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.
“-等出去了可以再买的嘛。
托斯卡纳也救不了的cringe，男主感觉有点边缘人格，片长加一倍就能发展成惊悚片。
主线是逃生 副线是邻里情谊 轻喜剧灾难片的基调 但被拍得不伦不类 甚至被同类型的极限逃生吊打 导演的华丽的休假也是煽情居多 逻辑全无 另 车胜元是被李先生附体了么
两颗星给托斯卡纳，一颗星给男主角儿，因为胖大人欣赏他打扫厨房的专注与高标准
毫无逻辑可言，但是看得还挺欢乐的，就当无厘头搞笑灾难片看了
导演优秀的叙事方法让这个“尴尬”的中年爱情故事变得优美生动起来
挺好看的虽然所有物理化学科学内容完全扯淡，但是看的就是一个情绪啊，那些分析合理不合理的都是杠精！张无忌乾坤大挪移合不合理？暴风女控制闪电合不合理？孙悟空不怕火炼合不合理？杠什么杠，有毛病都。
金社长真的演啥都很强完全不跳戏
原著党很生气😤我不得不重新看一遍07年的洗洗眼睛
抛开原著不说，这部电影还是成立的，达妹演的很灵。
其实不难看，就是男女主人设OOC。本来男主对女配的那段其实就有点儿渣，这部这种感觉更明显了。要不是她最后移情别恋，真的男女主就要错过了。所以啊，永远不要对感情意气用事。（感觉打破第四面墙的手法更适合爱玛或者liz，也许劝导也适合轻喜剧的改编，但是这部明显不是很成功）
作为以美食为主题的电影，嗯……菜太少啦！！！就这几道菜好意思拍
故事平平淡淡没啥特别的 我只想看Dakota Johnson
所谓的现代版改编难道只是选角上体现肤色平等，以及女主打破“第四面墙”的尴尬独白，就很不伦不类，真是糟糕的改编。男主像根木头，眼神空洞毫无魅力，演不出深情味道，男二又过于油腻浮夸。达妹无论是扮相或演技都没有一丝符合这个角色，全员劝退。
女主的表演有一点点浮于表面，看完之后有一种说不出来的别扭
光洙呀，下次不要演pabo了。
也算是很沙雕的奇思妙想了。最后居然能活，开心大结局。
给了green submariner好多镜头，有意无意的……
政治正确也不是这么拍吧…各种违和…女主的表演模式像是模仿fleabag…和默默无闻的二女儿设定完全不搭…自曝被妹夫求过婚实在是太bitch了…爱不动拜拜…需要重新看一遍小说是不是女主真的这么轻浮= =。不是说现代风格的演绎就一定不行，神探夏洛克的前两季就很成功。
因为光洙，因为车胜元。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
