剧情介绍

  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.

评论:

  • 乌孙溪澈 6小时前 :

    但在人心里剔除阶层歧视还有漫漫长路。

  • 屈刚洁 3小时前 :

    看完本片,不由得对坚持正义的律师心生敬佩。每一个国家,都需要这样的人,为手无寸铁的民众举起对抗部分邪恶公权力的法律武器。

  • 卫珉成 2小时前 :

    为了社会底层的奋斗 那么的激动人心 好看的印度电影 你 永远可以看不起印度很多东西 但是印度电影永远都不能轻视

  • 东郭沛文 8小时前 :

    靠一个正义的律师和一个有良知的警察,翻了一个警察为了破案屈打成招的冤案。一方面,这个故事靠2个英雄解决冤案,看起来是多么理想主义的不切实际,幸好有真实原型事件,否则确实难以确信。另一方面,印度的种姓歧视和底层执法警察的黑暗,真的比香港上世纪四大探长时代还要绝望和恐惧。但是,最终靠2个还有赤子之心的人和公正的法院体系翻盘,这才是印度的希望。最后,印度电影可是比我们有希望的多了,这种题材不仅能拍能上映还能被其他国家看到,多加1星鼓励。

  • 古承德 6小时前 :

    韩国和印度的现实题材电影很大程度上是中国观众对于不可说的中国现状的代餐,又是一部某些人看了会气的跳脚“印度人只敢拍却从不改”的作品,印度爱歌舞的风格还是太突出,只是某些人也不想想,自己连拍出来讲出来的权力都没有,输在起跑线上你高贵个什么劲儿?嘲笑韩印只拍不改、日本人只会鞠躬,你怕是很多时候这么点儿安慰也得不到呢

  • 斛天悦 5小时前 :

    印度电影有一种理想化的英雄主义的倾向,一种情绪上的美颜滤镜,以及强行植入的歌舞音乐,缺少深入冷静的思考。结局虽然大快人心,但是社会根源并没有丝毫的动摇,甚至都没有被深入的质疑,这就比同类的韩国电影差了不止一个档次。至今的印度还是一个奇怪的混合体,有着最原始的种姓制度,也有现代法治国家的司法和审判制度,产生了大批硅谷高科技公司的高管,也有最大规模的文盲群体。背后的原因到底是什么呢?

  • 俎秀英 1小时前 :

    走投无路的小民,在正义律师的帮助上走上维权之路。

  • 公冶芳蕤 4小时前 :

    种姓制度不完全废,没啥希望。给低种姓的人学习的机会,都考上大学,他们自然不结婚不生孩子了

  • 方飞语 5小时前 :

    人性的公平和法律的公平是世界的希望!影片用力还是有点猛,和辩护人还有很大差距。敢于揭露黑暗的影片,以后也许只是奢望了。

  • 向朋兴 4小时前 :

    什么时候公正法治不再是需要一个英雄的幸运概率事件

  • 卫小妹 2小时前 :

    种族主义历来是最可悲之事,中国很多朝代也屡见不鲜,只是很少会有国产关注这些,只是关注浮于上层的亮丽光鲜。

  • 及梓欣 7小时前 :

    魔鬼在人间!警察的暴行,让人发指!一个妇女,一个律师,寻求公平正义种族平权!印度能拍出这样的电影,印度是有希望的!

  • 充元旋 5小时前 :

    就……幸好它是以爽片的形式拍的。难以相信现代社会还有因为相信某个人群是神身上的泥灰所以低等恶劣的国家,也难以相信这样的国家可以拍这种电影。不过距离电影里故事的发生过去这么多年了,事情好像也并没什么起色

  • 振梓 1小时前 :

    看误杀的时候就疑惑 印度是不是没有广电总局

  • 康澄 0小时前 :

    这个社会意义得十颗星啊。超级英雄片的处理把一个非常沉重的社会议题变得偶尔迸发一点娱乐精神,三个小时看下来也不累,这样才能触达最广大的受众啊。广播质感也是杠杠的,印度电影有一手!

  • 施梦之 7小时前 :

  • 彩丽 4小时前 :

    南印电影里程碑。尽管有些造神煽情歌舞的桥段,也不能掩盖这个纪实电影的优秀。拍出来这些印度顽痼沉屙,会改变吗?总有一些在慢慢推动的吧。在家,with阿梓

  • 戎兴庆 9小时前 :

    不得不说越来越多的印度电影和电视剧出现在我们的视角里了,有些电影真的值得我们导演和编剧学习。

  • 希和煦 9小时前 :

    谁能想到这是真实发生且还在发生的事情呢?PS剧情过于冗长,看了一大半也大概猜到结局便匆匆睡去。

  • 东门琴轩 2小时前 :

    女主角和其他的村民第一次进富丽堂皇的法庭的时候,他们睁大眼睛四处看的样子真实得让人心疼。作为一部电影我想给它五星,可是看到现实里的女主原型25年来依然住在那栋破屋里我就下不去手了。豆瓣的印度高分电影结局总是美得像童话,可是有现实做比对的时候,这份美丽很伤人。

加载中...

Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved