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.
群戏比较出彩 对话痨厌烦者和对美国60上世纪60年代末的民权运动不了解的观众不是很友好 总之对于当下美国的现实 算是很应景的一部电影了
全世界都在看？只是在看，并不能帮我们什么…
求同存异，真的很美好
天地不仁，以万物为刍狗。选角精准，演技在线
期待哪位大神把红空拍出来，让我们一起重温2019。
Leaders of the Youth International Party
真实事件改编，50年前的美国，有过一场如此荒诞的审判https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1qT4y1F7YM
在美国大选前放出这电影居心叵测啊。电影从人出发再到人，体现不仅美国政体优势和劣势也体现了作为人的权利。艾伦·索金又一部精彩的庭审故事，开场第一次庭审就张力十足，且勾勒出几位角色的性格。演员台词功力好强剪辑好棒
因为某地有些情绪非常个人 fuck the police
好像是我印象中唯一一部正面描述法官不公的影片，好像几乎所有的职业都可以黑，维度法官不可以~
美国律政剧永远能推陈出新，历史上经典政治案件，或名垂千古，或遗臭万年，在这个动荡的2020年重现，极具嘲讽，又意义非凡！
看到最后整个人都在发抖…
还是那个写了新闻编辑室的艾伦索金，过于理想主义但是他好像已经没有那么乐观了。在惨遭强权霸凌的超长庭审拉锯战中插叙导致被告被指控的示威事件，令影片整体台词特别密集并不很有娱乐性。虽然涉事人物众多但是群戏并不是那么多。“有没有可能去年夏天在芝加哥有7个示威者带领1万个卧底警察进行抗议”，笑死“。
剪辑凌厉又伶俐，台词与场景之间的互文更是自带力量，共同构建起庭审、现场、回忆/讲述交错编织的叙事空间，历史影像在其中穿行无碍，是警铃，更是利刃，劈开时代的外衣剖心而来，历史何其相似，却又何其不同！
铭记一句话，解释了美国官僚政府理应被民众认清的地位：
也许是鄙人经历过1980年代末期的各种运动思潮，对于游行抗争有直面的感受。
氛围的强烈推倒，还在于影片中短促高频的穿插剪辑手法太老辣了，不只是为了解释前因后果，还在情绪和节奏上扫射着观众渐渐高涨的代入感。
1.这storytelling，太厉害了。2.有些司法可以playing dirty，有些司法没有player。3.whole world watching
一句话没说清楚引发的血案，作案手法挺复杂，推理戏也凑合。不过总算发糖了，看到新一小兰终于确定了关系，不自觉的露出老父亲的笑容，加一星
从真实事件改编的这个剧本真的厉害啊，果然王牌编剧。电影中的剪辑包括真实影像的拼接都挺有意思，台词和法庭戏尤其抓人，又见囧瑟夫，好亲切啊。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
