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.
幸好明天不是世界末日，不然死之前看了这么烂的片我真的会哭
（圣经《诗篇》22:20）
故事沉闷无趣，摄影僵硬无生机，当然也可能是人家的特点，起初看的不知所云，耳朵里又都是父母的喋喋不休，废话连篇，心烦意乱，看到后面才好像明白了是什么故事，更是困意难耐。
所以这根本不是什么女性主义电影
美如画，稳如山。比美美哒瑟琳席安玛多了一份粗粝。始终在规避传统类型，向内心里钻得很深
Campion还是很强的，能把温柔细腻拍出自己作者性的人非常少，就比如以钢琴和乌克丽丽进行简单对话的那场戏，那种用乐器理所应当地对话的氛围是独属于她的人物个性表达（我更想看到“对话”时间长一点），这样的行为细节很多。但是，不是一直慢步细腻就可以，有时候就觉得挺磨叽的：费了老大劲情节只推到这？这就跟邓斯特的角色给人的感觉一样，她有独属于她的脆弱敏感，但是那个东西太多了会让人不舒服，别扭、做作。西部的部分拍得跟赵婷的水平也差不多，其实可以多学学老东木。
一度以为两人是互生情谊，后才知是为复仇而故意接近。男孩是男人脆弱内心的外显，只有他们看到了纸花，看到了似犬的山脉。而男人是男孩偏激而强硬的内心的外显，他只在乎自己想做的事，只在乎自己想保护的人。两人扭曲的气质皆受挚爱之人的强烈影响，相反而相似，给观众以何为男性气质（或者有必要加上性别的限定吗？）的思考。简•皮坎恩的镜头语言，温和且充满力量。
喜感一半来自现实新闻影射，一半来自反套路的拍摄手法，每个情节都加速讲完，比如大表姐的酒吧演讲，上一秒情绪刚烘托起来，下一秒打砸抢，再下一秒就又戴头套被抓了——点到了观众就全脑补好了，直奔大结局而去。“毁灭吧，累了。”
4.5 冷血人手持温柔刀。贵族农场主戏谑暴虐下却掩盖着跨越数十年的深情，纤细又冷漠的少年剖尸杀伐好似折纸花般轻巧。非常喜欢，没有看过原著，但电影本身非常有文学感。
波米说这部电影建构了“新集权”框架——第四权力下放，大数据、流量经济、官能刺激绑架议程设置→后真相时代，信息战与认知战、转移焦点、“等反转” ——也是搭建在对人类这一认知之上的必然，所以彗星最终也必然落下。
通俗故事梗概：谁先动心谁就输了。文学性故事梗概：猎物有时会是猎人。简.坎皮恩是个解剖家，男性权利，被她庖丁解牛地异常脆弱。
执念于过去仰慕的对象 在漫长无望的孤独岁月里再次遇到的安慰却是一场纯粹的复仇谋杀 越品越美
纸花，皮绳，马鞍都好👌🏻，镜头色气但是讲述又很克制，太细腻了，大段的时间交给西部的辽阔和寂静的尘埃，秘密花园里的时光和被血染红的稻草都是隐蔽的欲望，四位主角都演得妙妙妙。Dunst两口子真的真的越来越像彼此了，可怕。
一开始以为是爱情伦理故事，后来以为是同性故事，最后原来是人性故事，搞得还挺复杂。。强壮的大人永远都不要小瞧瘦弱的孩子，因为知识才是最有力量的。这孩子内心还真是很“强硬”，外表的瘦弱只是表象，保护自己母亲的那份心确实值得称赞，但是这手段也真是阴险毒辣。从他对待兔子的方式就能看出他内心是黑暗的，而他对自己父亲的死之描述，也让人看后细思极恐。这片子拍的挺好，就是有点磨叽。
Jane Campion显然是智慧型 on masculinity
A HOT MESS. 无论是电影还是电视剧都打出尚佳成绩、奖项宠儿的Adam McKay其实早已深暗自己的“流量密码”- -由全明星阵容保驾护航，跟风蹭各种热门话题以及钝化一切分歧，都用「娱乐精神」炮制（甚至这次还把和Will的不和花边也拿来作为前菜，辅助呈现这道精心烹调的主菜）；谁不说句太懂了。只可惜它既没有成为能最终扣响议题的末世危言，也欠缺到达最终结果的精心铺垫；即使演员们意外没有在这种散乱中被冲走，我们也乐见两个彩蛋带来的讽喻。当然还是好玩儿的- -尤其是“抓”那些客串做找熟脸儿游戏，以及诸如从“Kate”的角色设计找到类似“Greta Thunberg”抑或一些热门现象的对应讽刺；但，
披着西部片面貌的《魂断威尼斯》，正当你以为剧情大致类似时，坎皮恩又放出了人性、犯罪元素的剧情佐料。但是全片整体显得庸常无趣，最后的反转倒更像是设计感十足的点缀，观感上很难给出高分。7.2。
电影本身是极好的，表演也特别特别好，但过度的克制和反高潮，让人比较难入戏和共情角色。
失望。为小李子的奥斯卡级表演感到不值。电影浪费了一打的明星卡斯，浪费了很有现实意义的故事立意。剧本太粗糙，远不如川普和新冠的新闻精彩。虽说是喜剧，人物呈现过于脸谱化，而描述严肃的社会现象时也浮于表面，显得小打小闹，扁平无力。全片基调变换玩得飞起，跳崖式剪辑多到让人火大，结尾地球要完蛋时，前一秒的喜剧感瞬间荡然无存，让人兴致全无，嘴角抽搐。
不得不相信已经有很多外星人混入了人类当中。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
