Linkshoch Wonderful Movie

UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Acensbart Excellent but underrated film

Hattie I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

lasttimeisaw Dreyer's first sound feature, VAMPYR is an archetypal induction of the blood-hankering undead onto the celluloid screen (but not in its stereotyped appearance), made in a time when the story is foisted to unspool predominantly through title cards with minimal dialogs (sound recording is still a nascent embryo in Europe then), the film's chiefly non-professional cast serves as props rather than fully embodies flesh and occurrences are sometimes painstakingly tardy in their paces. Yet, Dreyer's modus operandi prospers in the somber, eldritch and never-wracking mise-en-scène, dispersed with thanatological symbols (the Grim Reaper in the beginning betokens its mythos), enhanced by a dream-like soft-focus tactility, and most extraordinarily, Dreyer's legerdemain of coaxing shadow and light into his narrative, a coup de maître where a soldier emerges with his seemingly discrete shadow denotes the mystic separation and unification of body and soul. During the thick of its vampyr-myth debunking sequences, our protagonist, the spiffy young man named Allan Gray (played by the French scion and later illustrious magazine designer Nicolas de Gunzburg under the alias of Julian West, who invests the movie with his own money to secure his dabbling into filmdom, which is his only screen credit) is afflicted by an out-of-body experience and witnesses a burying ceremony of his own body, swapping between camera's (subjective/objective, body/soul) viewpoints, the film reaches its most eerie, preternatural actualization of a blurred vision between real and unreal. German actress, Sybille Schmitz, whose real-life tragedy inspires Fassbinder's VERONIKA VOSS (1982), leaves behind an indelible image as the mostly bed-ridden vampyr-bitten girl, by dint of Dreyer's stock-in-trade expressive close-ups. Poetic justice prevails in its simplistic ending (why the girl's father who is in possession with the book doesn't try to extirpate the scourge if he is assumedly equipped with the know-how? A title card explanation would be apposite), but the scene where the evil village doctor impelled to receive his comeuppance potently flags up Dreyer's ingenious flight of fancy, and this time, without being curtailed in the religious solemnity and rigidity, Dreyer's VAMPYR surges with its top-drawer German expressionist idiom and avant-garde techniques that have timely reappraised the cachet of a film maudit.

qmtv Super Atmospheric, Good Acting and Music, The Story needed more workVery atmospheric, eerie characters. I saw the German version with English subtitles. Something may have been lost in the translation. Or maybe some parts were cut out. But the characters and the story was not well thought out or displayed in this version. Best part was when the old man walked in on the young drifter and just stared. Very creepy. Acting was good, but not great. Cinematography captured the scenes well. Music was good.Worth checking out. But I can only give this a C, 5 stars.

Leofwine_draca Despite having dialogue this feels very much like a silent film. This dated, spooky little gem concentrates on visual imagery rather than concentrate dialogue and this fact gives it a dreamy, ethereal quality rarely seen in modern cinema. Indeed the film works best as a series of haunting visual images as our hero experiences weird events, hallucinations, and frightening dreams. Although difficult to watch and not exactly entertaining, VAMPYR is nonetheless a fascinating horror film which taps into some of our deepest fears.Despite having a vampire, this is a film which actually feels like a ghost story due to some spooky scenes of character's spirits coming out of their bodies and walking about in dream states. Exceptional use is made of shadows as they are given lives of their own in a very unsettling way. The acting is understated and efficient, but there is little in the way of a linear plot or storyline - it's just the images, linked together to form a puzzling whole. This is definitely a unique item and a good example of expressionistic cinematography, and it stays in the mind long after viewing.

kfo9494 After reading all the reviews on this film, I considered it a 'must watch' event. However, I can honestly say that I was not as impressed as others.The story was good, the action was great and the feeling of horror was extreme. But I found the film hard to follow.It seemed that Allan Grey was going from one situation to another without explanation. One scene he is in an inn and the next scene he appeared to be following shadows in another building. He sat on a bench and the next thing we see is an out-of-body experience that seemed to be crucial but we are not sure of the reason.Carl T Dreyer, in my opinion, is one of the best directors in early cinema. But this film appears that he might have been holding onto the 'old-ways' too long. By 1932, films had somewhat good sound and the use of lighting excellent. But this film, or at least the copy I saw, reverses all the tends of film making. The appearance of the film felt more like 1922 than 1932.The film does stir strong emotions of evil and doom. The camera is used to let the viewer feel like they are part of the events on the screen. But at times we have to guess at the event.It's a good film and an fair watch. But be prepared to say "What just happened" during parts of the movie.