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.
现在日本动漫也陷入了卖情怀的怪圈，老故事里加了一味调料它还是老故事呀，这样都能拿出来卖钱的话就有点儿过分了。作为看过旧番的我来说如同嚼蜡。
第一次看这个系列，确实很适合再收割一波粉。不过很多文戏不知所云
作为补充性质的外传，以亚丝娜的视角补完了许多第一季中的许多细节。制作在线，期待下一部的上映！
2.兔泽这个人物加的很突兀，人设并没有立起来，新情节和原动画存在矛盾；
也无风雨也无晴 推荐台版配音 仿佛听到小时候的辰光
又去看了一遍第一季，本来以为是前序剧情，结果发现根本连不上
这个剧场版改编自原作进击篇，前期剧情真的太平淡了，就最后打第一层boss小燃了一下，进击篇和原本第一季剧情排布改动还是挺多的，还添加了新角色。
……第一层剧情的扩张版，还新增了一个人物，粉丝向作品，没什么值得评价的
确实，桐人的戏份少一点，多注重亚丝娜的角色塑造会更好。
粉丝向作品，特别补完了开始前亚丝娜的视角发生的事情。但是那个紫毛怎么看都是强行加入。所以这是平行世界？
虽然这个剧场版剧情依然套路，但相信如果是在TV动画时上映，估计会吸引一大部分观众去看TV动画——死掉的队长当时说了什么？亚丝娜的姬友最后会如何？亚丝娜和桐人他们是否会通关？
刀剑神域元年，亚总视角前传，三次元热炒元宇宙，完全潜入VR却仍然遥遥无期，只好重温恩葛朗特稍微弥补游戏幻想。强行斩断百合线，衬托桐姥爷救场，令人不愉快。
嗯以为亚丝娜作为女主的话会以她的视角展现 【闪光亚丝娜的成长】故事，没想到成长是成长了，时间维度还在第一层阿，这就有点水了。毕竟剧版也很完整展示了第一层发生的事情。还是很想看亚丝娜是如何大放异彩成为了骑士团副团的。
……整个剧场被我包了，每到这个时候就觉得自己果真非常东亚。。。
1.故事完全是第1季扩充版，照这种操作可以出n部剧场版；
百合失败了，但是还是很喜欢米特。这个角色更加贴合我们的内心，最后虽然分道扬镳，但毕竟这是bg不是吗？
距离补完刀剑第一季已经过了7年了，心目中最喜欢的刀剑神域只有第一部那100层的故事
看完电影就想着 印度这个国家也太可悲了 尤其是生在那里的女人。。。
女主视角的再创作，开头女主与深澄同学的互动还蛮有趣的，中间背叛的戏份有点突然，也没必要直接离队吧……男主一如既往的无敌。
如果光按照电影的标准，这部片最多三分，很多情节处理太快了，人物的转变也铺垫不足。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
