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.
小k给人一种用力过猛的感觉，可惜真实结局远不是电影中的那样*配乐又是绿木，拿捏到位
借用桃厂的评价：《斯宾塞》用极致的视听美学，掩故事性的缺失。想做到小写但缺乏叙事，给人一种不得劲的感觉。这种不得劲就是种矫情感，画面很美，配乐合适，情感饱满，服化道精良，能看出来费了力气，但然后呢？我看的是传记片，你给我放了一百二十分钟的香奈儿高定宣传片和英国皇家园林风景片，英伦厨是狂喜了，可戴安娜呢？她可能是斯宾塞，但绝不是戴安娜。
起码妆造上很贴，小K好美，大部分时间演得不错已经有进步很多了毕竟很多都是怼脸拍的，但海边的戏的和结尾又回到她自己了。情绪浓度很高，配乐的调度也挺好，和查尔斯掰头那段挺喜欢的又总觉得少了点什么，但加了那段姬情戏真的好败笔
她只是内心渴望爱的小女人。却成为困在笼中的金丝雀。海报真美啊
摄影和配乐是超神的，调度很库布里克很《血色将至》。但剧本无论台词还是情节都太干枯。安妮博林的安排太刻意。大美k太紧绷，像女豪杰上阵杀敌而不像王妃脱离pua
不愧是你，《第一夫人》的导演，K独角戏，表演还挺好的，竟拍成了惊悚片，“穿越对话”线不错。
Maggie神来之笔。K好努力，不过Diane真的不好演。
演技太糟糕了，这是戴安娜嘛？无时无刻不让人想起她演过的琼杰特，爆发时刻，崩溃时刻，乃至歪嘴笑的时刻。戴安娜王妃哪有这样缩脖子猥琐颈的体态？王室成员该有的仪态都不对。
起码妆造上很贴，小K好美，大部分时间演得不错已经有进步很多了毕竟很多都是怼脸拍的，但海边的戏的和结尾又回到她自己了。情绪浓度很高，配乐的调度也挺好，和查尔斯掰头那段挺喜欢的又总觉得少了点什么，但加了那段姬情戏真的好败笔
不管你今天吃了多少美食穿了多少件裙子，我只想祝你圣诞快乐，斯宾塞。
4 All I Need is a Miracle. 和Jackie比是退步了，但鍋是編劇要背（這彆扭的台詞啊）小K的表演雖然還是把演Assayas那套拿過來，但我這種顏控就是愛死了她那張臉啊！一旦接受本質上不是傳記片而是移植到現代的Bloody Chamber式噩夢童話，小K的高中生戴安娜就成立了（還原度根本就不是重點，燒女圖攝影的超近大特寫明顯看到小K本人的綠色瞳孔而不是戴妃的藍色眼睛）張開雙手像鳥兒一樣勇闖狩獵場的母親，固然是拒絕長大的王妃（小孩），當同時也對僵化的皇室（成人）最辛辣的批判，而Larrain最聰明的地方在於他甚至允許看著母子三人奔跑逃離的查理斯在鏡頭前流露出一絲耐人尋味的嚮往 ps. 威廉的小孩選角太出彩了，和小K的母子cp感簡直爆炸
事实上是完成了一次《闪灵》的再造，空洞的大宅、幽灵、梦境与幻象。爵士鼓点与运动长镜思及《鸟人》——相同的焦虑感。沉稳的封闭性空间构图以及在戴安娜的近景与特写镜头中不安分的摄影运动，嵌套的蒙太奇确实加强了阶级与皇室贵族的限制力量，戴安娜强烈的渴望挣脱牢笼的冲动同样在观众这里得到了感受，直至最后我才意识到这是一个发生在90年代的故事。可将问题的解决与自我家族血统的认同相联系的处理方式似乎感觉略微轻浮。最后，克里斯汀的表演始终是没能深入到我的内心。她很卖力了，但遗憾就遗憾在我看出了她的卖力。
送龙虾圣诞礼物的时候我哭得好难过。
怎么形容戴安娜呢，一个字“作”，两个字“虚荣”，三个字“吃太饱”，四个字“无病呻吟”，五个字“不作不会死”。
空洞，华丽，神经质，斯图尔特控制力很好，电影整体上没什么惊艳的地方
pretty shit. 表白那会儿我都震惊了
关心孩子,不想他们参加危险运动,我更是...打猎不一直是贵族们的消遣吗?！
前80%的内容压抑到死，完全跌落在她的自我崩溃之中，还没说清到底什么动机让她如此崩溃。灯光、画面、氛围感做足，后20%明朗反叛是个吃kfc的美式结局……呃，u1s1大女主颜是美的，叙事结构有点单薄，结尾有补救却无力回天。
不像就是不像，再怎么捯饬造型也还是不像，和演技无关
我明白电影想表达的，拍得也不错。但小k的戴安娜怎么一直扭扭捏捏的，喜欢耸肩，不站直，和所谓其他人说的高贵优雅的王妃是两回事。衣服漂亮人漂亮镜头画面也是漂亮的。就是感觉一个快内外崩溃了的女人在抗争，像个神经病一样，又惊悚又脆弱。光鲜亮丽下，苦苦挣扎，一举一动完全被控制只能按照规划好的每一步来行走，在其位谋其事，斯宾塞和王妃只能二选一。衣服真的很五颜六色。裙子真的太美了，即使套上了寻常外套，裙摆还是如此美丽。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
