Continue with Google
>
Les Vampires Reviews
The days when serial dramas were shown at the cinema are long since over. Given the notoriety of these serials, which were the cinematic equivalent of the penny dreadful, it is surprising to come to Les Vampires, a French serial movie made in ten parts that must count as one of the earliest serials. Whatever we can say about Les Vampires, it is never dull, never formulaic, and it does not cheat the viewer. Even by the standard of 1915 to 1916, Feuillade's cinematic style was simple, and a little crude. Scenes are filmed in long takes with no camera movement. The camera is placed at a middle distance from the characters with only a few close-ups to allow the audience to read letters and notes. This may be because Feuillade made the films on the cheap. The sets are basic. The same furniture is reused in different settings. Doors are obviously painted on, although they are designed to open. Stock footage was employed. Each episode was made in haste with very little script, and no particular direction. This last point may explain the extraordinary inventiveness of Les Vampires. Feuillade and his team were making things up on the hoof, and this allowed for considerable variety in the settings, and in the action of Les Vampires. Each episode tells a separate story with no cliffhangers, and brings something fresh to the narrative. It is a testament to the fertility of the imagination of everyone involved that this did not result in a dull or muddled production where the story returned to the same tropes each week. Indeed the improvisational nature of the plot has a peculiar absurdist quality to it that makes the film seem more surrealist than was perhaps intended. Luis Buñuel claimed to have been influenced by the film, and so also were New Wave directors such as Alain Resnais and Georges Franju. Feuillade also set the scene for later thriller directors, among them Alfred Hitchcock and Fritz Lang. If modern reviewers are lukewarm about Philippe and Mazamette, there is unanimous love for the character of Irma Vep, the only Vampire who appears in most of the episodes. Strictly speaking Irma Vep's character is not much deeper than that of the other regulars. Feuillad does not devote much attention to characterisation, nor does he need to. However Musidora's performance in the role has a spirit about it that makes her a curiously appealing villain. It helps that the actress was also an acrobat who performed her own stunts. Musidora's appearance in Les Vampires proved helpful for her film career. She went on to appear in a number of films, and even directed some. Her dark eyes (she used kohl), pale skin, unusual clothes and lively acting immediately draw the viewers' attention to her. Les Vampires is superior pulp fiction. The criminals kill, sedate or threaten people with an infinite variety of methods, including bombings, shootings, stabbings, gassing, and poisoning. Paralysing darts are concealed in gloves. Bombs are hidden in hats. Victims are killed by decapitation, with poisonous ink, and with a hat pin. If the Vampires wish to intimidate Moréno, they could have used a drive-by shooting or a bomb, but if you have a cannon hidden inside your hearth, it would be a shame not to use it. Ordinary settings become menacing. There is no safety in the home, at the opera house, or while attending a social gathering with dozens of guests. A party to celebrate an engagement is broken up when the guests realise the champagne has been poisoned. This is a world of locked rooms that contain secret chambers, safes that open from the wall behind, and secret hideouts that are hidden below wells and manholes. t is marked by a number of side stories that suddenly appear for one or more episode, and which seem entirely unnecessary to the action. For example, in Part Eight, Mazamette's son is expelled from school, and the little boy is enlisted in the dangerous work of entrapping Satanas. After this episode we never see the child again. I saw that these stories are unnecessary, but they are the sauce that makes Les Vampires so tasty. Its many bizarre plot twists, far-fetched crimes, peculiar leaps in logic, and constantly changing storylines keep the thriller from ever going stale. Feuillade was probably wise to wrap up after ten parts. While the serial is entertaining until the end, there are a few signs of him repeating himself – a second mesmerist, a second lassoing from a window, a second fiancée, etc. However even the last episodes contain new ideas, and provide a satisfying conclusion to the thriller. It is said that Les Vampires was condemned at the time for glorifying crime and dubious morality. Certainly the series does revel in the antics of its eponymous gangsters, but the events in Les Vampires are so gloriously unreal that the story is more of a fantasy than a celebration of any realistic criminal activity. Feuillade shows a good grasp of pace and creates one of the most imaginative serials ever made. I wrote a longer appreciation of Les Vampires on my blog page if you would like to read more: https://themoviescreenscene.wordpress.com/2021/03/20/les-vampires-1915-16/
This film was so long that you would be better off watching it in episodes. Most of it is really boring by today's standards but some of it is still very valuable cinema. If you love silent films watch it. Otherwise skip it.
I enjoyed the thought beyond this film but the length hurt it a little in my opinion. It helped that it was broken up into chapters, but I think I shot myself in the foot by sitting and watching it all in one lump. I may have to tackle this again someday in the future.
A groundbreaking film serial starring the magnetic Musidora.
"It's Mazamette, friend of Philippe Guérande!" What? Mazamette has done more for other people than anyone else in this damn story, better show some respect. At seven hours, one of the more intimidating features to have appeared on the 1001 Films to See Before You Die, Les Vampires is nevertheless one of the more influential and popular of the early serials in the modern day. Condemned as commercial pulp upon first release, the film has grown in esteem not only for its technical accomplishment, but for its widespread influence on the modern thriller and action genres, predominantly crime films, but also general 'investigation' narratives and spy stories. That said, there are certainly plenty of populist elements that clearly were designed to appeal to a mass audience rather than critics - goofy gadgets, heist subplots, and melodrama. But is that really so different from your average modern action film? Les Vampires was among the most accomplished of the early films to establish such tropes, and deserves credit for doing so. In some ways, the film actually carries a greater degree of realism than modern counterparts; one of the recurring criticisms of fight scenes in action films is: "Why don't they just shoot them?" Well, here characters do that shockingly (often humorously) frequently. The structure would predict the course of several other long-running pieces of media in years to come, such as comic books, with its narrative conveniences and management of stakes in such a way that was designed to keep the narrative going without losing viewer interest, such as the introduction of new (oh, so much more terrifying!) antagonists when earlier counterparts are killed off, as when Satanas is introduced as the 'true' Grand Vampire. Plenty of diversity in the settings, including many on-location shots, bring a sense of energy to the film. A piece of film history that may be a bit tough to budget time for, but worth it to see the widespread influence that it has had among successive generations of writers, producers, and directors. (4/5)
1001 movies to see before you die. This one was a chore. Thank goodness it was on public domain. Regardless, it still is a special production that went reminded me of a tv series. However, there are no actual vampire, just criminals. The plot was not the best though and it dragged at times.
So the film has great characters, story, atmosphere, music, and camerawork. What's the problem? For many, it comes down to the length of the picture. I'm a firm believer that a film being long is not an automatic flaw. I'd be down to watch a 20-hour epic if it managed to hold my attention through all 20 hours. Unfortunately Les Vampires fails to do that. The cinematic moments are fantastic, breathtaking even, but they are scattered throughout the seven hour runtime. The final three parts slow down to an unbearable crawl (honestly, I almost gave up on this), and the conclusion is not noteworthy enough to justify the build up. It's a product of its time for better or worse.
Tarantino put the poster of Les Vampires at the Parisian cinema of Inglorious Basterds. This wildly-acclaimed masterpiece definitely has its status in the history of cinema. The narration of this series of silent films was really outstanding, only to be outperformed by its intriguing storyline, which was conjured one whole century ago. Respects. I gave Irma Vep (1996) the same rating as this, but whatever. Apples and oranges. 20151015 @ Anthology.
A crime thriller about a gang of no-gooders in France and the reporter trying to bring them to justice. Of course, they take his interest personally, so for nearly seven hours they attempt to murder him, his mother, his finance, and other people in his life. Les Vampires is considered a masterpiece because it influenced so many directors in the years that followed, including those of the German Expressionist movement and later work in American horror, gangster, crime thriller and film noir. By modern standards, the basics are here, including basic camera work like the occasional pan and fixing the camera to a moving platform like a car. In the earlier episodes of this 10-part serial, the acting is restrained; things get more dramatic by the end. I enjoyed the earlier parts the best, mostly because they were compact and generally under 30-minutes. The later parts that stretched to nearly an hour became tedious, so I had to watch them over several nights. One of the problems is that the plot becomes increasingly dependent on fantastic elements, including science fiction and hypnotism. The acting is, well, hard to judge, but seemed fine especially in the earlier chapters. Comic relieve was provided by the character Oscar-Cloud Mazamette and his tiny son, Eustache Mazamette. Édouard Mathé as the "crack newspaper writer" Philipe Guérande was generally mild-mannered, except for moments of humor and slapstick with Mazamette. The various Grand Vampires (the gang leaders) were sufficiently evil. The standout, of course, was Musidora as the femme fatale Irma Vep. Diabolical and seemingly indestructible, she vamps her way through the events and apparently became a fan favorite. One downside of many silent films restored for modern audiences is the music, and Les Vampires is no different. I heard two different versions of music, one that was monotonous and another that was too busy and electronic.
Rather than a 60-95 minutes feature, Les Vampires consists of 10 parts which total to 6 hours and 30 minutes. Fortunately not all 10 parts are required at one time. Each part consists of different stories which all fall under an overall arc regarding a criminal gang known as The Vampires. It's an interesting idea that fans of the silent film era would love. However, for those who prefer their features with a bit of dialogue may struggle to get through it. The first part starts off fairly well. Through the use of movement and suitable dialogue slides, it is easy to understand the story from start to finish. Characters are distinguishable from one another and the environment sets the scene. Unfortunately, from what started off with an interesting lead eventually ended in an conclusion which was a bit of a let down. As you work through each part, you will notice many similarities between the sets, characters and the plot to the point that you struggle to keep interested. By the time you reach the end of the tenth part, you are just relieved that it has ended. However, if I must praise Les Vampires for anything it would be the decision to tint the screen different colours. Rather than keep the screen a standard colour, it switches to reflect the time or the day and the mood. Whilst this is still confusing at times, it is a little idea that I thought was nice to see. If shortened down from the epic running time, it might have more of a chance to impress. A 6 hour serial could have worked, it just doesn't have enough in it past the second part to impress me personally. However, I can't deny that it has been made well for the early years of cinema.
Película #998: Una de las primeras series que en el ámbito cinematográfico y uno de los primeros thrillers de los que se tiene memoria, con más de 6 horas de duración y durante 10 partes nos muestra el enfrentamiento entre un periodista y una banda criminal llamada "los vampiros".
Louis Feuillade's astonishing 6+ hour silent film, divided into ten chapters, ranks among the masterful pleasures of cinema - complex, mysterious, and damn good fun.
Worth the seven hours.
For a 7 1/2 hour silent film serial seen nearly 100 years later, its striking major accomplishment is that it is fun. An intrepid reporter and his wacky friend Mazamette chase the evil criminal gang The Vampires through 10 episodes full of secret doors, letters with invisible ink, poison gas (or poison champagne), kidnappings, robberies, incredible stunts, and general mayhem. Feuillade never moves his camera (although he does cut frequently within scenes) but within the scene there is movement, deep focus, and a great use of framing. To this eye, it is modern enough, in technique and story, that I'm ready to start a conspiracy that it is a faux silent film (actually directed by Kubrick, taking a break from directing the moon landing for NASA).
While luck is on the side of the squeaky clean heroes, the audiences sympathies may well be directed to the villains in this early serial following the criminak exploits of Les Vampires and their muse, the original Irma Vep. Good fun, but it would have been interesting to see the audience reaction at the time.
Super-cool serial film that's nearly one-hundred years old.
The only criticism I have for this brilliant brilliant crime epic is that after a while the sets get a little samey.
â~Les Vampiresâ(TM) is a 399-minute film (or rather film serial) broken into ten pieces, following the story of a mysterious gang that also gives the film its title. Working for good to stop these crooks are reporter Phillipe Guerande (Edouard Mathe) and his friend Oscar Mazamette (Marcel Levesque). What unfolds is a marathon of fast paced, whimsical set pieces with brilliant scope and daring experimentation. Showcasing everything from mysterious gothic costuming to one of filmâ(TM)s first buddy action adventures, stunning sets and wild camera work, writer/director Louis Feuilladeâ(TM)s film is a groundbreaking piece that is unconstrained by the conventions of modern cinema. The most obvious example of this is the format in which it is presented. The ten segments range from 15 to 60 minutes in length, hardly offering the consistency of even a modern mini series, and well beyond the two, or even three hour length of nearly all of todayâ(TM)s longest features. This inclusion of segments makes it a much less daunting beast to tackle, offering new arcs and small closures to break down the mammoth runtime. The result is surprisingly fast-paced storytelling that is also boosted by the varying lengths of each little arc, which supply a spontaneity and energy void of unwanted filler in the name of uniformity. The total length allows for thorough, intriguing character developments and the promise that leads can happily switch sides and loyalties throughout, avoiding any explanatory monologues or jumps in logic that might compress such developments. All in all, itâ(TM)s an epic given in small, elaborate chapters, which is pleasing in its grand effect thanks largely to the buddy film at the heart of the investigation and some stunning, and (from a modern sensibility) wonderfully stylized special effects work. This is one of the more relatable, timeless, and satisfying silent films Iâ(TM)ve seen, and its constructs and stories are so active even today, that for all its aged aspects it remains relevant. Sure it is long, but as with long airplane rides, properly broken up and mentally prepared for it is quite a treat. As with most movie marathons I suggest getting into it when youâ(TM)re slightly tired, when the body is happy to rest yet your mind is still ready to take in a story. The finale is fitting and satisfying, and though there are inconsistencies in which serials are best or most prominent, it remains a largely focused, genre-defining trip through early cinematic storytelling, free of a format that has come to define motion pictures and television alike. It is a great, untarnished reminder of the camera as a tool for telling stories in new and fun ways.