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.
被感动的是机器人的人性，按一个人来写机器人，一不小心就容易强加于机器人人性，电影拿捏的挺好，智能和笨拙同时在杰夫身上。当狗狗也死去，杰夫看怎么办呀……
末日孤独公路之旅，类似题材到如今是真的看得太多，无论是加了狗还是机器人~~~~不过这次不止是为了活下去，后半更多是平静的赴死并为了让狗狗活下去，突然间这高度就拔了一拔，生命的意义和羁绊还是挺美的。虽然主题不新鲜了，拍得倒是没有急功近利，很舒缓得讲故事节奏，挺舒坦。
What would Finch do? He'd feed the dog. I'm gonna feed the dog.
好故事永远是第一要议，永远能拉高你对电影的印象分。情感朴素思想先进创意加分。一步一步走到最后，想不被打动都难。观众最终都被创作者严丝合缝的捕获。
—最后杰夫和good year完成最后的旅程，是升华的部分。
能用废土风拍出温情公路片也是绝了，虽然不太对我的口味（我觉得废土风就应该拍杀戮动作片），但还是可以给个好评。
给我的感觉就像满天冰雪间的一堆微火，虽然小而孤独，但却能温暖人心
温暖的童话永远不会过时。无非是换一个壳子或内胆，重新讲一遍，照样打动人。
Live a little!
整体相当的平庸无趣，全是套子活儿，没提供一丝惊喜，给三星纯粹是给汤姆汉克斯一个面子。
最大的感动居然是机器人给我的
仅一人一狗与一个机器人，却有种相依为命的温暖感
设定上虽然有些矛盾存在，但是这不是科幻片，是在讨论一种可能性下的人性，看似简单的故事，内涵却极其丰富。人类在消亡，机器人还是个新生儿，结尾杰夫和狗的背影走过金门大桥，但是他们真的准备好了吗。
科幻只是个壳，还是煽情公路片，看完会感觉这个文本是非常薄的。几乎全靠配乐强化抒情功能甚至有点喧宾夺主了。前面的风格是十分明朗的，太多的爵士乐串烧，后面随着剧情略有起承转合最后仍然是煽情平铺。同样的形式所指，没有《我是传奇I Am Legend》或者《月球 Moon》这样的沉郁和深刻，套接一个末世情境，核心不是在臭氧层消失殆尽之后的沉痛反思，而是在此情景下，一个临终人类及其所造机器人和动物（狗）的所谓信任融合。从这一点上看，这部片子是在尝试人文主义的。7.4
饥馑里忆丰年，末日里说希望，学车敲钉爆米花，金门大桥入梦来
如果到最后只有机器人和狗可以信任，那才是真的世界末日吧。
浪费时间。。。。。。。一帮子豆瓣小清新sb(包括看沙丘都不会去电影院看，但又会假装自己很爱电影的某著名电影学院教授)会喜欢的片子
雖然不乏編劇硬來的強設定，但那份善意和暖意還是挺讓人動容
设定和场景真的太fallout了吧！另外，是因为苹果投资的所以加州还没事？
人与人之间的不信任与敌意恐怕是比世界末日还要来的恐怖 善待比自己弱小的生命 是生命基本的感动
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
