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.
章回体罗生门叙事，与老雷擅长的古装史诗战争片不同，几乎没什么大场面，最后马特大战亚当的比武审判算是全片唯一的高潮，主题类似最近的《扬名立万》，立足点在于对当时男女不平等地位的呐喊控诉与抗争，老雷在《末路狂花》为女性发过一次声，这次借古代的故事又再次发声。整体处理得太过工整，罗生门视角的确是容易方便塑造人物，但不同视角亦没看出变化，悬疑部分甚至削减得很稀薄。再怎么数落不如人意之处，也不要否定本片是一部好电影，这年头还敢碰史诗片，除了老雷也没谁了，实际上本片的票房确实很惨淡，不知道投资人还会不会给老雷投钱。故事简单到可以一句话概括——我把你当兄弟，你却抢我地盘，占我爵位，奸我老婆。就是这样一个简单的故事，配合恢弘的场景与大气的配乐，响应现代主题的内核，足够让你享受这一场观影。大本真滴帅！！！
在特殊的位置有一粒痣
画室一段默默流泪。抱抱狗狗。😭 有代入感，恐惧抗拒厌恶憎恨甚至冲动下想要毁掉一切的无助情绪很真实。所谓“困兽犹斗”，困兽不是坏人，他只是想不到别的好办法了啊。😭很难判断是自私还是无私，伦理题真是无解。
越长大越多被迫面对病痛和死亡，越感受到造物之残酷。通向衰老的路径必然而不可逆，而这一切带来的只有悲伤。这必然发生且几乎百害而无一利的事，是写在我们基因里的宿命.....
影片的演绎都是关于告别，同自己、同爱人，这份费心铺垫，残忍又何其幸运，现实里太多人都没有个像样的告别。影片启止纯粹如一，结局深情而伤感，只要自己爱的人幸福就好，无论最后陪伴她的人是谁。大爱如此，似傻如痴，可也正展现了人类拥有真挚感情的美好。
两个不同的直男活在自己想象中的伟岸image造成的悲剧。pc的痕迹有点太重，有点刻意了。
為何對玩遊戲機的小孩發脾氣？那時能基因編輯克隆人，不能治癒癌症？
三星半。罗生门式的故事。所谓为女性尊严而战，不过是为了男性尊严而战。
一个披着中世纪古典片外衣的，用罗生门风格演绎的女权主义电影。结构独特，表演精彩。
但是生活并不是如此
小变态演的好。看完以后我才反应过来:婆婆是大傻
原以为只是简单的罗生门 每个视角不同的小细很有意思 玛格丽特part中段开始简直想冲进屏幕打人~ 朱迪在这部电影里好漂亮呀
达蒙的角色写得比想象中精彩，很多主事件外的隐喻（比如育马一段）还可以。三段式即有统一事件的不同角度，也有信息互相补充。可是大概电影的不完美也在这部分上，即使是pov模式，过于跳跃的细节导致电影前半段并不太引人入胜。而且我也说不清，不知道是一些细节还是主演的原因，这电影的年代感并不强烈。整部电影里的人都在夸司机如何潇洒帅气，我笑到爆炸。
為何對玩遊戲機的小孩發脾氣？那時能基因編輯克隆人，不能治癒癌症？
RJ说这类型电影是在给AI做宣传，光看了开头就说不喜欢主题不看了，但我看完之后感觉，其实重点不在于AI的合法和合理性，而是如何对自己的爱人和家人进行告别，以及如何平和的处理被遗忘和忽略的感受，RJ说这种感受不需要去了解，但我确能体会到自己在group chat里失语时的落寞和无奈，注定是一部属于“自我”的电影。
中世纪的“罗生门”，增加了现代的议题。不浪费一丁点时间，深刻！雷公真是人民的好导演！
那这应该就是同一个人吧
中世纪性侵案，女主做了自己在当下可以做出的最勇敢决定，却最终还是要以两个男人决斗的方式来判定真相。受害者无法伸张正义，甚至主动权掌握在施害者的手上，这样的哀歌，时至今日也没有停下过。电影分别以三个人的视角把同一件事讲述了一遍，这样罗生门式的展开，让真相更加立体，也将“理智”尽可能的推到观众面前，当我们能更加理性客观的审视，相应的问题也就越发明显。不得不说雷德利老爷子的电影总能提供一种发人深省的视角。而朱迪科默完成度很高的诠释了这个角色，就她目前的势头，不能说是未来可期，她已经在那个未来了。
看完我还在想，所以片名“天鹅挽歌”的寓意是什么。我女朋友竟然一语中的：“因为天鹅在湖面上的倒影，就是由两个自己，组成的一个爱心呀。”
只看最后三十分钟足矣，叙事效率在老雷面前是个伪命题。罗生门的厉害之处不是不同视角下含混的真相，而是真相毫不重要：乱世里活着最重要。少了这层意味，只剩下对旧社会封建礼法对女性残害的无声控诉（参见达蒙凯旋后bgm突然的静音）。高光要属决斗场面，惊险刺激但并不激烈，和十字军东征一样，表面上骑士精神，实际流氓械斗。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
