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.
选角很好
武打设计不错，但是人物立不住，故事太苍白，表演也有点粗糙，千人斩很明显是在模仿隔壁《绣春刀》吧。
部分武打镜头可以再优化，台词虽然略生硬但故事还算流畅……不太明白为啥低分，网大这水平算不错了
导演有诚意，决不是凑数拍网大。演技都在线，没有耍酷狂吊威亚。鼓励👍
十步杀一人，千里不留行。刀一旦拔出，便很难留手。命运只是幻象，一切早已发生。
编制外的打工人为了改善下生活，在他人鼓动下捞偏门，又被他人出卖，发配十年。十年后，黑社会来小镇寻仇，打工人几乎以一己之力，杀灭全部对手，自己也伤重殒命。作为一个网络大电影，有着良好的叙事节奏和完整的故事，至于宣发说影像效果像王家卫，打斗风格像徐浩峰，基本都属滥竽充数。东邪西毒里杜可风镜头下粗粝、饱且有层次感的画面，至今未见来者，徐浩峰将江湖置换成武行，重试探，强调一招致命的打法，存在一些日本武士片里，多数国产武侠都在武舞的范畴。影片的配乐能很好的契合剧情，不过，大提琴前奏一起，极其接近谭盾为《英雄》创作的主题曲，但中间变调又让人无所适从。影片角色设定甚至故事本身也有配乐一样的拼接感，千人斩的角色跟《绣春刀》里丁修一致，而且表演方式都与周一围如出一辙，陆谦和鬼刀林的故事基本就是林冲故事变奏。
额头刻刀致敬21 savage: issa knife，换白人来演就很俗套，黑人西部还挺新鲜的，唯一的亮点
给个五星
毕竟是网大，拍的东西就是东拼西凑，明显可以看到《东邪西毒》《绣春刀》《水浒传》和徐皓峰的影子，又多处致敬邵氏电影，但画虎不成反类犬，人物表演和服化道不伦不类，主角一脸面瘫，明显是cosplay宋洋，名字竟然叫大卫；反派一副脏辫二混子样，一看就是深受热血高校毒害
台词多了点，无用的镜头多了点，剧本多了点，离好电影总是差了那么一点？但差的是一点吗？是导演和编剧差了十万八千里的一点。还是给5分吧，起码动作涉及到了及格线
看出来导演想努力拍不一样的网大，也确实有点不一样的感觉，但故事、武打、表演都有点中途半端。
一个亡命之徒，偏偏名叫Love，强烈的反差
6.7分吧，打斗挺好，剧情中规中矩但是逻辑上欠佳。不太清楚是模仿还是抄袭绣春刀。电影里有的一笔带过都无，知县跟十年牢狱只存在台词里🤣，感觉主角太不杀伐果断了，兄弟陷害通吃你家人都不报复。值得一看，绣春刀3啥时候出呀？
十步杀一人，千里不留行。刀一旦拔出，便很难留手。命运只是幻象，一切早已发生。
导演能想象的他们的西部故事 画面用心但让人摸不着头脑 故事貌似很爽但也很傻 女朋友跑去单挑看的人精神失常 确定这不是导演拍出来反政治正确的？ 配乐独挑大梁
好一西部武侠片。
这句这特么棒，好多年没看到这么棒的写实刀剑打斗的武侠剧了。
真的是比相当多的院线电影强太多了。
比《雪中悍刀行》好看，武打非常棒，网大这样己经可以了。
剧本太烂了 但动作和氛围很棒 比某些大牌武侠片还带感
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
