25 Vampyr

Message

Tommaso · #26 Post by **Tommaso** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:38 am

Now don't tell me he had any other interests than watching films!
But, yes, I remember that he posted some time ago he was buying some Korg synth and would be busy with it. Well, always better to do art than just talk about it. And denti, I guess he's really afraid because of the 'family jewels', but don't triumph too early. After all, the final confirmation of the 1.19 is still missing.

HerrSchreck · #27 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:53 pm

No no no he hasn't disappeared. Just a lot less free time on his hands. And not a synth but a 32 track.

And he is most emphatically NOT a welcher! The deal was Dent that I would take you to a show of a good silent at Moma, something along those lines.

First of all BRAVO... thank god at last an english language release of this resto... I'll bet a CC is not far away now.... And I'll wager that it will be from the same digibeta used by MK2, so expect a 1.33. Tom do you see the aperture marks on the corners of the MK2? In scenes do you see them in two or more corners at the same time? Thaat would tell you something definitive in mathematical/geometric terms right there.

Friends I dontt know if we'll ever get the definitive answer on VAMPYR. Since the Koerber resto is from a hodgepodge of elements (a composite of various language prints, PLUS SILENT... with a single release soundtrack married to it) my guess is that the printing fluctuations of ar size(visible on the SCHMITZ doc) are a result of multiple prints used resulting in instability in the gate. Remember that we don't "know" that Koerber said the film was 1.19. Pillarboxing is such old hat by now I cant believe MK2 would just flop it over into 1.3 for no reason whatsoever. Assuming they used what they got-- why in gods name would the Murnau foundation provide a tape with an incorrect ar of it's own restoration?

Now that Nick has finally announced, let's stay cool and see what he comes up with and what his reasons are. Remember however that VAMPYR was both silent as well as sonorized, so who knows what the answer to all this confusion is.

I've got to log off now but best to all you guys until next time-- Tom, Dent, Dave, Michael, etc... I'll keep popping in (I told you Dave I wouldnt be gone indefinite, just not near as much as I used to). Thanks for asking about me,all...

peerpee · #28 Post by **peerpee** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:09 pm

Good to see you back, Schreck.

We're using a new HD transfer made a few months ago in Denmark from the restored IP. We're not using the digibeta that MK2 used.

This title has nothing to do with the Murnau Stiftung in Germany. MoC convinced the DFI that they owned it, as it was left to them in Dreyer's will, and they've been strong enough to take the bull by the horns.

This new HD transfer has also been snapped up for release in the USA.

More on the AR in a week or two.

ellipsis7 · #29 Post by **ellipsis7** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:16 pm

Now that's superb news about the source material and the transfer... Oct or Nov release maybe?

denti alligator · #30 Post by **denti alligator** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:29 pm

peerpee wrote:MoC convinced the DFI that they owned it, as it was left to them in Dreyer's will, and they've been strong enough to take the bull by the horns.

This makes me so happy. I'll be grinning for weeks. I'll probably still be grinning when word comes back that this is 1.19 AR so that I can get my date with Schreck.

peerpee wrote:This new HD transfer has also been snapped up for release in the USA.

Any clue who snapped it up?

Michael · #31 Post by **Michael** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:33 pm

Now that's superb news about the source material and the transfer... Oct or Nov release maybe?

Before Halloween hopefully.

But it's the most exciting DVD news in months, maybe years.

peerpee · #32 Post by **peerpee** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:39 pm

denti alligator wrote:Any clue who snapped it up?

It would be remiss of me to say.

Tommaso · #33 Post by **Tommaso** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:03 pm

Schreck, good to see you back, even if you don't come here as often as formerly. Hope you are as excited as I am about the forthcoming arthaus edition of Pabst's "Der Schatz" (I know, no english subs, but still...)

Back to topic: Nick's announcement that this will come from a different source than the MK2 is better than I have ever expected! I'm pretty sure that this time we will get it in the correct ratio whatever it may be (contrary to my original post in the MK2 thread, David's observations about the change of aspect ratio in between the film have pretty much convcinced me now that it is 1.19, but we will see...).

HerrSchreck wrote: Tom do you see the aperture marks on the corners of the MK2? In scenes do you see them in two or more corners at the same time? Thaat would tell you something definitive in mathematical/geometric terms right there.

Quite honestly, I didn't, and I must confess I didn't particularly watch out for them if they are there. That damn film simply blew my mind again (and that resto did the rest).

HerrSchreck wrote: Assuming they used what they got-- why in gods name would the Murnau foundation provide a tape with an incorrect ar of it's own restoration?

No, the Murnau foundation would quite definitely not send them an incorrect tape, considering their efforts to get "M" and "Testament" right. I simply don't know MK2's track record concerning these old films. It would be interesting to know whether they ever released anything in 1.19. If they did, then they would sure have done so here. But I guess all this talk will be completely futile (or is even now) with the MoC being imminent. An HD transfer compared to digibeta will almost definitely be superior. Not to talk of the extras.

Ledos · #34 Post by **Ledos** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:28 pm

Does anyone know where MK2 got their material from? Was it a master from the DFI print or from somewhere else?

daniel p · #35 Post by **daniel p** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:09 pm

peerpee wrote:
denti alligator wrote:Any clue who snapped it up?
It would be remiss of me to say.

oh dear...

Tommaso · #36 Post by **Tommaso** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:12 am

davidhare wrote:Who else!

Kino?

agnamaracs · #37 Post by **agnamaracs** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:11 pm

peerpee wrote:This new HD transfer has also been snapped up for release in the USA.

Is this an NTSC or a PAL transfer?

MichaelB · #38 Post by **MichaelB** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:22 am

davidhare wrote:Fo Nick to confirm but if it's an HD Datacine it should be switchable to either PAL or NTSC for SD disc pressing.

If the master was created with Transatlantic licensing in mind it would have been stark staring insane to go for any other option, so I think it's a pretty safe assumption.

denti alligator · #39 Post by **denti alligator** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:49 pm

Someone on the Beaver listserv wrote:

We showed a restored print of Vampyr at our cinema where we are able to present each film in its intended aspect ratio, no matter what (no 70 mm though ). Vampyr was claerly 1.19 : 1, so that a 1.33 is severely cropped. I hope MoC are aware of this.

HerrSchreck · #40 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:26 pm

peerpee wrote:Good to see you back, Schreck.

We're using a new HD transfer made a few months ago in Denmark from the restored IP. We're not using the digibeta that MK2 used.

This title has nothing to do with the Murnau Stiftung in Germany. MoC convinced the DFI that they owned it, as it was left to them in Dreyer's will, and they've been strong enough to take the bull by the horns.

This new HD transfer has also been snapped up for release in the USA.

More on the AR in a week or two.

That is like really WILD! (and kudos to your perseverance).

So my question then becomes-- does this DFI transfer have anything to do with KOerbers restoration? In other words are DFI doing their own transfer from their own restoration from their own composite (dif language prints, ar's, etc, creating different composites for resto could result in a uniqueness from resto to resto of course if!!!) entirely seperate from the long study that resulted in Koerbers resto?

And then of course-- is my guess that the MK2 is from the German/Koerber resto correct? Ie did Mk2 use a digibeta sent to them from the resto we had heretofore (before Nicks announcement of a 2nd, DANISH resto come into play?) been aching for?.

Talk about feast or famine! Now we got two resto's when we were prev slavering for just ONE. Will make for interesting study!

Lastly, what made you want another resto, since the Koerber was known to be glorious (this doesn't mean that I think your's wont be better, dont get me wrong)?

peerpee · #41 Post by **peerpee** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:51 pm

There is no other restoration. The Koerber restoration was paid for by Bologna, and the DFI have access to it because they've rightfully claimed copyright. We could have taken the DFI's digibeta (which is what MK2 used, I believe), but a new HD telecine has been made instead.

More on the AR tomorrow, hopefully.

Ledos · #42 Post by **Ledos** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:22 pm

peerpee wrote:There is no other restoration. The Koerber restoration was paid for by Bologna, and the DFI have access to it because they've rightfully claimed copyright.

One of the things Koerber mentioned when I contacted him about some questions regarding to Vampyr was that DFI had acquired a print of the restoration some time after it was completed. They also have another print, German sound with Danish intertitles, but this is apparently more of a reconstruction than a restoration as it was completed with material from other archives.

denti alligator · #43 Post by **denti alligator** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:30 pm

peerpee wrote:More on the AR tomorrow, hopefully.

Peerpee, anything to report on this?

peerpee · #44 Post by **peerpee** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:50 pm

The entire film is pillarboxed 1.19:1 on our new master.

denti alligator · #45 Post by **denti alligator** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:56 pm

Thanks. This is great to finally know for sure. I am so thrilled about this release. Any extras you can divulge?

Schreck, wanna take me to one of those Vertovs at Anthology? You owe me one now!

Ledos · #46 Post by **Ledos** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 4:42 am

peerpee wrote:The entire film is pillarboxed 1.19:1 on our new master.

Good to know. Since the transfer was done months ago, and it took so long to report what the aspect ratio of the transfer was, I was beginning to get genuinely worried that there were bad news. Good thing that this was not the case! But why was it an uncertainty for so long?

Also, any estimates on when it will be released?

kekid · #47 Post by **kekid** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:30 pm

Tommaso wrote:
davidhare wrote:Who else!
Kino?

I recently received a Kino flyer that makes no mention of Vampyr. Does that increase the probability that it is going to be Criterion?

justeleblanc · #48 Post by **justeleblanc** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:54 pm

kekid wrote:I recently received a Kino flyer that makes no mention of Vampyr. Does that increase the probability that it is going to be Criterion?

I've heard things from my Criterion friends that this will be a Criterion release.... but then nothing specific has been mentioned.

CSM126 · #49 Post by **CSM126** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:03 pm

This ought to count for something (note "Coming Soon: VAMPYR" at the bottom):

#50 Post by **domino harvey** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:05 pm

post about Shanghai Express next