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.
如果我有罪请用法律来制裁我，而不是用这种黑漆漆忽闪忽闪的电影
情节太跳跃了，设计一般。主要靠老演员的脸和演技来撑场面了。
前两部还傻fufu蛮搞笑，这一部又low又💩唯一的一颗星献给パピヨン
这一批配音演员我好像有点印象。像是零一零二年左右，那一批盗版DVD电影的配音阵容。
吓人是吓人，但是根本不知道这个故事讲的啥，纯无剧情恐怖片
感觉三万年没看过这么好笑的电影了……真的笑死了……想想这部剧本写起来会多有意思呀！“疯蝴蝶瞬间移动来到了老大身后”之类的。（而且配合ED画面回顾这三部曲，更觉得宫九这几年最好笑的几个梗都贡献给了这部……）
真有点看不下去，好在 最后女主那段还是很恐怖的 加一星
⑤“难道每个人都束手站在鸡蛋那一边，高墙自己就会塌吗？”
感觉三万年没看过这么好笑的电影了……真的笑死了……想想这部剧本写起来会多有意思呀！“疯蝴蝶瞬间移动来到了老大身后”之类的。（而且配合ED画面回顾这三部曲，更觉得宫九这几年最好笑的几个梗都贡献给了这部……）
说差吧也不算差，两个小时能不费力地看完；说好吧，也确实没有哪里特别突出。
看评分，似乎三部电影都是小烂片，但实际上1很好，2也不错，3就是差点意思。完结篇就很多拖沓、普通的段落，节奏稀烂，编剧也稀松。有意思的地方也算是有一些，不多。时间拖得有点久，生田斗真都老了。堤真一就很好玩。
三池崇史带着他最新的烂片来了
①案子不复杂 人物太多线太多 导致不像法庭戏 全在讲述背景
经典明知山有虎偏向虎山行。经典东西掉了一个人回去拿。经典只是昏迷但是被活埋/淹死/烧死....经典磨磨唧唧制造破绽。很多恐怖片常见桥段，吓人全靠一惊一乍，不过剧情里的小悬疑元素（虽然也没有很悬疑）为这部电影增色不少。
本子应该是个好本子，程序正义和结果正义哪个重要？但怎么最后拍出来是这个样呢...
一个垃圾片，看的人闹心扒拉的，什么无限循环都是扯淡，没能力你去驱个毛的鬼？这鬼也是很衰，就占个破楼等人来
什么鬼玩意呢，驱魔没系统，故事很枯燥，没有哪个厉害的恐怖片 是靠1、2个小创意就起口碑的哇
钢牙雨，“脱水完了”和“海中蝴蝶”笑了三下，然后就不知道其他演了个啥了。居然延续了一下这几年的极道边缘人关怀。三池老怪最近几部片子还能再应付点吗？
港片一边放不下身段，一边投入有限，想拍深又有所顾忌，所以最终就失去了灵魂。
电影2星，剩下1星给智叔。编剧太垃圾，浪费好演员。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
