Two differences between this Austrian version and the generally available American version are immediately obvious: they differ both in their length and in the language of the intertitles. The American version is only 1,883 metres long - at 18 frames per second a difference of some 7 minutes to the Austrian version with 2,045 metres. Whereas we originally presumed only a negligible difference, resulting from the varying length of the intertitles, a direct comparison has nevertheless shown that the Austrian version differs from the American version both in the montage and in the duration of individual scenes. Yet how could it happen that the later regional distribution of a canonical US silent film was longer than the "original version"?
The prevalent American version of Blind Husbands does not correspond to the version shown at the premiere of 1919. This little-known fact was already published by Richard Koszarski in 1983. The film was re-released by Universal Pictures in 1924, in a version that was 1,365 feet (416 metres) shorter. At 18 frames per second, this amounts to a time difference of 20 minutes! "Titles were altered, snippets of action removed and at least one major scene taken out entirely, where von Steuben and Margaret visit a small local chapel." (Koszarski)
From the present state of research we can assume that all the known American copies of the film derive from this shortened re-release version, a copy of which Universal donated to the Museum of Modern Art in 1941. According to Koszarski the original negative of the film was destroyed sometime between 1956 and 1961 and has therefore been irretrievably lost. This information casts an interesting light on the Austrian version, which can be dated to the period between the summer of 1921 and the winter of 1922. Furthermore, the copy is some 200 metres longer than the US version of 1924. If one follows the details given by Richard Koszarski and Arthur Lennig, this means that, as far as both its date and its length are concerned, the Austrian version lies almost exactly in the middle between the (lost) version shown at the premiere and the re-released one.A large part of the additional length of the film can be traced to cuts that were made to the 1924 version in almost every shot. Koszarski describes how the beginning and the end of scenes were trimmed, in order to "speed up" the film. However, more exciting was the discovery that the Austrian version contains shots that are missing in the American one - shots/countershots, intertitles - and furthermore shows differences in its montage (i.e. the placing of the individual shots within a sequence). All this indicates that Die Rache der Berge constitutes the oldest and most completely preserved material of the film.
想法是挺好的，就是镜头晃的呀！画面还黑漆漆的！
认真看就输了，估计导演自己都没搞清楚编剧编得什么鬼
看结局男主的女朋友也会死吧
韩式驱魔来一点 废弃大楼探险来一点 时空交错和时空穿越来一点 有各种片的影子 但啥也没说好 逻辑各种混乱 导演都圆不上了
“你没有这种经历吗？虽然已经束手无策，但还是希望有奇迹发生。如果只要鼓掌，精灵就可以不用死去。那我也会感到一丝安慰。下次要是到了束手无策的时候，我会试着鼓掌的。”
循环没《恐怖游轮》好看，恐怖都是靠漆黑的环境、一惊一乍的画面、突然出现的鬼脸、扭曲的马赛克营造出来的，后半部分还是有惊喜的，总体及格以上吧
一段并不成功的爱情故事和一座修成正果的地标性建筑 作为学过建筑建构的建筑生 看到主人公在电影里不断描结构外侧感觉很出戏 整部电影没有特别抓人的高潮部分 也没有特别瞩目的短板 下次再去巴黎的时候 也许会对埃菲尔铁塔有多一重认识
就还蛮有趣的诶，中间扯东扯西的，最后连起来的时候才是恍然大悟。风间俊介演技超乎预期，藤原龙也我还是不太能get……
为什么评分这么低呀？气氛有昆池岩的感觉，同时有恐怖游轮的悬疑感，是这两年值得推荐的一部恐怖片。
空间交错挺不错，就是有点小乱，如果篇幅够长可以慢慢来，最后原来是都死了，一直在重复而已
鬼都不是人，哪来的人格？还有多重人格的设定？鬼杀人还需要依靠人格分裂这种能力吗？🥲
低配版的两个月亮。。鬼都可以有双重人格了。
全滅...我個人並不討厭這種結局,就是過程有些不足,或許是時長的問題.男主自己闖鬼樓是不是太托大?身上真沒什麼護身之物...照說自己單刷鬼樓的話,應該不管見誰就直接一杵刺過去,但男主偏不這樣...還要確認名字長相在鬼面前念誦一次才出手,所以錯過了好多次送走地縛靈的機會,讓自己落入地縛靈的掌控中,還被自己關在鬼門裡.人格分裂鬼的設定還挺有意思,有屍體派對幸子的感覺~善良幸子的黑暗人格,操控錘叔殺人!
气氛音效绝了
6.1/10 这节奏倒是不拖泥带水，演出效果跟独立恐怖游戏一样简单直接，就是还是太温柔了，恐怖度比不了昆池岩。
太暗了看的老费眼了ಥ_ಥ所以妹妹最后也进了大楼？
真的不必用這麽凌亂的剪切去講連鎖反應的故事吧，最後把綫索串起來的時候流暢得讓我長舒一口氣。
还可以吧，叙事顺序上下了点心思，有一点点恐怖游轮意思
看得出用了心 道具音效够吓人 但是男主是无干嘛的？我反正是忘了 我猜导演也忘了。。
编剧这样瞎编，编故事前都不看看百度百科吗。很狗血的爱情故事，婚外情全被写的很唯美，难已置信，三观不正。反而全片没有太多描写埃菲尔铁塔。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
