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.
怎么做到把每个本来可以拍的好看的故事都拍烂的
预告片也太诈骗了，冲流星颜值可以看，冲剧情来就快跑，鬼牌那个游戏不仅没紧张感还有点尴尬。。本以为和赌博有关会拍出很多花样，，好吧，只能说很中二～
The Ritual + The Taking of Deborah Logan. Adult characters are bad, bad writing.
横滨的脸是可以支持下去的，他还真是适合这种银色发，《初恋那一天所读的故事》里粉色头发也抗的住，真可以。 情节有点弱，作为一个电影有点不够刺激，还不如《#斗牌传说#》那里的本乡真是帅到巅峰，这里黄毛也有本乡就差点了，颜值都让横滨包了。
配角里好多大熟人，连本乡dd都来打酱油了。故事有点无聊，为了世界和平不应该去参加反战组织吗？
好久没这么爽，女演员都选的太漂亮，很容易出戏
看了半天结果就一个抽鬼牌，还只是前传...还不如同类型的狂赌呢。
每个单元剧的男女演员的演技怎么会如此拙劣，这部电影的编剧应该是在打瞌睡写出来的吧！
圣母班上有个孩子有点呆，原来他爹恶魔化了。恶魔化还是传染病，弟弟也传染了。所以，想要成为“圣母”这派的人，就要弑父、杀兄弟……反正这套路跟尚气其实差不多。恶魔怕光，就很扯淡，手电筒、照明棒带眩晕的。
社会化抚养原子化社会结构是导演编剧的梦想吗？原生家庭的父权已经需要全员降智角色+弑父？缺乏深入表现社会经济文化的原因才是剧本的原罪
和姐妹的睡前催眠工具，假人模特那个又被吓到。
一家人被困在家里，随着时间的流逝，食物逐渐短缺，一天又一天，一家人的心情越来越糟糕……这天，一家人吃完了最后一点存粮，大人们望着空空的碗碟一筹莫展，唉声叹气道：什么也没有了……这时，最小的孩子眼神懵懂地望向家人们，不解道：我们还有彼此啊[爱心]
看的是TV版的衍生剧鞍马兰子篇，真是烂到家了。乃木坂那群妹子在发单的时候演演小短剧就算了，毕业出来当主角之前麻烦提高一下业务水平啊，不管是是西野还是白石演技都没法看……
但就像我很早时候说的，看恐怖片就不要太在意逻辑，好好享受电影的氛围才是最重要的。
【3.0】和中世纪瘟疫的流行所衍生出来的诺斯费拉图一样，鹿角恶魔其实也是灾难叙事中传染病的喻体。影片讲的实际上是一次神罚，对自然生态无度破坏的现代工业是召唤这起灾难的元凶。
挺好的啊，恐怖片最大的意义是什么？就是吓到你啊，这部片做到啦，好多小故事捂着眼睛从手指缝看的，够吓人。
是流星粉也看不下去的电影，剧本好烂，没看过原著，改编的剧情也太弱了，像幼儿园过家家。这简陋的布景，真的无力吐槽，这片投资应该是满少的，全篇就没有什么大场面，我的天这也能叫电影吗，只能称得上是一部超长sp而已，唯一亮点只有流星的银发了
蛮无聊的拼盘恐怖故事，没啥逻辑性，故事比较乱。。还不如好好整合一下，弄成像日本的世奇物语和毛骨悚然系列一样，每年推一些精彩的合集。。。
横滨流星的斑目貘尽管已经尽力浮夸了，可还是不够疯逼，没内味儿
摄影不错，别的就算了吧。4.9/10 1080P 21/12/14
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
