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.
这电影是收集了韩国艺能圈所有欧式大双眼的男演员吗？除了小崔，阿加西个个都…
真的，为了崔宇植看的，但挺混乱冗长的，小崔演技依然很好，演任何角色都能带入，前期卧底时，换成香港警匪片秒被发现，导演功力实在太浅了。
以毒攻毒以暴制暴。我个人赞成这种做法，你秉行正义，犯罪分子可不给你面子。你鸣枪示警三次，人家上前就捅你一刀。警察本身就是危险行业，只要他做的事光明正大，只要一心为民。
还是太像儿童电影了，但是批判唯成绩论的味还在，喜欢郑渊洁的童话是因为故事中善恶不分明，批判性强，只是这个结尾有点崩
翻拍日本的《孤狼之血》，讲真，日版更黑暗更压抑，同时也更有张力，画面比本片也好太多。同样的本子，本片拍得太平庸了。
虽然影像和情节有不少显得散乱的地方，不过整体依然是可爱的，小演员也都很努力，在一眼看上去就很假的特效面前呈现出了一种真。
奔着梗概里“高密度神秘推理”看的，看不出推理了什么
卧底是闹着玩的吧，前面还以为班长故意让他拍照跟踪......男主被捅刀也很无语......
赵震雄加崔宇植，依然挡不住片子太烂。这两年韩国电影真的不太行啊～
一部上来十分钟，人物背景和关系乱到看不下去的电影。
86'鲁西西获奖感言：这段时间我新认识了几个小伙伴，也一起经历了很多不可思议的事情。他们让我知道只有将知识融会贯通，最终被我们所运用才是真正的智慧。勇敢从来都和身高没有关系，也不是恃强凌弱，而是用不惧怕的态度接受未知的挑战。每个人都有自己的梦想，应该坚定自己的内心，勇敢追求，并为之付出努力。我们只有真诚对待别人，才会为别人温柔以待，我们应该敞开心扉，学会沟通去感受彼此的爱，我们都不是完美的孩子，每个人的爱好和特长都不尽相同，学习成绩很重要，但还有很多更重要的品质值得我们珍惜。
看着让我想起了日本的孤狼之血，感觉没有很大创新。
拍的有点感觉乱了，但是也还行，韩国做这种电影确实强。
感觉改编不是太行，皮皮鲁的形象也不是电影里的傻蛋样啊
还不错，一切标准均在心中了
白警察要把手搞黑才能办案，但会不会甘于黑暗而忘了初心，度的问题也是觉悟的问题
还可，有种哪哪都不行但尽力了的感觉。只是故事放现在，确实陈旧了。
嗯，整体来说我觉得还不错，有的时候，是非对错真的很难说清楚，灰色地带是一定存在的，6分
剧情有点平 看评论原著可能刺激一些 崔宇植我爱了 男主都很厉害的
老老实实照着原著拍应该能好很多 但是这个20年前的服道化和特效既视感是怎么回事 我们的子役一开口就让人犯尴尬症又是咋回事 小孩就不能好好说话吗 《驯兔记》那么惊艳这片咋一点也没学到呢
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
