Vampyr - Der Traum des Allan Grey - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Vampyr - Der Traum des Allan Grey Reviews

Page 1 of 22
½ July 23, 2017
Not especially scary, but very deliberately silent and haunting. The plot was not well told, but Original stuff that certainly influenced the genre. I want to visit that town.
½ July 19, 2017
German expressionist vampire picture is not as great as Murnau's "Nosferatu," but it is far more surreal, atmospheric, and creepy. This was director Carl Theodor Dreyer's first talkie and is for the most part a silent film with a few moments of dialogue. Dryer still primarily uses title cards to and visuals to tell his story of a man who discovering a vampire is stalking a small town. The plot is rather thin, but in terms of style, the film is a visual feast. Some of the film surrealness includes unsettling reverse film shots, shadows not corresponding to their corporeal bodies, frightening dream sequences, astral projections, POV shots from a dead man, strange looking actors talking directly to the camera (ALA David Lynch), and many many more. The film's undoing is heavy handed symbolism and the lack of a strong plot, but I'm not sure that was really the focus of the filmmakers. Photographed by Rudolph Maté, this is a must see for fans of German expressionism.
June 15, 2017
Captivating and haunting.
February 23, 2017
The fact this has a happy ending really brings it down for me.
November 2, 2016
Another interesting movie from T. C. Dreyer. Very weird and non-linear.
½ October 27, 2016
Extremely odd. Yet enjoyable
October 4, 2016
Try to make sense of Carl Theodor Dreyer's "Vampyr" and you'll find yourself spinning in circles - this is a horror movie best looked at as an exercise in style, not a comprehensible adrenaline inducer featuring much that would characterize it as a quote unquote vampire movie. Vampires are involved in the plot, sure. But because the film reads as a cinematic fever dream to disarm the eyes and not the senses, it's more reasonable to be hypnotized by its images than attempt to keep up with the characters Theodor Dreyer barely sketches.
Eighty-four years later and "Vampyr" is widely regarded as being one of the finest horror movies ever made and a pivotal point in the career of Theodor Dreyer ("The Passion of Joan of Arc"). But from the critical and commercial standpoint of 1932, the film was a failure, an unlikable enchilada of blurry photography and dull nonsensicality. Since cinephiles of today are better equipped to appreciate the technical achievements of game-changing auteurs, "Vampyr's" interpretive renaissance only makes sense. But perhaps those close-minded ticket-buyers of nearly a century ago were slightly unerring in their disfavor of the movie's indirectness - while I'm in awe of Theodor Dreyer's cinematographic innovations and his masterful control over the film's hallucinatory atmosphere, there's no denying that its ephemerality makes it a fantasy pressed to successfully put us under its spell.
It puts on a front of having a storyline for the sake of appeasing the most difficult of a viewer, but I see "Vampyr" as using characters and their motivations as markers to stitch the celluloid together to keep it from floating away. The film, more or less, revolves around Allan Gray (Nicholas de Gunzburg), a young occultist whose view of the world, as the movie puts it, blurs the real and the unreal. His wandering nature thus leads him to the village of Courtempierre, a secluded region in north-central France. Gray doesn't plan to stay long - he's simply renting a room for the night - but after being awakened in the early hours of the morning by a strange man who appears to be in a trance (he even leaves a letter that's supposedly only to be opened in the event of his death), his stay gains in its meaning.
Especially when, after some investigation, Gray learns that the village, in actuality, is controlled by vampiric forces, with several of the town's residents being dominated by the vindictive energy. As examinations deepen and revelations increase, Gray very well might find his life drastically altered in the process of his getting used to Courtempierre.
A lot of those descriptions, though, stem from a great deal of inferring and speculation - while watching "Vampyr" was I not so much caught up in the logistics of the plot (if there are any) as I was taken aback by Theodor Dreyer's torrent of stunning imagery, all gorgeously realized (his utilization of the soft focus lens is an absolutely brilliant touch) and all luscious in their nightmarish disconcertion. The film's more inclined to evoke artistic intoxication than a night's worth of spine chills, however, and our reaction to it is more comprised of admiration than emotional torment.
Which is precisely the problem I have with "Vampyr." Though unquestionably ravishing and unprecedented in its experimentations, Theodor Dreyer always keeps us at an arm's length, never to erase our surroundings and draw us into the world he's so methodically created. And in the wake of the incredibly affecting "The Passion of Joan of Arc," paling in comparison is inevitable. But much of "Vampyr" is extraordinary; this is filmmaking at its most daring and its most peerless.
½ September 6, 2016
Between 2.5 and 3. Although little story and vague plot, the use of image (shadows, the girl opening to the evil) is great, and some aspects have not been overcome by time.
May 14, 2016
Truly gorgeous stuff, but kinda gets convoluted after the first act unfortunately. Didn't need to be.
May 11, 2016
More hypnotically surreal than anything, Vampyre feels like a nightmare where you're living in an arcane photograph.
½ December 29, 2015
Ah films about Vampires, you either get your blood thirsty crazy looking vampires or your calculated vampires whose thirst for blood is much more creepy than scary. Vampyr the film from Carl Th. Dreyer is really the creepy kind with its weird looking sets, surreal events and just characters whose emotions are conveyed through body language much more than by words. Dreyer somehow manages to get that dark underlying feeling all successful horror movies must have but in my opinion does not create any kind of masterpiece here, good, but not as perfect for me as some say this is. The story revolves a young man who is introduced to the world of vampires and the supernatural, as the plot moves on we see more about what they are and what they can do.

Dreyer uses a cast not very well known if not in some cases at all and puts Nicolas de Gunzburg in the lead role as Allan Gray the young man whose fascination with the supernatural takes him to a small inn in the village of Courtempierre. For me the best character is the village doctor played by Jan Hieronimko who was found on a Paris metro train of all places and cast into the film among many other amateurs. I feel that Hieronimko's performance is similar to others in this too, I mean the acting here is not exactly great, don't get me wrong it's not bad at all but sometimes they just move around a little sluggishly, reactions are sometimes over the top. Dreyer knows though how to use his actors well though, even if they aren't too believable, he does this in a spooky way and although they move around just a little strangely, at times that strange movement can be kind of freaky and used to nice effect.

Dreyer co-writes the film with Christen Jul and the script but in more specifics the dialogue is very well, not much there, but that is one reason this movie works so well. At such a short running time that this film is you can't be adding too much small talk, in fact this film dives into the plot very quickly indeed and it works well because it makes this so much more interesting, straight away you are hooked in on the story and that makes this at least very watchable. The film was not exactly met with positivity when it was first released and was considered a low point in Dreyer's career, the thing about this film though is that although I feel this is a little too clunky to be anything better than good, it is still well as I said, good, a must see for any fan of cinema or horror.

Vampyr is not the best horror film but it is as I can see considered a classic among it so I can't finish this review without recommending it. It won't make you jump, in fact it won't probably make you feel scared at all but that I feel is not what Dreyer is trying to convey, it is the surrealism of it that he tries to make you see and tells a story that is highly original and a very smart yet weird story. All the characters Dreyer creates are well done and although I mentioned the acting before it is fair to say they all do a pretty decent job at least all together as a cast. Oh and one more thing and this is pretty important really, the camera angles, Dreyer works extremely well with Rudolph Mate and they create a film that looks not just creepy, but also looks extremely surreal as well.
December 25, 2015
Surprising use of effective camera angles and visual effects including shadows and superimposed imagery - from 1932 Swedish director Carl Dreyer.
½ October 31, 2015
Filled with lovely imagery and some daring dream sequences, Vampyr is more an example of something you'd watch to appreciate than to really experience. The story is standard (a man visits a town only to come in contact with the supernatural) and the sound elements are barely there, but as a whole, it works as a visually compelling look into the early stages of the horror genre and a stylish piece of classic cinema- just don't expect to find anything beyond that point.
October 14, 2015
The mind boggles at how this must have played on release in 1932 because, here in 2015, this phantasmagorical Vampire tale kind of blew my mind.
½ October 5, 2015
It does take a fresh approach into the Vampire mythology, but it can take a confusing turn at the very end.
July 9, 2015
Classic horror film from Danish director and silent film auteur Carl Theodor Dreyer. This is not like most vampire films, but it is moody and creepy and can give you the genuine creeps. Shot mostly like a silent film with limited dialogue, and relies mostly on the images and a few title cards. I'd recommend this film over the Bela Lugosi-starring "Dracula" from the same era.
March 28, 2015
A masterpiece and an example of expressionistic psychological horror if not the greatest vampire film.
½ January 24, 2015
Interesting visuals; overlays of multiple exposures and other early film special effects uses shadow and texture.
The plot seems to largely consist of a Latin version of HP Lovecraft look a like wandering around a small fishing town. The story it self is super vague and loose.
Would have been cool to see in high definition, but DVD is the best they have at the moment.
January 17, 2015
This film is undoubtedly home to some elegantly disorienting images, but the one thing that really stands out for me is director Carl Dreyer's use of sound, which is nothing short of revolutionary...especially when you consider that this was going to be a silent film practically until the moment it came time to shoot. The sound design (not to mention the music) is the most unsettling thing about it, at least for me. The entire film was shot silent, and dubbed later in German and French versions (an English version was planned but evidently never recorded); all the more amazing that even by today's standards the audio aspect of the film is still unusual enough and effective enough to qualify as 'cutting edge': today's filmmakers could learn a thing or two from Dreyer when it comes to using sound and music to enhance image. Having said that I don't want to undersell the visual aspect; this is among the most physically beautiful of all horror films, its pictures generating a luminescent surreality that is so very like an uncomfortable dream. There are no outright scares to be found here, a la even 'classical' monster films such as Frankenstein or The Mummy, but it haunts you like a half-remembered nightmare, its gauzy dream-pictures moving through the back of your mind with all the deadly stealth of a black widow spider; for instance, the grotesquely smiling face of a recently-vampirized young woman gazing lustfully into her sister's eyes is chilling enough without descending into melodramatic cheap scares or parading artificial boogeymen in front of the camera. The plot, as if I need to point this out, is practically nonexistent; Dreyer's world is as divorced from any conventional notions of reality as that of Buñuel or Cocteau or Vigo. The influence this film exerted over scores of future directors from David Lynch to Dario Argento, from Roman Polanski to Mario Bava, is plain to see. Not for everyone -- and modern horror fans expecting conventional thrills may feel shortchanged -- but worth it for the discriminating film buff.
Page 1 of 22