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.
俗套、平庸，这样的作品实在想不出来有何生产出来的价值。
那个记者充了多少钱进组的？任达华的徒弟又充了多少钱？明明特警身上有枪为什么要出去背射？心脏打烂了咋整？最后，求求别再自己拍了，找唐探1的枪手回来吧！
打俩星是我最后的仁慈！千万不要去电影院看啊！它不配！
所以误杀1里面肖央看的那1000部电影
年度最烂骗钱大作，陈思诚只要到第二部就开始瞎搞，剪的一个完整镜头没有，剧情甚至找不到吐槽的开头。
这一惊一乍情绪直给的演法（除了肖央）是参考了短视频演法？可有效了是吧。
当年出这个新闻的时候替患者们悲伤。这个年代无良的人无法无天，战争。。药害。。悲剧在无数的角落天天上演。个人的物质私欲无限膨胀不断蛊惑
悬疑片呈现的现实跟真实生活的现实有很大的不同，最典型的就是戏剧的锐度不同，很多我们生活中无法接受的坏事，在电影里都只是小事。真正的好故事一定要写出“两难处境”，不可以给观众只站一边的机会。在锐度上要“剜肉饲虎”，要写真正的戏剧性的绝处。
预告比正片更精彩，正片节奏太慢了。大概最后二十分钟才比较精彩。
现实意义巨大，但是没有拍出预想的效果，浅浅谈一下现实意义吧:正如电影中奶奶所言“医生说要用，电视上也说这个安全，国家也说它安全……那它就是安全的啊！”是啊！最后的推诿扯皮很真实，门口人山人海也很真实，但是——真实而无用。
小姗爸爸蹲在病房外哭着打电话
这一惊一乍情绪直给的演法（除了肖央）是参考了短视频演法？可有效了是吧。
陈思诚真的掌握了“民粹”的最佳玩法。虽然我拍得差，但是我能保证票房。这种破电影，今天能八千万票房，在座的各位都有责任。
并没有很悬疑，剧本撑不了时长，所以注水明显。
制造了有毒杀菌剂的企业和颁发安全认证的国家都认为自己没有责任，那么有错的只能是我，我才是那个杀人犯，我杀死了我的孩子和妻子。
假泰国和假泰国人有点出戏 结局的父子情还是有点感染力的 没必要非拍泰国啊 中国背景不行吗？
过度煽情卖惨慢镜头大特写，强硬反转零度悬疑，经不起推敲的剧情、陈词滥调的价值观，肖央油腻指数爆棚，姜皓文陈雨思颜值拉回一星。
“我们老老实实做人，为什么赢的怎么总是你们？”食利阶层若是不赢，普通百姓可能就活不下去了！
原作已经不算优秀，但至少涉及到一点制度的漏洞。改编版则更简单粗暴，塑造出一种阶级对立，给你一个好人再给你一个恶人，挑动情绪。慢镜头抒情耍酷，从头到尾都透露着一股鸡贼的味道。延续了前作中架空背景的做法，把地点设定成国外，各种腔调混杂，却终究大都是华语，甚至电话区号都还是022，不和谐不搭调。
对类型元素达到了滥用的高度，以至于每到这种画面场景就有种让人出戏的感觉，这种出戏不是打破第四堵墙的那种间离思考，而是一种面对相似重复的尴尬与别扭。太过于算计也是面对资本市场的功利心态的暴露，强行的煽情与套路化叙事，让整个影片看起来索然无味。摆烂，也是大多数国产片续集的一个特色。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
