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.
可悲
希望司法相关的她力量更强大
争取女性权利的印度作品，能想到剧情有点老套，节奏拖沓，冲题材还是可以给高点分鼓励
姐姐对妹妹的爱 到这种地步 真的是可以了 长兄如父 姐如母啊..
从几年前的Bird Box开始，我发现桑德拉布洛克是不是因为颜值坍塌，再也接不到好的剧本了。虽然这么说mean了一点，但是她的脸真的有点惨不忍睹了，为什么不早早转型幕后，还在接这些没什么原创性的狗血剧集
新概念印度电影，标准的冲突情节剧结构，本土文化符号，印度社会现实的反思。电影作为集体意识的显示终端，女性视角突出，自觉成熟的女性主义表达，对新闻媒体的批判，个体自省。
这种冲奥片感觉十年前就已经不拍了……虽然主题是几个家庭的彼此救赎吧，但是处理得这么温吞碎片也是……闪回也是太多，最后的结局更是收尾很硬，没有她的上部作品让我觉得有力道了。
桑婆难得严肃克制。系统性的恶无形杀人后还要剥夺受害人的地位。对伤痛的表达刚刚好。
【7.2/10】能猜到背后有隐情，老师不会真的伤害孩子，前面悬念即便做再好也不会很惊悚。印度女性生活在水深火热之中，所以从真相上来说并不新鲜，但在其环境下社会意义还是很大。本片制作应该挺大，搞得印度人好像都是在都市，人们生活得都挺光鲜，警察好像也挺高端，国家挺文明还有个厉害的女总理。电影最大的bug在一切都太理想化了，事情几乎都按着她一个菜鸟罪犯的掌控在发展，要么运气不错没出太大纰漏，男女两人反抗都被女主一人干倒了，男警官知道女主动机后，立马真心忏悔自我检讨，我们太想出名了忽略了伤害，总理也很圣人不顾危险同意来现场和罪犯面谈。最后反转我倒是没想到，但是不是也有点硬呢，那么一个坏人，从开始就表现得就是一个怂男人。
“幸福的秘密是自由，自由的秘密是勇气。”
这样就失去了新意，感到有点无聊
议题确实切合印度社会实际，当然较为理想主义，现代社会肯定是无法让强奸罪死刑化的，印度这种男权高度集中的国家就更是如此了。
我不是舔英语，而是从小到大就学英语，听起来总比印度语更加顺耳
（霰弹枪口径最大可以达到26.72毫米，但最常见的口径是18.53毫米和15.63毫米；弹丸通常为铅制）
人的主观概念太严重往往就会对事情有了主观臆断丧失对真相思考能力，所以有时不必去理会别人的看法和思想，结局不错终究血浓于水。桑德拉布洛克和肖恩复仇者谁的鼻子更大？
只有桑婆的演技很棒，剧本有些潦草，每一步都在预知范围，结局收尾仓促
印度也开始像韩国人那样编排国家元首了。这个剧本虽然胆子很大，但故事完成度还可以，女主也相对耐看。
哗众取宠，只为揭开伤疤让你们看；置之死地，但愿姐姐妹妹站起来。
开头的节奏很好 很紧张 就是确实有些bug
苏州疫情下的观影•第9部
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
