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.
剧情不够精彩，因为没有boss。
各种现代主义表现方式的杂糅，令人眼花缭乱却对人物塑造没啥实质推动。全片最精彩的就是来自原著小说的旁白了，使观众一窥原作的高度文学性。另外，镜头晃得叫人想吐，过多的失序败坏了美感，只让我觉得摄像师手抖得厉害，越发感到固定机位和轨道摄像的可贵。
饿了偷东西跳舞那段，很可爱耶。法比安，法比安。
小李29岁。成都某酒吧驻唱。本科声乐专业毕业。年少无知被骗，曾参加某歌唱类节目第二轮被淘汰。
#德国电影节 开场由现代进入历史的长镜头。（映后连线了希林，满足
对瞬间地考古，对当下地建构，对权利地解剖，对爱情地颂歌
4：3画幅打开一幅30年代柏林风情画，上演一出“罗曼蒂克消亡史”，尊严煎熬下的法比安不愿意接受现实，又在想象的拯救和约会中死去，也许战争爆发前以这样的方式离开反倒是一种仁慈。
“你只有弄脏自己才能摆脱污泥”
结局会马上想到《横道世之介》。不该死的人死了。
各种现代主义表现方式的杂糅，令人眼花缭乱却对人物塑造没啥实质推动。全片最精彩的就是来自原著小说的旁白了，使观众一窥原作的高度文学性。另外，镜头晃得叫人想吐，过多的失序败坏了美感，只让我觉得摄像师手抖得厉害，越发感到固定机位和轨道摄像的可贵。
感觉好像讲了点什么又好像什么都没讲的片子，没有反派没有任务，就一群人开个会，主角辽个伤修炼修炼居然也能做成一部电影😅
一点都不有趣，可以说是极度悲观，主人公事业爱情家庭可以说一事无成，最后连自己的生命都没能经营下去。似乎他一直都想要拯救别人，但别人都不需要他。
记得先看这个 再看无限列车哈！我都看反了……哈哈哈
说实话挺怀念九柱都在的时光，都是很好的人啊，想想忍姐姐就。。
四星半吧，前半段非常喜欢，魏玛时期的疯狂展现的淋漓尽致，后半段传统叙事略显平庸，没办法就是喜欢德影
剧情不够精彩，因为没有boss。
一个九十年前（1931年）的德国魏玛共和国时代之浮世绘，传统的外表（4:3的画幅、古典的色彩光影，老式的布景、服道、歌曲舞蹈等）却与极现代感的电影表现手法、技艺奇异、令人炫目地结合了起来！做专业的同行们可以仔细看看。由于时间和历史的距离，虽然使我们不太能共鸣主角在乱世中的苦恼与挣扎，艺术上的新意还是值得体味。
剧本太出彩了。画面看起来跳动和随意，使用了最原始的蒙太奇，又未止步于转场暗示功能。观影过程像做梦、醒来、做梦、醒来的往复，而这，就像溺水。
很喜欢，从开头的长镜头就开始喜欢，之后，画幅设计、充满怀旧感的胶片，一幅德国浮世绘悦然眼前。一个小人物也可窥见大历史，风雨欲来前的社会终究无能为力，就像小人物湮没水中，波涛继续翻涌，仿佛他从未存在。
直到两人进入私密空间，赤诚地展现自己最稚气可爱的一面。她跳起舞时，能很快地体会到，在这座城市她是多么宝贵的东西。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
