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.
看了解说，原来bigbug就是把机器人脸录进去了这种法式幽默，真让人不理解
懵懂姬情+灾后重建小作文，演员是好的，但编导水平实在太差了，最后堇视角复盘侮辱观众智力达到了巅峰。
跟爱死机其中一集非常相似嘛 讽刺人工智能 讽刺人类自身 有点意思
Je veux le bébé 🤖robot
喜欢这种科幻小品，又是可可爱爱暖色高饱和的法国片。庄周梦蝶用在人工智能和人类上，分外合适啊！最后还嘴了一句新冠，笑死。 @2022-02-12 22:59:04
人物视角转换实在是没有达到预期效果，内容有点少，节奏实在是有问题，保持片长就要充实内容，要么就剪掉半小时。大海、原声带和动画的加成实在让我无法忍心给低分。
讨厌所有为了误解而产生的误解，为了错过而制造的永别。
有意思，场景都在一个房间里完成，机器人和人类的交流很好玩，色彩艳丽，完成度很好，只是尤里克斯最后全体暴毙得莫名其妙
把未來被機器控制的生活描述得很有趣。有焚書跟莊周夢蝶的討論，東方色彩。
有进取心的导演会大胆预测，更会保留自己最擅长的风格又扩大审美追求的半径
另外，毕竟贴上了百合文艺片的标签，你可以拍校园闺蜜，可以拍职场暧昧，可以拍檐下接吻，还可以拍被窝做爱，但你啥都没有，而且矛盾起伏，从无到有从有到无的过程也不表现，你让我如何评价呢？
看了十分钟，删了，就这种不明所以乱七八糟的玩意，注定法国电影永远斗不过美国。
用舞台剧一般的体例，冗长拖沓地讨论一些陈芝麻烂谷子的思想实验。如果是科幻迷，很多设定称得上熟悉到作呕。
室内赛博朋克配色，住久了估计精神会出问题，讽刺过度智能化，在一间屋子里面的1984。
政治宣传作品，跟现在波兰现在偷俄罗斯天然气一样，西方婊子又当又立
喜欢这种科幻小品，又是可可爱爱暖色高饱和的法国片。庄周梦蝶用在人工智能和人类上，分外合适啊！最后还嘴了一句新冠，笑死。 @2022-02-12 22:59:04
法国人的幽默…本以为是一部科幻片，谁知道在讲老套的人工智能和人类的相亲相爱
出乎意料地好看，差点被6.x评分错过的一部好片；今日剧中的科幻或许就是明天生活中的场景；细品还是有天使爱美丽那种魔幻感；
剧情真的 莫名其妙啊！（我们512有类似的片子吗
执法部门滥用权力侵犯人权，操纵司法和检察机关进行伪造隐瞒，威逼利诱栽赃替罪羊，利用亲属的懦弱和对权力的恐惧瓦解抗争，当种种卑劣行径被针对到面前，当绝望无助的情绪一直环绕在身边，你还能坚守内心那一处微弱的正义么？光亮或许很难照进黑暗的现实，但主角在法庭上一遍又一遍地重复着那句最直白的真相证词时，我相信都在观众心里种下了一颗为正义反抗的种子。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
