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.
一定要看未删减版……警察局那3分钟实在太酷了……设定有些老套，但反关节打斗真的是无比诡异，简直想玩这样一款游戏了……
对比温子仁前几部的作品，缺少了标志性恐怖的招牌，举例来说就是恐怖修女乍现时那种心提到嗓子眼的效果。不过整体还算不错。
怪不得温导表示，《恶性》可能会发展成为一个像《招魂》《潜伏》那样的系列呢
恐怖怪才变行活大师。这身手估摸得让隔壁厅尚气来治。
看的是無刪減版本，實話，我覺得溫子仁選材這部不太行。。。
调低预期之后观影，个人整体观感倒还可以。前面还以为是又一部类似《招魂》《潜伏》的恐怖灵异片，结果后面却变成了类似《准备好了没》的恐怖动作片，拍得还蛮血腥暴力的，也难怪《致命感应》能获得贱熊的青睐。★★★☆ P.S.：女主角的设定莫名让我联想到《火影忍者》里的鸣人（&九尾）。
他是她，她是他，他爱她，她也爱他，他恨她，他控制她，她给他写了一个剧本杀。
鏡頭調度喜歡。除去女主的女性選角是照著一個模板來的嗎。Where is my mind的这版改编合适
最后高潮部分杀的是真爽，你tm杀人就说杀人了，还整个连体婴糊弄nm谁呢，装tm的无辜，把精神分裂说的那么邪乎
以为是个恐怖片，结果和恐怖一点关系都没有 畸形怪胎猎杀的故事 后边感觉就像是游戏CG 超能力直接拉满
版权归作者所有，任何形式转载请联系作者。
很明显在尝试某种突破，多种类型元素混杂在一起反而显得乱，故事的核有些草率，感觉是一部非常精致的“粗制滥造”的恐怖片，缺乏惊喜。
期待过高，有些失衡。抛开温大的光芒，作为一个恐怖片，故事完整，逻辑前后呼应：女主习惯性流产，家暴男撞头，想寻找血亲，枕头上的血迹。逻辑硬伤有两点：一是Emily的视角应该是第一人称的，而不是站在一旁。但这么拍就会太早让观众猜到，所以很有可能是故意为之。再者就是“伏地魔”其实不需要破壳就可以直接利用身体。破壳大概是为了视觉效果。结构设计上看到了阴儿房的影子，没有完全焕然一新。但洗衣机那里和监押室暴走真的有点酷。
视听还是很温导的，包括那标志性的摇镜，不过这个不是招魂那种片子了，有点类似寄生妖怪？前面误导还是很有趣的，后面亲情拯救一切有点俗，整个核心设定在怪医黑杰克里看到过，也不太觉得有新意了。
视效确实不错，整体流畅 剧情一般....
美版寄生兽。最终战胜恶魔的是母性的伟大。前半小时代入感极差，莫非是故意营造一头雾水的感觉？所以导致更多的悬念都是在第二幕给埋下了，第三幕渐入佳境，但是我真的没想到不到5分钟就把尾给结了。总之节奏乱乱的，到也没有那么可怕，都是基操。
难看，好像美国上世界例如变蝇人那种低成本猎奇cult片
抖音来的，全剧也就那一个地方有点恐怖，只能说寄生儿真牛逼，都能控制电
⚠️不管你支不支持咱国所谓的“正版”，原版都是得看的，一秒钟都不能少。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
