剧情介绍

  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.

评论:

  • 及南烟 6小时前 :

    哈哈哈哈

  • 加晨 3小时前 :

    还不错!虽然故事很老梗也很老,但感觉认真,有做恐怖片的信念感(啥(然后那个视错觉的小技俩蛮可爱的!

  • 季烨煜 7小时前 :

    (当时看到片中女主叫我们念咒的那一段时,旁边有个人来了句“大威天龙”,然后我们也笑着喊了起来,房间里顿时充满了快活的空气)

  • 户双玉 5小时前 :

    无神论者不觉得被冒犯 只是一个梗而已 可能因为做了妈反而不觉得恐怖 就是那种管你是天王老子 老娘为了娃跟你拼了

  • 博韦 1小时前 :

    很好,模仿痕迹太重。小演员没有镜头感,太强了

  • 卫娅娜 8小时前 :

    讲真,剧本逻辑值不起推敲。恐怖氛围营造得不错,但是手持摄影的真实感细节还是有做得不到位的地方。

  • 卷建德 1小时前 :

    全程伪纪录片的形式有点刻意,不如部分纪录片、部分上帝视角,那样可能会更自然,但邪神崇拜的部分太邪性了,非常好!诅咒观众的部分真没什么,这届观众太不行了。

  • 彩瑶 8小时前 :

    这年头,当穷到连死到不怕,这种小儿科低级鬼片就是用来笑的。☆/1

  • 伏骊娜 1小时前 :

    哎不是,真有人觉得因为那句话自己就被诅咒啊?

  • 妍雪 0小时前 :

    (pps.看也没关系,主创都说了看的是盗版连诅咒都是盗版的哈哈哈哈)

  • 力亦凝 0小时前 :

    内容有很多抄袭(致敬)之处。但是片子的诅咒这个主题很抓人

  • 刚祺然 9小时前 :

    虽然叙事清晰流畅度上有瑕疵,惊吓点拼凑的略有破碎感,但这片基本水准是绝对过硬的,没有令成熟理智的影迷失望。各种惊吓桥段拍的非常地道,心理暗示、视觉残留等小巧思也颇具匠心。只是预告片里实在不该把阿清嫂扑面那段剪进去,严重影响了大众观影后对影片恐怖程度的评估,那本是影片最大的记忆点。另外,主角一行三人在村子里的遭遇拍的真的很好,诡异感层层叠加,氛围极佳。

  • 利承泽 4小时前 :

    想起小学时有收到那种诅咒信,要转发给多少人就没事,要不就有血光之灾什么的,天生善良的我抄回信手都抄痛了,也不知道是哪些幸(dao)运(mei)儿(dan)收到过~

  • 卫四泓 3小时前 :

    4.0。氛围到了自然好,伪纪录片大杂烩,丧尸元素、探穴元素、直播元素、桌面电影元素和宗教招魂元素等等。

  • 以飞鸣 4小时前 :

    细思极恐,剪辑缺陷选择性眼盲,个人五星。(含剧透)

  • 帖若翠 0小时前 :

    加一星肯定它在我看过的华语恐怖片中的地位,毕竟此前看到的比较优秀的华语伪纪录片形式恐怖片只有《中邪》。相比之下,《咒》引入了更多的民俗元素,并且借鉴了大量外国恐怖片的设定。可是尽管它超越了简单的冒险故事情节(相比《昆池岩》,《致命录像带2》等),但仍未能留下太多的回味空间,大黑佛母只是“恶念之神”,所以它是为恶的,它是一个难以抗衡的诅咒的祸根,这或许简化乃至消解了民俗文化的意义,主角的使命只是与一个强大而不神秘之物(一个为恶的东西)对抗,这使它和很多内涵平庸的恐怖片没有区别了,或许它比这些恐怖片最大的亮点在于,它敢于大胆地诅咒观众。于是它让“晦气”成为了自身最被印象深刻的点,而非恐怖,或者神秘。

  • 员梓露 7小时前 :

    遇事不要慌,先拿出手机录个像,全知镜头无处不在,这种伪纪录片真的氛围感越来越差了,恐怖是真没有,如果再没有最后那点晦气的反转,可能更没劲了。

  • 叔晗蕾 1小时前 :

    得多,但我就吃那一套。哪怕本片纯粹是一部"妈妈爱女儿"的催泪片我也能接受。p.s.小女孩很可爱,看到未成年人受苦实在不好受。

  • 念元魁 5小时前 :

    女主对着镜头说,你们都替我女儿分担这个诅咒 吧,然后诅咒所有看电影的观众。

  • 宋书蝶 9小时前 :

    给观众下咒的做派要说恶心不至于,观众智商低到这份上那我也无话可说,个人只是觉得无聊,因为电影本事质量低,这个下咒之举就非常幼齿。这部电影所有元素都是别人玩剩下的,我是真心没有被吓到,不是我对恐怖片免疫,是真的看过一遍了都,吓人的节奏我都给你算得准准的。相比之下同时期同样有着广泛舆论褒贬不一的“灵媒”和“南巫”都在各自领域起码还有的聊,突然就显出优点来了,这玩意真的超无聊~~~~

加载中...

Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved