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.
OST作曲刘韬，aka 宇文硕，牛叉。
女主对男主的感情挺深的
20211227 人生啊，一眨一闭就是一辈子，王啸坤是亮点，小痞子演的不错！
剧本很深刻，艺术性很强。但镜头与叙事太过普通。
3.王朔这么多年过去还沉浸在那个京圈美梦里，上次听闻他正在创作涉及人类历史命运的宏大作品，现在却中间出现这样一个东西，很难不感失望。
可惜没把时间慢行性的设定多利用一下，这个点还是挺有意思的。
白开水一样，平铺直叙，没滋味儿
前半段给人感觉很像忧郁版的阿甘正传，特别是女主的设定，后面吧，说实话也不知道具体想要表达讲了个啥，讲了很多，科学，生死，感悟，社会，无奈，时代，变迁，都说了又好像都没有说
看了一半，发现两人的关系这不是阿甘正传吗？不戴眼镜的王传君看着挺奇怪的；为了王珞丹+1星，各种风情，尽显魅力；可惜剧情又臭又长。
我刚看完电影，感觉主创很勇敢啊，电影里包含了很宏大的主题。王传君的表演很高级。王珞丹也演得更有层次了。我需要多看几遍！
3.王朔这么多年过去还沉浸在那个京圈美梦里，上次听闻他正在创作涉及人类历史命运的宏大作品，现在却中间出现这样一个东西，很难不感失望。
前半段还是正常爱情片，后半段逐渐又飘又乱了起来，两段故事有点割裂，到后面角色动机也有点突兀，男主说惨也惨，但有一个青梅竹马最后回头，还有一个曾经爱过自己的“女儿”，又何尝不美呢？总体来讲拍的有点长了，有点啰嗦，大段关于生物学伦理以及“我生我自己”以及“记忆”的探讨很超前但可以再减。最后，离别才是真正的永远，有点小emo了。
实质是一部探讨死亡跟人生意义的片子 丁萌萌跟王老这两个角色真出彩啊
再好好剪一遍，这片子就能登堂入室了，目前看来总觉得差口气。各位演技那是真没得说，王珞丹从不让人失望！
从去非洲沙漠开始不理解了。男主的心理有点病态。
挺惹人喜欢的爱情时代剧，写着写着就变成求仙了呢？王珞丹是本色出演？怎么两部戏都是大姐大混江湖哈!自打干细胞出来，这现实主义就很魔幻，而且是无法面对现实的更年期综合症。
用一种奇药，讲述的又都是凡人情爱，倒是看腻了苏那样的人设，如果是爱，为什么不在一起呢？明明来得及，明明有条件，有勇气去追梦，无勇气去相爱。丁教授还是挺可爱的人，真实有趣。
我很喜欢中国软科幻、又说话文艺像话剧的电影。
郭是个随波逐流的人，在漫长的人生长河中遇到了两个闪烁光芒的灯塔，一个人用小提琴点亮了他的童年，也杀死了他对美好未来的憧憬，一个是丁萌萌。这个极其先锋的人物因为恐惧死亡而走向了死亡，却让郭不再畏惧生死。很可惜小鲁到萌萌的最后一刻才真正爱上她吧。影片的结尾很有意思，我相信这是苏的幻想，弥补过去的一切遗憾。而郭可能再他人生中的某一个阶段已经走了，可能非洲，可能和萌萌一样死去。王珞丹是我非常喜欢的演员，可是总让我感觉非常出戏。导演想一本正经的搞笑，但没有处理好让这部剧low了许多。
干细胞宣传片，高粱饴软植入，王珞丹的演技真的牛批。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
