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.
什么乱七八糟的，导演当人都是傻子，没看过别的恐怖片儿是吧…………
哎呀，每个短篇都是帅哥美女。现在鬼片对颜值都要求都这么高了吗？
女鬼一个比一个漂亮，头发一个赛一个丝般顺滑，还会物理攻击，拂面爱抚…看得我想让老板和人事组给算算八字了。2022年，女鬼能抡起铁锤了，能一手提溜人还能一手爬墙胜过蜘蛛侠我也是看醉了，而且女高姐妹组容易跳楼死人回来复仇的优良传统依然能够发光发热，看得我秒回大学时期女高怪谈的青葱岁月。老梗基本表现平平，新番偶有亮眼时刻，个别篇章竟然戛然而止，实在是如镜中女人一般，太不自信了！
城市化进程中被城市抛下的底层阶级 个体生活面临的亲情友情房子的社会问题而产生的迷茫 最后年轻人为了赚钱依然前赴后继的进入这个吃人的熔炉
2021 Venezia 78，后半部分很好看，父亲的病作为线索，像是隐喻，也交代得干净利落，城市乡村父母子女议题探讨引入得也很自然
1：隧道
两个小时的电影里塞了10个小故事，哈哈这要是拆分开，都能搞个韩剧了吧。虽短但每个小故事逻辑还算清晰，有意思。
第三个故事的内双妹妹很好看，第四五个故事都能更吓人的，但编导完全不知道啥是心理恐怖
这不就是鬼片吗？？？一个个的小故事，胆小误入啊！
很明显的作者电影，导演把自己的经历融入电影画面的角角落落，把氛围表达出来了。本来以为分为三大段是要表达三种不同的情绪或主题，但其实无非就是自己梦想的无力，贫穷和社会精神世界的崩塌罢了，反而感觉第二三大段粘在一起了，因此觉得分成三个部分没有很大的必要，但情绪堆叠起来的效果倒是大大给了我惊喜。剧作方面：对于第一大段的剧情属实觉得和后文没有什么关系，而且并没有主要刻划主角，反而是戴面具的c力了一些。剧情上面不出意料的简单又繁琐，细小的事件以小见大，渐渐就反应出了柬埔寨的社会环境，有导演个人的思想和态度在里面，欣赏导演的台词功力。对于导演，有几个隐喻镜头和幻想镜头安排的很有感觉，对于电影时间空间的运用给了我很大的惊喜，小布局的节奏感把握的很棒。
救那个大命，本来觉得《齿虫》章节还行的，结果又变成了丧尸片。和之前的《韩国都市怪谈》大同小异，每一个故事发展得都挺让我意外的，呃，是意外的俗烂那种。刚开始有点好感，结果又给结局憋回去了，这么一对比感觉《怪奇宅》都顺眼多了。现在的营销号也是，怎么连这种质量的电影都要炒作。。。。
十个故事，没有剧情，没有记忆点。观看过程的我面无表情，毫无波澜，甚至想打瞌睡，不出半个月我会完全忘记自己看过这部电影。
齿虫这个故事还行，扩展一下可以拍一部丧尸片。人类高质量男性之人体模特故事也还行，密室逃脱也是不错的，除此其他故事太弱了
白楼是柬埔寨建筑师万莫利万的作品，期间也有和CIAM成员的合作，形式上和法国在阿尔及利亚的国际式住宅一脉相承。拆迁故事对中国观众不会陌生，不同的是法国殖民未散尽的尘埃，东南亚的热浪和带着霉菌的潮湿气息。导演是白楼里长大的柬埔寨艺术家，作品也是他的个人投影。
房顶漏雨的斑驳，父亲烂掉的脚趾，城市变迁无奈之下的选择
果然这是一个基于纪录片之上的故事片啊；整体剧情来自导演亲身经历，也致使几条线屡屡跑偏
像 素 级 抄 袭 。给一星无关各个故事质量如何（虽然质量确实很烂），这种有就抄且不带任何头脑地原样照抄我是绝对不能容忍的。如果你是一个长篇，好抄个一两处我当你还在学习阶段。短片，集合，每一个都在抄，抄了漫画抄电影抄了电影抄游戏的，连不到2年前的特效短视频也要抄？卧槽这样的作品我无法给出任何正面评价。洪元基，下一部你还这样我就觉得你整个人都可以被拉黑了。是怎样，怪谈福利很好吃？
一截轰然倒塌的肢体 扶着这段身体的废墟就像扶着拐杖 半寐半醒的无奈现实 昏迷和窒息呃画面 气质深邃漂亮 好看 导演小哥真厉害
“齿虫”看的好疼。。编剧是个有生活的人，被牙龈痛支配的恐惧表现的淋漓尽致。开头处摄影机前外罩的口腔内部画面好评～独特视角仿佛寄生虫窥探着外界。遗憾的是不免俗套的还是走向血腥僵尸类型
其实大部分故事选材都很不错，但剧情太弱了，很多故事都没有前因后果，都是老套路。齿虫的故事不错，但又走了丧尸片的老路，招魂吃人的很对我的点，但最终还是老套路。看个乐子吧，看完之后没啥印象深刻的。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
