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.
恐怖盛宴的材料齊備，但廚師卻似乎不懂得「煮」。
剧情一般，但是这中二的感觉～横滨的白毛～还是很不错的。（为啥感觉流星和大当家有点好嗑）
一句话概括就是颜值真的很高的一部电影。没看过原著，剧情节奏不算慢，但是作为烧脑剧题材，每次揭晓的时候实在是有种就这？？的无力吐槽感。就...这样。
这个电影推荐的意义在哪里啊？莫名其妙的 槽点太多了
雖然橫濱流星這個造型有那麽點秋山深一平替的感覺。但橫濱流星的面部細節還是太漂亮了。這個髮色確實適合他，沒有什麼太大表情的時候也還是好看的。只不過在做嚼糖和吐舌頭的動作的時候面部太用力，就顯得很誇張很刻意很用力過猛。人物塑造得也不像城府很深的樣子。沒能瘋批到點子上。給人感覺他更像是那種誤打誤撞的二傻子。當然還有一部分原因是核心詭計太垃圾了。
一班班啦，无啥出众处，不过不知道是韩国人皮肤好还是咋的，个个脸那么水？包括男人？
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。
用抽鬼牌做主菜感觉不太够啊，没有呈现出什么新颖的赌局，遗憾。
好装逼好中二最帅的竟是全程没什么戏份的樱井海音
没那么不堪呀，挺喜欢看这种小故事合集的，很下饭，有点像毛骨悚然撞鬼经，比怪奇宅差一点，3.5，对这种类型要求不能太高了
普普通通……好吧，其实没那么好看，但这是流星第一次单主大馆，还是要给个五星的👋
同类型里面不算出彩的。没看过漫画，白麻那个角色感觉太硬凹大姐头感了
故事不太行，形式类似怪奇宅，但远不如怪奇宅
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
爱豆演员大乱斗。。。看到了我前担公司3个以上的师兄师妹😂恐怖吗有点jump scary 但是有的剧情真的很令人无语
看的机翻资源，字幕驴唇不对马嘴硬理解看完，十个恐怖小故事组成，十个故事水平不一，有的故事像凑数的（比如：开车和假人…），整体水平一般吧。
像初中高中看的劣质短篇小说
一般般，每个故事都太短了，铺垫不够，也不够恐怖。
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。
借用推特上一句辣评：角色厨拍出来的同人作品。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
