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.
无疑这是韩寒最好的一部。诗性细腻，文学性强，人本生来孤独，有许多打不开的门，如果命运最终都是悲歌，也不妨碍我们还在有期待。被反向治愈的一部电影，谢谢韩寒。
大过年的这些贺岁片能不能做到起码的一点就是“不要让观众在电影院里如坐针毡”啊……
看完跟盛夏未来一个感觉...不知道到底要讲啥我丢..我就是个烂尾收割机吧
神奇般地很好看，虽然有些情节很尬，但是是那种看了会让人心情变好的片子。
前半部分勉强当喜剧片看，后半部分的感情戏真是莫名其妙没来由的刻意悲壮，拉垮了。
每一帧都是他自己的味道
哎，虽然一直喜欢韩寒，但是这次剧本不好拍得也不太好。
非常小清新的一部台湾青春爱情片，看完之后很有当年的感觉，我们在校园时期也何不是都有同样追女孩子的经历呢，这部电影又勾起了当年的那些小确幸，而且电影中的歌曲都非常好听，而且还是原创，这样一部片子值得到影院去看一看，和喜欢的人或者喜欢的回忆一起
我倒是希望影院出现更多这样底层里的底层，人生实苦，热爱生活
小清新的片片，台湾比较擅长的类型，没有什么惊喜，一切都在正常的发展，名字就预示着结局。不过还是应该有人吃这套的吧。
又或许，校园恋爱剧不再适合我 🤣
韩寒还是只有一部飞驰人生是完整好看的，写书就是意识流，拍电影几段之间也没有什么承接，以前拍后会无期这种乌托邦式公路电影没有放大这点，现在发现每一段独立的故事都太有表达欲了，看完整部电影不知道他到底想表达什么，最重要的是，韩寒的人生本来就很顺利，他根本就不懂我们普通人的悲惨，用死亡、车祸来表达悲惨都是不入流的做法，很难带入和共情，一个理想主义者想象出来的现实主义，只有那么一段大船袭来，漩涡带走了前半段故事热闹欢喜的氛围，好像触碰到了一点儿这个故事的内核👉🏻小渔排怎么妄想征服大海呢？
小清新老套的可以预想的青春爱情故事，男主的颜我真的努力适应了，但还是get不到，是我的问题吗？粉丝别打我谢谢。
韩寒这片子被低估了啊，相比于《奇迹•笨小孩》最后的CEO飞黄腾达，《四海》回到家乡才更加贴近现实。
不要看!!!大年初一看了个悲剧片真下头!!!
印象最深的戏是阿耀走在逼仄阴暗的楼道间 光落在他的脸上 这条路一定是充满希望的吧 为女朋友担下债款 摩托被押走 只能在游乐园的球形铁网中一遍又一遍练着特技表演 想吐也会说着没事继续来 即使这样还是充满希望的吧 第一次敲响父亲的门 却听到一声“爸爸 有人敲门”
男主的脸经不起特写啦。但是好美好。项爸我真的无法摆脱他在婆婆可爱里的印象，不配刘品言啦
时常太长，可以缩短半小时。结尾结束得太仓促，过年档不来个大团圆吗？
“心存善念 闪光就会出现。”
以青春帅气形象示人的刘昊然，演技还是不错的。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
