollibasher wrote:I don't really understand what this question really equates to? I don't think he's particularly referring to a 'dvd' edition, he is simply saying that while he was writing the book Koerber was preparing a restored version of the film that was yet to be seen publicly. xx

I naturally speculated that he couldn't possibly be (its a bfi monograph, right?) waiting for a film (i e photochemical) restoration in 2005 that was already completed in 1998, right? And when his book was coming out, the first dvd edition of the 98 Koerber resto was indeed in preparation.

That's like me saying I'm not going to comment on the political situation right now because I want to wait and see whether or not Bush gets elected in 2004.

I say that sort of stuff all the time, don't you? Just to confuse people.

Also posted in the MOC 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).

Really excellent, Dom H... The 2 releases are actually neck and neck, although I'm not much of a fan of Guillermo del Toro, so probably will plump for the CC... Quite a bit of overlap also with story 'Carmilla' reproduced on both....

and presumably the same restorer's essay too

Just a heads up that programme and restorers essay have been online for some time and posted here on this forum as well.

The essay.

The programme.

Gullermo del toro on Vampyr lol.

I think I'm going for the MoC (but may get both eventually). I've enjoyed all the MoC original docs and interviews *greatly*, and their booklets always trump Criterion's (del Toro commentary? Sounds Bogdanovichy.) Thanks for the head to head comparison.

It can sound silly but I think that another Criterion's Exclusive is the great cover. The MoC's cover is a little ugly. But I think that MoC wins in the Extras (by a little)

Thanks, domino harvey. It looks as if I'll have to get both versions now, which I'd otherwise never do!

domino harvey wrote:Also posted in the MOC 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).

Am I missing something? Looks like MOC is the handsdown winner on extras. Only thing missing is better cover art and Dreyer reading an essay (find the essay he's reading and you're covered, no?).

skuhn8 wrote:Am I missing something? Looks like MOC is the handsdown winner on extras. Only thing missing is better cover art and Dreyer reading an essay (find the essay he's reading and you're covered, no?).

This looks to be a labor of love for MoC while the Criterion looks to be a "well, we already had the other big Dreyer films out, so..."

The DeGunzberg doc, short or no, would fill the one major grey area about this film's production for me. So Much of the text essays (including the Koerber) & programme etc have been viewed by me years ago. And the Dreyer reading on the CC will probably have little to do with the film specifically. Like the Das excerpt on Naked City..

Actually much of the production is a huge grey area. But I'm afraid what little we know now is probably all we're going to know about it. But DeGunzberg was always an unknown quantity to me. (beyond the general knowledge of his amateur actor status, and the fact that he is in the film because his own (family's) money kept the film afloat during the great difficulties and industrail apathy Dreyer faced at this time)

There's actually fascinating info on de Gunzberg at his wikipedia entry which I stumbled across the other day. Not necessarily about Vampyr, but his later life is pretty interesting!

Steven H wrote:This looks to be a labor of love for MoC while the Criterion looks to be a "well, we already had the other big Dreyer films out, so..."

That's a little unfair, no? This isn't Armageddon or Chasing Amy! Criterion may not have as many extras, but as discussed earlier in this thread, they apparently got materials in terrible condition and had to spend a lot of time on cleanup. And their image may well be slightly better when all is said and done.

I think most Criterion, MoC, AEye, SR, etc. releases are a labor of love, even though the image/extras included on the end product is variable in every instance.

That said, I'm leaning toward the MoC for the extras. But I'll wait for a dvdbeaver comparison before taking the plunge.

jbeall wrote:

Steven H wrote:This looks to be a labor of love for MoC while the Criterion looks to be a "well, we already had the other big Dreyer films out, so..."

That's a little unfair, no? This isn't Armageddon or Chasing Amy! Criterion may not have as many extras, but as discussed earlier in this thread, they apparently got materials in terrible condition and had to spend a lot of time on cleanup. And their image may well be slightly better when all is said and done.

It was a little unfair and an exaggeration (I'll just stick to my "MoC = Labor Of Love" comment and leave out the "Criterion = Just Another Dreyer" idea, which surely isn't true). I can't wait to hear the Rayns commentary, actually.

I think it seems that way (it does so for me too) because MoC is a smaller company that probably isn't earning quite as much money. All of their releases seem like labors of love to me.

In fairness to all, this film suffers from an appallingly small amount of firsthand information... it's like all accounts of it's making have disappeared into the void. This renders all available materials fairly redundant.

But for CC's being "just another __________.." vs MoC, lets remember two things:

CC jas been straining to get this thing released for at least seven yrs if not longer. No way has this been an afterthought, and

MoC is using Lee Kline's HD telecine. So essentially both discs are attributable to CC's efforts to produce something above that which was used on the MK2.. though I'm sure a pre-commitment (perhaps in $) from MoC to buy the rights to the HD master aided the decision by CC to go ahead and do it.

HerrSchreck wrote:In fairness to all, this film suffers from an appallingly small amount of firsthand information... it's like all accounts of it's making have disappeared into the void.

Although it would certainly be wonderful to have more first hand information (or simply more information) on its making, I think that to some extent the absence of such only adds to the overall mystery that is Vampyr. This applies particularly to the film’s narrative – almost impossible to grasp at times. And this sense is amplified by the fact that it was shot almost entirely on location and actually has a very rooted sense of the real, physical environment (though of course these various 'spaces' cannot always be comprehended in terms of their relationship to each other). An ‘imagining’ of Vampyr’s production might even make a great film itself!

Lets discuss Vampyr the film itself. I think we all can agree on the film's visual inventiveness and it's amazing to watch for its images. But what about the story? Do you feel the film bogs down by the excessive use of intertitles especially after the discovery of the Vampyr book? I find myself wishing for the film to be completely free of intertitles, just for it to flow as one beautiful nightmare with no interruptions (like Menilmontant).

Ican see where you're coming from along those lines. The dude I bring up every now and then in conversation here who lives with his load of 4-5k vhs tapes is typical of the person who doesn't enjoy Vapmyr, not owing to the intertitles, but because of the pace, which they find boring. I'd mention the film and he'd immediately roll his eyes and start faux yawning.

But probing him on other films with a similar meditative tempo (Dreyer's subsequent films, Bresson, Tarkovsky, others.. like Sprit of the Beehive) I discovered he just can't assimilate into those atmospheres in general. Like Natalya Bondarchuk said re Solaris and the rest of AT's canon, "some people have it in them and some people don't" (paraphrasing)

On the intertitles, I can openly confess that I've fastforwarded thru them when on one of my quick "just passing thru" views of the film. But remember that this was mostly just the old version with the abysmal electronic intertitles.

HerrSchreck wrote:On the intertitles, I can openly confess that I've fastforwarded thru them when on one of my quick "just passing thru" views of the film. But remember that this was mostly just the old version with the abysmal electronic intertitles.

Yeah, this may be a situation where we'll need to wait for the MoC/CC editions. However, the intertitles remind me a bit of Herzog's commentary on his own Nosferatu: that the maker of a vampire movie has to hit certain touchstones, one of which is a pseudo-scientific explanation of what vampires are for the benefit of the characters (who presumably have never heard of the creatures before). The book that Gray reads (i.e., the intertitles) have always struck me as Dreyer simply paying lip-service to that convention.