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.
看个电影都能产生度假的愉悦感，现在可谓vr发展的大好时机。下次去东京就住royal park吧，啊啊啊
What a convoluted mess. 我不知道制作者们有没有想过，这样描写永恒族，是几乎剥夺了人类文明所有的agency，这对我来说是远比节奏，角色等等剧本技术性更深更大的问题。
大排场的无聊剧，找了很多事做让自己忍住不要中途起身。动机完全站不住脚。中村安挑了半天舞的意义???
笑死，凶手有钱住酒店没钱买表是吧，实在不行你看看手机也行啊……节奏倒是比上一部纯酒店宣传片要好些
太多好玩的双关和梗了，所以加一颗星星
“你来抓我啊你来抓我啊我靠你还真的抓到我了”
1.我他妈这一部终于看到秋刀鱼在哪了（再不看到我是瞎了可能）2.剧本一如既往东野圭吾味儿（非褒义）3.甜心跟木拓在这部终于有了西皮感，可喜可贺，可喜可贺！4.你们真就找青木美沙子来演个尸体啊。。。5.麻生姐姐好美
东野圭吾的推理……有时候就是建立在“小聪明”上。本来是个三星电影，但是我太喜欢木村拓哉和长泽雅美搭戏了，强行加一星，哈哈。
就是我觉得美国的酒店根本不需要从业人员这么精细贴心的服务……
一点逻辑都没有，居然比上部还难看，情绪全靠配乐推😓剪辑灾难，无法理解开头那段舞的意义，太傻比了。唯一好的就是blocking，把所有人都串在一起看着还挺舒服的，其他一无是处，木村拓哉都变得又丑又油腻。
沒在推理部分下功夫，舉報人和凶手都沒聯係上，凶手敗給酒店服務精神這個概念不錯。
故事一般，出场演员好牛👍大神跳舞好有魅力，女演员除了长泽雅美，都是看起来不简单的那一挂，没一个好惹的哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈😂
经典阖家大联欢，乐趣完全是建立在在认卡司和找演员上
笑死，凶手有钱住酒店没钱买表是吧，实在不行你看看手机也行啊……节奏倒是比上一部纯酒店宣传片要好些
有些无聊，即使长泽雅美也只是支撑我看完，两人比第一部还没火花。剧情推理也不够精巧
看他们飙戏好舒适，虽然推理有点逊。东山嫂又演了一回恶女！简直爱了！相较下9妹好不适合这个悲剧型反派🤦♀️
东野永远雷声大雨点小的垃圾推理作品别再浪费大把演员了pls（唯一好处可能是卡司全员大牌没那么容易猜凶手hhh
和前作一样能看，但是总差一口气，结局太磨叽…
大排场的无聊剧，找了很多事做让自己忍住不要中途起身。动机完全站不住脚。中村安挑了半天舞的意义???
不透露客人隐私也是脑残，人家是警察啊，而且都要出人命了，还不能透露？
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
