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.
是个不错的广告导演，镜头利索，但只会拍情节，不会拍人物，更遑论故事。妈妈是每个人的哭点，哪怕是这些不那么连贯的碎片，差不多从妈妈去车站接女儿我就开始痛哭，我妈基本被照搬了70%，好多情节我都经历过😭。不管是妈妈还是爸爸，不管多久没见，多久没说过贴心话，家人之间的向心力是永恒的。😭导演再多读点书，再多些文学性和深意，就是《女人，五十》了，
看了一会儿就想起来韩版的那部了，怎么说呢，想悲情，却感动不了。集母亲、姐姐、老婆、儿媳于一身，全都在为了你好。但如果没有那么好，自己是不是就不一样了？虽然如此，还是想起了我妈，也是这样的人，愿她安康。
脸谱化的人物，戏剧化的冲突，每个人的标签都好明显，因而显得特别脱离生活。大喜大悲的剧本，真的煽情不出来，只让人觉得如坐针毡
想起黄执中在『无聊斋』的一期节目中说，他从来不主动去找活，活来找他时，他就有了抱怨的权力（当然，黄可能是自嘲）。但好像是这个理。
有多少妈妈，就这样过了一生。每一个平凡的生命后面，都有不平凡的故事，阿尔兹海默症的婆婆，不回家有自己生活的女人，再没能上手术台在急诊室忙的丈夫，欠赌债的弟弟，真正倒计时的病友，患重症的自己。苦难，总要分散一点才好，最后，也要看到阳光冰川才好。
1.细节都很真实；
客观而言，人物形象扁平化，可细想之下多少中国家庭的母亲不是如此？季老师一出场，就想到我妈。你想让我哭，但我不想哭。
这部电影的定位很准确，就是要来赚你的眼泪的，母女情+绝症+扶弟魔+阿尔兹海默症+不伦之恋……所有最能催泪的题材都让一部电影集齐了，势必要对观众的经历做一个全方位无死角打击。
回避痛点
虽然矛盾刻画得很真实，但还是实名反对一切号召牺牲一切伟大母亲的倡议
徐帆老师奉献精彩演出啊，该接地气儿的时候接地气儿，该煽情的时候眼泪说掉就掉，张弛有度。
宝贝啊，妈妈等不了。（以死相挟）
一个非常好的反例，导演如何毁掉一个最佳女主角的。
最后，只有她快要死的时候，身边的亲人才发现她的重要性，才开始真正爱她。
母亲为了丈夫，弟弟和女儿操劳一生，为了他们好也害了他们。一定要理解上一代母亲的选择，也希望这一代女性能选择自己想过的生活。
故事很套路，但感情过度溢出如我还是忍不住流了很多眼泪。不喜欢女儿去南极的设定，真就落实了片尾曲“我偷走你的梦”。值得称赞的是母亲去世前的最后一个镜头，导演选择的是夫妻而不是母女。妈妈不应该只是妈妈，中国人的亲子关系不应该总是互相亏欠。
朴实真挚！流了我一吨的眼泪和鼻涕！致敬赵导！
3.5分 重点片段确实感人涕下，整体上也比较完整，但就是感觉少了点什么…
徐帆傻傻地笑着，你本以为她一开口会很出戏的时候，她却不留痕迹地让你感动。
以及不喜欢最后的结尾，强行把女儿拉回正道，强行还原关于“妈妈的一切”。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
