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.
7分，太阳之下无新事，新闻行业从来都是这样一个运营规则，掌握了话语权，就掌握了操控的能力
波旁复辟；Au 19e, le principe de publicité va être dévoyé au sens où les propriétaires de journaux vont vouloir faire de l’argent donc faire de la publicité de tout et n’importe quoi ,et pas seulement des idées politiques；Un art devient bourgeois : le théâtre.
#听说电影获得凯撒奖就去看一眼结果是我天真了
又应了《红楼梦》中那番话：“那红尘中有却有些乐事，但不能永远依恃；况又有‘美中不足，好事多魔’八个字紧相连属，瞬息间则又乐极悲生，人非物换，究竟是到头一梦，万境归空，倒不如不去的好。”
虽然是巴尔扎克时代的故事，但仍与如今的现实相符合。
虽然只拍出了原著1/5的内容和1/10的深度，但已算是足够优秀的一部电影。片中汇聚了几乎所有法语国家的演员（法国、比利时、加拿大），好在基本不出戏；原著的语言实在太精彩，电影于是加了很多旁白（虽然是比较偷懒的方式，但也还能接受）；电影的很多情节处理得过于温情，以至于显得有点肤浅，原著要残酷得多。
评论里一个个都是好journaliste，我只信🍍
吕西安无法留在巴黎，卡洛琳死在巴黎，爱与美都在这里凋零——他将停止幻想，开始生活
求求他们不要动《交际花盛大衰记》！😭
看完电影打开豆瓣，忽地只觉得讽刺啊，豆瓣一部部热门或冷门新片，沸沸扬扬的评论们，不知道有多少是花钱买的，多少是关系户，多少是真性情，多少是凹人设，又有多少是崇拜权重、跟风的
Je pense à ceux qui doivent trouver en eux quelque chose après le désenchantement.
当理想变成借口 欲望就会吞噬所有 折射媒体和政治的乱象 人类真的毫无进步
巴尔扎克的原著很扎实，改编得也很成功，复辟时期巴黎社会众生相，去年能战胜其他众多强片获得凯撒奖当之无愧。
看约翰克利斯朵夫的时候就使劲儿想这个片名，终于翻到了。
三星半 @UGC cité les halles avec Nicole
這拍得也太依賴畫外音了。男主演老是歪著嘴笑看著不太聰明。
Il commence à vivre.
没有历史视角是不行的哦——尤其对于男主这样的身份来说，复仇？——在对抗还是在面试呢？或许结尾之后才能作为真正的开端吧。
Coralie一开口就是个2022年的高中生
我不信十恶不赦的人会金盆洗手，也不信久经沙场的人最后才发现纹身。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
