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.
此生无悔入华夏 但会后悔进电影院浪费了三个小时的生命
感谢《长津湖》将这段历史这样好的呈现在我们面前。
没有冻不死的英雄，更没有打不死的英雄。
不错的，就是拍长津湖只有半小时，总觉得怪怪的，头重脚轻
四字的演技在戏骨众多的演员里显得浮夸了那么一些
太长了 看到后面逐渐有点没耐心了都 场面确实拍的很宏大 3个大导演水平都不错 主旋律拍的也越来越好了 就是我个人可能对这种题材不是太感冒 四字弟弟在里面演的真的挺好的 很多微表情都处理的很棒！
缺少细节，把美国人想的太简单了，整体把握不够，时间偏长。
一个电影盲盒，没有预告，没有贴片，沉浸式的开场。三位导演的联合拍摄，本期待一部诺兰式的诺曼底登陆，却没成想是陆港台联手的三大战役般的呈现。
想要的太多了反而有点四不像和松散，但，战士们真的太可敬，心疼，感恩，感谢
真的厌倦了音效特效的狂轰滥炸，可不可以先把故事讲好？
单纯电影看完无论剧情剪辑如何，时刻铭记外国亡我之心不死。中国人用何种制度何种价值体系延续华夏文明有自己的选择。外来强权想强行干涉，有种就来，没怕过。
我愿意给它五分，这部电影传递出的精彩表现值得五分，我们总是被中国最可爱的人保护的很好，感谢感恩永远铭记🙏
三颗星全部给前半段，拍出大兵瑞恩水平，后半段坦克大决战+加里森敢死队+最后的武士，士兵总会开汽车，驾驶对方坦克击毁对方坦克，用巴祖卡击落飞机，用吉普装载标识炸弹追击敌方装甲部队，太扯了。团级冲锋人海战术在淮海已经证明无法战胜现代敌人，包抄合围+三三制+炮兵伴随才是以弱胜强的王牌。
第3265-向19万多烈士致敬。
特定时期的特定影像爱国宣传片，一切都是被需要的，抓来三位导演既可以说没底气又可以说是“很重视”，对那个年代也好，对观众也好，又是一种消费，又是一次教育
《长津湖》—第七穿插连在战场上舍生忘死、浴血奋战，“我们出生入死 就是为了让我们的后代不再打仗”。新中国🇨🇳开国之战，是伟大的战役！全程看的热血沸腾，情绪一直跟着电影走，鸡皮疙瘩没消过，非常感动，非常震撼！（流了很多泪水😭）
2.战争场面过多，尤其是战斗机的轰炸场面，容易产生视觉疲劳
场面是很大没错，但是故事又到了啥都想要然后啥都抓不住的程度。毛岸英本身的故事已经足够动人，但是创作者不能约定俗成觉得观众都能直接get他的故事线而不用铺陈作为第三幕高潮前的动力。横向比，不如乘风的故事来的踏实。
感谢这些文字和影视作品，虽然没有百分百还原，虽然无法让所有受众都满意，但是能有机会多知晓一二，都很珍贵与感动。很可惜历史学科念得太差。历史并非是冰冷的年份人名原因意义啊。
●2021.10.28
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
