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.
女主很美 但是我不懂为什么打架打着打着就发生关系了，很跳戏
最近重温港剧，看看那些年的男神，喵到肉的这电影，看了下，嗯，到底是我长大了，还是他们的套路已经看腻了！男人是帅的，剧情的无语的！
算是比较老套的电影，打戏还是比较精彩。
❌ 怎么还是“奥八股”......真的不能换一种逻辑或者叙事方法来创作人物的传记了吗
🫥🫥🫥真想不到还有3……我竟然全系列都看了……
★★★
歌真好听 故事性还凑活吧 片名尊重貌似说那个年代白人对黑人的尊重 其实是说人得到的尊重是自己给的 无论在什么位置 不要忘了自己是谁 尊重也是相互的 家人才是最后留在你身边的
一部灵魂歌后的福音记录片电影，黑人天生的歌唱天赋无与伦比，有时候的确会令人在不经意间从歌声中获得安慰，这也算是教会的一种无解的传教手段
智叔！可惜最后一部电影那么努力，却都是TVB剧的感觉
图书馆不错。感觉在香港坐牢条件可以。
本来两星，冲着片尾彩蛋加一颗星。全戏最精彩居然是彩蛋。。。正如彩蛋所说，拍无可拍了，这一部完全是狗续貂尾，内容极度不合理，人物也非常单薄，尤其吴卓羲，最后真的很多余。。。但是不得不说这个彩蛋是我见过最有创意的。
除了发型和服装，没有一处像aretha, 尤其是音乐，这和她平时的唱法有区别吗？
2022.7.13和老公一起看的，挺好看的，吴卓羲演的贺俊好帅啊五官好好看，还有那个刀疤的演员不就是一路向西那个男主吗哈哈哈哈我认得他的五官，怎么肥了这么多啊好油腻了
标准的美式暴力片，漏洞肯定有，也没啥好评价
本来已经觉得肥花唱功震撼，直到片尾Aretha奶奶的footage出来，直接秒杀。电影的话，和Annette正好相反，歌曲足够经典，肥花也足够有才华，加上文戏铺垫，音乐部分情感冲击力很强。但传记部分有些松散，少了条人物发展的arc。
无前两部精彩。外传一定要有滚筒。讲真监狱这么和谐，比不起90年代的监狱风云。
流水线上的作品，节奏挺快，应该省略了不少细节。
制片国家/地区: 中国香港
着实没想到这居然拍成了一个系列，第三部明显悬念少了很多。陈豪打了个酱油，熬到了最后一部的刀疤竟然领了盒饭，可惜了。
接第二部的剧情，更多的老戏骨加入，比前面二部好看。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
