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.
对了，这部电影里设计恐怖向的剧情里，镜头呀打光呀音乐什么的都有种复古和致敬的感觉，还挺有意思的。
不算恐怖的悬疑片，温子仁靠视听营造氛围的能力依然是T0级别，空间转场和谜底揭晓都伴随着很漂亮的视效。可惜推理过程敷衍，结尾略显简单，不然就是年度最佳horror级别了。
旺达我的宝，太惨了太惨了，从电影虐到TV再从TV虐回电影，漫威美强惨第一人。电影太精彩了，结尾旺达线收的很好，博士和Christian的感情线也很感人，看的很爽
我出息了！我没开好运来看完了未删节版！孩子长大了！非常喜欢这种血腥的惊悚片~
meh 为什么要把花八集塑造的角色拿来当反派 好多jump scary
多加一星吧，主要是太久没有这种观影体验了，气氛营造的不错。结尾有点小做作。
多加一星吧，主要是太久没有这种观影体验了，气氛营造的不错。结尾有点小做作。
就说这设定还是挺新颖的，但这片是真真不恐怖啊。
只要温子仁不再拍什么驱魔电影，那它就是一部好片子。
听了她的现场，我比以往给更快乐。今年最爱的专辑
电影没什么逻辑，叙事逻辑可以跟《蜘蛛侠：英雄无归》比烂，一开始教美国小姐学会使用她的超能力不就好了吗？特效有些地方太粗糙了，好在法系打斗够炫酷。福卷两鬓白发造型，终于觉得他好有魅力。旺达的确是美强惨，电视剧明明好好地收尾了，这部一上来就黑化了？
我以为是纪录片，寻思了解了解她。结果是演唱会。碧梨的歌，我一直就不爱听。那首《哈雷彗星》不错！
仅个人，复联4之后的漫威top。恐怖元素还蛮到位的，对于我来说，在电影院真的有被吓到x特效感觉花了不少钱，客串角色感觉有一点仓促就领便当了。最后！"love you in every
哈雷彗星比原版还要再上一个台阶
ps：穿越多元宇宙的那一段太尼玛酷炫了！这特效真的是下血本了！每一帧都是创意！
录像＋通灵，还是有招魂系列的影子，刚开始以为是通灵，结果是通脑，悬疑揭开后，灵异的气氛没了，就成了有点B级片血腥暴力，结局的意思还有第二部？感觉不太可。
总结：没预告片好看。😩😩😩
温子仁恐怖气氛的渲染确实厉害。
没什么恐怖的，猎奇度倒是温子仁导演生涯的最高，尤其是不怎么难猜但视觉冲击极强的反转。录像带元素结合砍杀段落迸发出浓厚的复古B级片气息，致敬老派是今次的思路之一，血洗警局在上世纪欧美砍杀片中屡见不鲜，辅以温作品中一贯的亲情埋设，和花活依旧繁多的镜头运动，温子仁的确在努力推动新时期恐怖电影的多元发展，打造更多可能性，8/10。
这部奇异博士真是cult，诡异又混乱。上次在电影院看漫威电影，已然是2019年夏天在Newcastle看的蜘蛛侠2了，已经是那么久远的事情了。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
