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.
Anthology Film Archives 为坦率而富有想象力的内容起立鼓掌
最后的决斗不是为女性的尊严战斗，只是为了男性的财产所有权和荣誉战斗。三个不同视角都没有废话，两个半小时的片长很值得。Jodie的戏太好了，其实台词没多少，这双眼睛太会演了。Ridley Scott 确实不会令我失望。
历史的变幻复写。将戏剧埋进电影的血管里，让教科书上的史实伸展出三头六臂，成为新的客观性，“你在北京找到真理了吗？”但好像《痴》亦是如此（太久之前看的，也许会有差错），所以尽管我极其钟意导演的个人风格，但是在“自我重复”这一项上可能要标个问号。
叉会儿腰，4星送给我们自己，留一星以后还会更好！！
老雷亲手通过对比告诉你其实某些爽文版的爱情故事，只是来源于一种虚假自负的讲述视角而已
emmm这是字母站没有的那段吗？还是包括在总集篇1里？
韦斯安德森拍霸王别姬 (w/ Lavender)
中世纪“Me too”故事。很多人把它比作中世纪“罗生门”，其实并不是。因为真相就是最后一章的女主视角，那个淡出的“Truth”已经足够明显。整部电影最后韵脚停在了貌似正义获胜的决斗场景，悲哀的是这场决斗根本和正义无关。雷德利斯科特真的是目前还活着的电影大师里最高产最革新的了。整部片子基本坚持实景拍摄，绿幕特效很少。中世纪战斗做得简直要赶上《角斗士》水准了，远超《权力的游戏》里械斗水平。很遗憾由于本片营销策略失败，夹在007和沙丘之间，票房惨淡。但我想即便档期选好一点，这类没有噱头、不加笑料的严肃电影恐怕也已经不被观众青睐了。
影影綽綽，拿民俗文化做皮，以私人記憶為軸，雲霧環繞間，溫和卻又銳利地，勾勒出活在口傳和記憶中的近代中國史，和屬於導演自身的生涯自畫像。從開場一直shock到結尾，數次懷淚，卻又總落不下來，真的又好又有趣，就蠻難想象這樣的作品除了滿分還能打幾分，真的值得被所有人看見。
中国特色超现实主义 历史的大幕落下 一个个人生 一个个政党 一个个时代 循环往复 周而复始（今天Anthology空调坏了 所有人都拿着宣传册扇着风看 颇有回到小时候看露天剧院的感觉 很奇妙）
这么好看的电影不引进太可惜了。开头夫人盛装打扮，还以为她是要坐贵宾席观摩决斗呢，结尾给鞋子特写，脚上的枷锁造成强大的反差。三种视角展现，前两种男性视角和最后的女性视角相距甚远。结尾算是导演的善意，一如欧也妮·葛朗台，但她们所经历的苦难都让人心痛。
将这部电影和罗生门类比非常不恰当。一个是叙述者有意的涂抹，关联到切身的、即时性的利益；另一个则揭露了内化的视角，风俗、价值观、无意识的自保情绪都导致了最后细微但重要的差别。说什么女权的也是拉低了这部电影，它并没有在刻意突出女性视角，只是女性与男性视角的差异天然地适合这种不可知论般的电影叙事，决斗的胜负和叙事的胜负其实都由神来裁决，最后的胜利者——女性视角的叙述者由此获得了一种神性的光辉——所以也不妨说它是种很高级的女权。
男人们永远在要求一个完美受害者，到头来一切交给上帝判决，中世纪的强奸真相无人在乎，现在呢？罗生门式三视角拍法不新鲜但，让女主的悲剧事实重演了三次，这才是冗长的意义。
目前看鬼灭之刃的任何剧集或影集，都还没有不满意的，希望继续保持下去。
感谢法国让导演有钱拍完，让观众能看到。非常个性化，手绘的背景，默片的节奏，远景的乐山城，剧院茶馆，历史对人的摆弄，人对苦难的冷漠，中国人过去几十年的一出戏，现在看来，仍然是永无宁日。演员也灵，四川话如流水，灵动。@Anthology
新戏从来演旧事
虽然和《英雄》一模一样的三段结构（更早是《罗生门》）但细节填充得很漂亮，果然问题不在于重复，而在于怎样完善细节。
恳请朋友们坚持看完！俩男主视角之后的女性视角叙事，将这部电影拉高了好几个度。我也是看到后来才明白，原来这竟是一部优秀的女权主义电影！#Venice
#南特三大洲#很奇特的观影经历，天马行空，却又落入实处，才气逼人的作品。陌生化，戏剧化，荒谬化的表达，但稍稍有点长，一度分神，也充斥着过多符号，信息量负载过大。
剧本，配乐，演员的表演都精彩，几乎没有不好的表演，主角，店小二，邱福新的童年小孩，都太棒了。有两个不满意的地方，一个是文革那段的镜头和表演有点太“影视剧”，一个是导演的两次出场。特别是结尾出场可能对导演的身份来说很重要，但是有点破坏影片余韵，毕竟邱福新才是真正的主角，那些可能遗忘或者被遗忘的人才是主角。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
