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.
高跟鞋的那段太对我的点，哭了。看完缓了很久就觉得命运是很捉弄人的。
最年轻的影帝不该只模仿人物的外部的小动作而只达到形似，更何况人大爷当时并没有面瘫
整个叙事非常质朴简单，看不到半点卖弄，却温情的让我内心融化，笑着将悲情的才是最动人。整部片子看下来就两个字，舒服。
千篇一律的日影调子，三分之一已经看不下了。
生活才是最高的舞台，成为艺术家而不是表演艺术家。
结尾好啊，北野武回到老地方，师傅和太太 搭档大家都在 还是喊着阿武 好像什么都没有变
只是无意之中随便看一下的电影，没想到像抽中头彩，毫不客气地说，这是今年截至目前看过的最好看的电影，充满欢笑，也充满眼泪。它让我了解了北野武、了解日本漫才、了解戛纳影帝柳乐优弥炸裂的演技，了解许多许多……
灵前那段看得我真是又哭又笑（另外，日本七八十年代就已经普及棉条了啊……
虽然电影描述的是早期的北野武，故事性会稍微缺少了一些震撼，但诸多的情感铺满了整部电影，特别是后半段与师父的羁绊，令人动容。一人成功，许多人为之高兴。柳乐优弥的长相太过分明是缺点，但演技确实不含糊，从面部到肢体，模仿的太像了。大泉洋的眼神会演戏。
4/5
人物转变很模棱两可，但意义更加是在于展现吧
日本电影不刻意煽情，认真地把发生过的事情记叙出来，它浓缩了人生的大道理，是在向我们讲述生活。
悲剧贯彻到底就是喜剧，要让别人笑的人，即使生活再怎么悲剧，都不可以让别人耻笑，而是要用真功夫，逗笑别人，用幽默化解世间痛苦。“我是谐星，你这笨蛋。"
85分/看完电影后翻了北野武的生平，不得不说确实是传奇般的一生。
各过好各的人生。厉害又倔强的师傅，唱歌的千春。北野武演的太帅了吧啊
师徒情好感人。所以做选择要像北野武，人往高处走，从短剧到漫才到电影导演，每一次转型都步步走向人生巅峰，不要留恋现状，碍于人情，大家一起躺平摆烂，等到发展好了，再回报过去的恩人。只可惜师父和师娘没能等到这一天。
阿武，听好了，不要去讨好观众，由你来告诉观众，什么才是有趣的。一个谐星，应该随时随地都在搞笑。（观众说，你以为你是谁啊？）我是谐星，你个笨蛋！
1.“人都是带着梦想饿死的”😂 2.连葬礼都能让人笑着哭的天生喜剧人
6/10 很标准很日式，柳乐优弥确实有捕捉到北子爷的精髓，但仅限于表演的模仿。而且真的太煽情了，剥离开来之后甚至显得空洞。属于北野武的故事没多少北味，不是很满意
北海道巨星演得好好。说实话我是在去浅草寺初詣的那天，在浅草商店街看到的海报，而且还有北海道巨星大大的脸，我以为北海道巨星才是演主角的……好在片子很不错。以及我说麻里怎么那么漂亮有气质，原来是莉香！
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
