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.
就算结合大电影，这部也是近年来少有的好的武侠动作片
中国人很难不爱的孤胆英雄侠客 John Wick式复仇故事 剧情很简单但是画面和音乐很好 一些镜头还蛮舞台剧 有些台词意外地很结合时事这是可以说的吗
大爽电影！武侠之光！
预告片动作挺酷的，没办法，多少要照顾观众口味和演员能力。加油年轻人们，加油投资人们。
怎么说呢，说他不新，他倒是给你拍了个原创新故事。你说他新吧，怎么有人在2022年文艺复兴拍张彻啊（不）
葡萄美酒夜光杯，谢苗，梅姑故去，李连杰垂垂老矣，你加油！
打戏很利落，谢苗蛮可惜，原本应该是武打巨星的。故事很简单，但是很有味道，有武侠内味儿了
制作还行，特别是开场字幕非常酷有质感，鼓励一下，导演继续加油！
谢苗诠释的这个角色，我看到了傅红雪的影子，绝佳。
你不给我个公道，我就给你个公道。平民防抗强权拥有天然的正义，所有一切都在类型片框架内，好处是没有拖泥带水，处理得很干净，韵味和动作设计如果内更精进空间。
动作，布景，灯光等美学设计非常好，很简单的故事，但是可以讲出武侠的精髓，人物简单却也不失丰满血肉。不足的是前半段拖沓无趣槽点多，谢苗的台词太僵硬了，容易出戏。整体是很用心了。
还挺好，故事极简，没有波澜，那一招火刀还挺惊艳。这些年没看过什么印象深刻的武侠片，这一部算不错的了。
当然这里要再强调一下，浪人形象这绝不是日本的东西，这是唐朝，懂得自然懂，我说的日漫影响是谢苗的人物基本就是座头市加浪客剑心的结合，绝招不就是天翔龙闪吗
整部影片的风格和质感都很不错，但故事的单薄影响了观众对武侠江湖爱恨情仇的深入体验，角色数量再庞大一些，角色塑造再深入一些，追赶绣春刀是有希望的。
配乐，摄影，剪辑都是高水准的
好看！三星半。前面的情节有两三处弱笔，但后面确实拍出了侠气，打斗也有自己的风格。如果可以把剧本再捋捋，人物塑造得再丰满些，拍足90分钟会更好。
剧情上有点牵强，动作场面利落，相信充足预算会更好
多给半星给个鼓励，电影画面和色彩很棒，简单的快意恩仇故事
以侠义匡扶正道，有惊喜到。不过bug有点多，有些镜头也有点做作了，但好在脉络清晰，短小精悍，还是蛮不错的武侠小品的。
精气神很足的短篇剧，这才是武侠该有的样子。武只是其一，更重要的是侠义之气。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
