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.
每个人看过才会有自己的体会，对于我来说是十分难得的治愈旅程
以为是恐怖片，结果是一个纪录片。线索比较断续
三星半。前半段挺无聊的，后半段反转的时候还是很痛快人心、酣畅淋漓。
🇰🇷真的属于一边讽刺财阀，一边拿着财阀的💰拍电影。。。但不得不说嘲讽和真实，🇰🇷电影真的可以！
细菌最怕的几件事，除了高温以外，一是通风，二是干燥，三是紫外线。 罪犯最怕的是-----阳光！
拍的很流水账，但也有受到感触，看过原新闻只是十分惊奇震惊，唉
刚失去亲人坚决抵制涉事商家，坚持要法庭告赢时：“我不要你的臭钱！你以为你的钱就能买人命吗？他们能活过来吗？”涉事商家公布和解名单（有赔偿金）时：“怎么办，人死了我一分钱也没拿到”
前边节奏有些慢，后边政治企业很真实、这就是现实社会。看完马上关闭加湿器～…
钱权交易，人命为草芥，政府的职能是养蛀虫，既然权由人赋，为何还会官逼民反？
拍出了天朝不敢拍的题材，其实在天朝有过之而无不及，只是过不了审吧
平平无奇，陈旧老套。与其说是电影，很像一集毫无悬念的电视剧。
略平缓的节奏、压抑的情绪，对应的正是现实中的这种无力感。演员们代我们说着心里话，将“演”无限荒诞化。
叙事确实平铺直叙，有时候也有些刻意 但是有被那句“我是敏智爸爸”感动到！！原来是卧薪尝胆 釜底抽薪 整体还不错
但是拍的好差劲啊
观看的资源最后一段字幕没翻译，导致不清楚最后这事是什么结局。看片名以为是个惊悚悬疑故事，没想到是韩国影片里常见的批判政府和大企业议题的电影。拍得也很套路，除了最后听证会上各个国家行政机构的甩锅有点意思外，其他也没太多新意。既然连自己身边有亲人因此去世的受害者家属都能被利益左右，你难道指望黑心资本家自己良心发现自己承认错误，承担这巨额的损失？剧情可笑就在于利益集团拼命公关洗白，却找了个同样家里有人因该使用产品导致生病离世的律师来负责处理这些事，这编剧强行给反派降智也是没谁了。这也导致本片虽然在揭示韩国社会阴暗面，却总觉得很不真实。还不如现实中网络维权来得有效。
又一次感叹韩国人真的敢拍，什么时候咱也能拍“彭宇案”和“三鹿奶粉”事件？
把所有证人和律师通通收买了，一丁点希望都不给他们。不过估计这戏也是过不了审了，只能自己慢慢欣赏。
钱权交易，人命为草芥，政府的职能是养蛀虫，既然权由人赋，为何还会官逼民反？
细想想，世界人口60亿，作为其中之一，真的是小到可以忽略不计，足够渺小和无用。
该片改编自同名小说，素材取自于2011年发生的加湿器杀菌剂事件，通过这个事件来讲述有些事情必须有人去做，还没有结束的我们所有人的故事。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
