JackTwist wrote:Thanks. I went ahead and bought it. Felt super happy that I was able to get it because I thought it was a sure-fire miss. Could've gone with the Kino edition instead but that edition is UGLY! Bought this and Passion of Joan of Arc on blu-ray. Beside Vampyr, this will be my first true introduction to Dreyer and for that I'm very excited.
Why is the film so unknown? It seems most feel it is a Dreyer masterpiece.
I'd say there are very few, in general, silent films that are well-known by the general public. Very, very, very few. This isn't even Dreyer's most popular/best silent film. Part of the reason Dreyer didn't make a lot of films, I believe I've read, is his lack of commercial success. So an incredibly personal, high-minded artistic director who had little commercial success in his own time is bound to have a lack of popularity to a degree for all time (short a Hugo-type movie made about him). His admiration in film lover circles, however, is undeniable, and surely an important acknowledgement that keeps his career and films relevant to a certain population to this day.
Well I just re-watched this film, after having a bit of a Dreyer binge the last two weeks, and I'm glad to say I have a much better appreciation of his work. I've watched all of his DFI available films in the last three weeks and now re-watched Michael, and in terms of where this film stands among Dreyer's work, I don't see how one could not see this as a masterpiece.
This film moves in such a beautiful way, and I think is the first of his films that perfectly melds style and story. (I haven't seen Parson's Widow yet, nor Master of the House). It feels like a Dreyer film throughout, not merely showing flashes of his brilliance in the making. I found a few of his early works to be a bit burdened by plot, and while he uses shots such as an insert of flowing water or an empty forest to create atmosphere, they weren't, perhaps, fully ingrained in the film as well as every shot here is.
I've also read most of Dreyer In Double Reflection at this point, and so many of the ideas Dreyer mentions/brings up with his films come through so clearly here, first. The "realized mysticism" of the man and woman holding the statue, and their entire affair brings out the best of his genius throughout the film. The "gliding movement" that occurs when Michael paints the countesses' eyes, as well, is an amazing example of application of technique. As soon as Brutus and Cesar are brought up, the Master has a look on his face of dread and foreshadow. It is in his look alone that the betrayal at the end of the film is predicted, and the same look returns when the Master knows he has been betrayed. On top of the mystic nature of the film, the lighting and ways shots are composed is also absolutely beautiful.
Michael, to me, fits more with his Gertrud, Ordet, and Day of Wrath period of films than his early ones. One thing that really separates it from his early films is the lack of a clear good versus evil/protagonist versus antagonist. The President has a clear moral choice he can or can not make, as do the characters in Satan's book, Love One Another, and Bride of Glomdal. In Michael, The Master and Michael are both guilty of harming the other one. And again, the plot and how it ends is absolutely secondary to how the film plays out, evolves, and moves.
Now, I do like Dreyer's early films I've seen (with the exception of Satan's Book, which I felt was more burdened by plot and so many expository intertitles), so I do not mean to put them down at all. But Michael towers above them all I feel, and absolutely belongs in the conversation with his best works.
Eureka on Facebook wrote:Newsflash! We can reveal that Carl Th. Dreyer's MICHAEL is coming back to The Masters of Cinema Series in the new year! A stunning 1080p presentation from a brand new 2K restoration, will be available on Blu-ray for the very first time anywhere in the world.
Full Details will be announced in the next few months...
What A Disgrace wrote:Why does next year sound so much better than this year?
Probably because they've been forced to buck the trend and do less studio titles thanks to labels like Indicator and Arrow grabbing everything they would've gone for (from Sony, MGM and Fox anyway). Criterion too, of course.
Pretty good though as it means they've had to dig a little deeper, and not only are we getting an upgrade of a Dreyer I wasn't expecting - I honestly figured they'd upgrade Vampyr first, if only to prevent another potential Criterion UK acquisition - but several other decent titles are lined up for MoC in the new year: three early films from Hou Hsiao-hsien; King Hu's Legend of the Mountain; James Whale's The Old Dark House; Phillippe de Broca's King of Hearts; and at least one more from Billy Wilder (probably The Fortune Cookie or Witness for the Prosecution). And that's just what we know about!
Anyway, glad they're upgrading Michael as it means I no longer have to worry about hunting down the long-OOP DVD edition.
Great news! This is such a rich film, and for Dreyer it was second only to "The Passion of Joan of Arc" among his silents. There was a restored version screened at the Berlinale in 2006, two years after the MOC release.
...is it weird that MoC is billing the new restoration as a "World Exclusive?" Doesn't that strongly imply no one else will be releasing it, using stronger wording than the usual wording like above about it just being the first release in the world?
Mauritz Stiller made a version called The Wings (1916) which survives. Wish they could still try to add this as an extra, I don’t mind if it means a delay.
Thanks to both of you for posting (& in Mr. Hare's case, writing) the reviews - I had been looking for reviews over the weekend & hadn't found any. I will definitely be picking this up.
david hare wrote:Thanks Per-olof. Very nice review from Ben Pinsent. I hope they can sell out on this title.
I would like to add my voice and say I really enjoyed reading your review (my copy has already shipped). At the risk of going off-topic, the review mentions Michael as being one of your all-time top ten, and your blog contains a link to your top ten (which I can't get to work, searched on Senses of Cinema as well). I would be interested to know what films are your all-time greats, would you care to post them here (or a link)?
Finally caught up with this and although I don’t see it as a personal favorite Dreyer, I was taken with the degree to which the thematic exposition was more humane and emotionally based rather than tipping more to the philosophical in his later works (both are everpresent throughout his oeuvre, I would never accuse those later films of being unemotional but this one seems to prioritize the emotional on the scale of balance more than most). I particularly loved the depiction of loneliness and internal chaos that comes from isolation- not in physical separation but the opposite: the type that comes from being very close with another to the point of loving them so much that this feeling blends with a sense of self; and how the fear of, and experience with, not having that returned or reciprocated shatters the existential core. This happens to basically every character in this film, some more obviously than others. My favorite is Charles’ more subtle love for his friend, lurking in the background likely having a similarly extreme experience to Zoret with Michael, but able to manage it better - at least in the context of what we can see of him in this story- though his character could probably have his own movie out there if we shifted perspective, a conclusion that reveals the care in attention to detail of character in the filmmaker.
Dreyer doesn’t discriminate with this universal consequence of heartbreak and separation-in-togetherness that comes from active participation in life, including offering one’s emotional vulnerability in sharing oneself against the grain of another individual’s own unique personality and agenda. He even takes the high road and treats it not as tragedy but with gratitude for having that experience of love in the first place even if it’s comprised of mostly pain. It’s a mature and advanced psychological observation to work through so completely for 1924, in an era that didn’t recognize such emotional experiences and social dynamics publicly, and without many of the frameworks to do so privately either. And of course this is all impressive and bold in its tackling of subject without even the homosexual subtext to boot, which only elevates the raw authenticity of Dreyer’s portrait of culturally-defined masculinity itself contrasting the emotional distress. MoC’s restoration looks wonderful and the Pierre Oser score is appropriately brooding and passionately executed with cumulative momentum in its intensity. It’s a terrific package for a deserving film that’s unfortunately often not mentioned in conversations about the man, hopefully soon to change with exposure.
Revisited this one twice in the last two weeks and I can still find new moments and things to observe and draw from. The film is remarkably strong and good and really does foreshadow his final films. I will say, however, that I did not care for the score on this release., I found it too morose and the mood doesn't really adjust enough. I suppose parts of the score really work given the tone of the film, but there are some key moments where a change in the mood of the music would have been appropriate, and I think the film was weakened in their absence.
I for one thought there are two moments which are a little more lighthearted in the film. The Master's comment about painting a Caesar and Brutus painting...to me it seems as if it could be read as a bit of a joke. Michael sheepishly doesn't really "get it" and then the Master rolls his eyes. Later on the Master is joking around with the Michael after he walks in on their dinner. While this is obviously where the film really takes its first dark turn, the Master is laughing as Michael walks in. The somber minimalism of the score just doesn't do it for me, especially in these moments which I thought could have been contrasted with something more upbeat, so the film's later moments could play out more effectively.
unclehulot wrote: Sat Jul 01, 2023 4:49 am
The piano score (for Michael) that was on the dvd editions (MoC & Kino) is much better, but doesn’t seem to be on the new releases.
I think the issue is that the primary presentation on the DVD was the US version with a piano score by Neal Kurz, while a second disc presented the European version with a score by Pierre Oser (piano, clarinet & cello). The Blu-ray only includes this second presentation. Not sure why the DVD presented them in this order, since the liner notes call the Oser score "psychologically correct" and otherwise, the US version apparently includes changes to Dreyer's images to make the film more English-friendly
unclehulot wrote: Sat Jul 01, 2023 4:49 am
The piano score (for Michael) that was on the dvd editions (MoC & Kino) is much better, but doesn’t seem to be on the new releases.
I think the issue is that the primary presentation on the DVD was the US version with a piano score by Neal Kurz, while a second disc presented the European version with a score by Pierre Oser (piano, clarinet & cello). The Blu-ray only includes this second presentation. Not sure why the DVD presented them in this order, since the liner notes call the Oser score "psychologically correct" and otherwise, the US version apparently includes changes to Dreyer's images to make the film more English-friendly
I suppose the Oser score is “psychologically correct” if that means one requires a repetitious new-agey “general purpose” and non scene-specific treatment (there’s a scene which shows a performance of Swan Lake, but the Oser score just blithely sails right through with the same muzak….guess it was too much trouble to watch the film a see what was going on) , that could be plugged in to just about any film with about the same effect. Kino did not originally use the Oser score for their David Shepard produced version on DVD. It’s a shame both scores can’t be included. One would think some editing could synchronize the piano score to the HD version.
Anybody seen the Kino BD? Can’t find any comparisons with the now oop MoC. I have the MoC DVD, so I’ve already got the extras….just interested in the encode between the two BDs
Zot! wrote: Thu May 29, 2025 1:12 am
Anybody seen the Kino BD? Can’t find any comparisons with the now oop MoC. I have the MoC DVD, so I’ve already got the extras….just interested in the encode between the two BDs
Zot! wrote: Thu May 29, 2025 1:12 am
Anybody seen the Kino BD? Can’t find any comparisons with the now oop MoC. I have the MoC DVD, so I’ve already got the extras….just interested in the encode between the two BDs
