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.
大题材，小格局。大背景，小视野。大历史，小商业。
1、故事比较常规，且融汇了各种套路元素，提调死囚、官侠联手等情节在此前很多影视剧中都能找到原型，甚至这类情节已然成为被滥用的公式，放在影片中虽不至于为人诟病，但也是差强人意。
谢苗一年也不拍多少网大。但这部还是挺好的。主要是谢苗打戏是真的好。台词也挺用心的。
华继良和何世清那场戏楼的戏有点清代《毒战》那味了，从套路来讲是包装上爱国情节的反毒剧，演员真的都很不错，网络剧情拍成这样真的够良心了
看完就知道为什么评分这么低了，不打低分不是中国人，这算辱华了吧
从古至今都是如此 不可以存在的东西往往背后都有一些害群之马在相互勾结
你们韩国高空抛物不犯罪是吧，还往下扔空调。
2、不得不说谢苗近段时间的电影质量有逐渐攀升之势，但其塑造的角色却仍然不尽人意，并且有演技固化之态，就如本片中的“华继良”到不久之后的“李红旗”，两者的人物形象如出一辙，都是“骨子里正义凛然，面子上桀骜不羁”，这类俗不可耐的人物其实早就该退出影视剧的主角市场，沿用至今只能说明编剧能力有限。
这两天看谢苗的电影有些上头啊，打斗场面太爽了，别人一打十，谢苗直接一打几十，别的不说就冲这对打戏就值得一看，也期待谢苗以后的作品，是金子总会发光的。
谢苗这些年的网大我必看，不仅打斗场面保持优秀，剧情也少有拉垮
3星只因为爱国，刀子戳进去再拧一圈，居然还那么有活力
给一星的都是战狼看多了吧 地点设置在中国真的太正常了 作为一个吉林延边人 我可以很郑重的告诉你们 东北地区尤其是吉林 搞韩国电信诈骗的真的多到让你难以想象 PS：本人身边就有很多从事这行的 很多！
这个很中规中矩的动作片，有点十月围城的影子但稍欠火候，个人认为可以7分。谢苗演技不说多好但绝对不属于差，打戏更为不错，多接点好剧本，以后前途不可限量。
挺好的，感受到当年前辈们的艰难险阻，那个时代坚持反抗实在是太难了，致敬。
通话中心的小米logo亮眼
就是男主到中国，被坏蛋核实身份的时候，让他念银行卡号，和消费记录这一幕，确实是用了一点心。
编剧: 杨秉佳
剧情的转折设计得很巧妙，但只能通过主角的笑来体现出现转折了，根本没能从剧情中看出来反派头子是如何被发现鸦片藏在哪里的。另外，个人英雄主义太强烈了，一个人打几百个，要不要这么假，如果是抗战片，是不是要放进来手撕鬼子了啊？感觉这个评分太过虚高，一点也不令人感动，浪费了这份悲壮的历史题材！另外演林则徐的这人，也太胖了吧，面无表情，看不出什么演技，换个人演林则徐，效果会好很多！
上学的时候只是知道虎门销烟，从来没有细想过销烟的难度。禁毒从来不是一时一刻，是一直的坚持。
题材成熟了，作品的下限就高了。6分有点富裕。但怎么着也不够8。得空看看没啥问题，专门看看不太值得。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
