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.
总之就是这个意思然后全员团灭
我最近对电影的接受度好高啊，差不多的都能看，这个电影看完了，就已经及格了。尽管很香港，但是能看。
7分。这其实是个惊悚片，实在算不上恐怖片，整个片子恐怖的镜头都没几个。但我还挺喜欢这片子的，时间跳跃和生死轮回的设计有点像恐怖游轮。但可惜创意是有了，但完成度欠佳，只能靠脑部才搞得清楚时间线，浪费了还算有趣的创意。
到底是在哪里重复的呢？ 很明显就是在被管理员杀死那里
被恶灵袭击的场景很容易让人联想到《昆池岩》的精神病院，不同的是《鬼门》是以一种像玩游戏一样的沉浸感使人赶到恐怖。像是一场密室逃脱游戏。
在我標注的同一天，曾江離開，香港最美好的時代看來真的一去不返了。
其实私以为蛮好看的，故事很不错。美中不足是剪辑手法有点减分，以及一贯的韩式浮夸和拖沓。
导演水平不太行，手法老套，时空交错的设定也没有怎么发挥出效果。
剧情比二强，结局真实回到现实没有升职加薪，继续平淡生活
三条时间线，在修炼院里交汇循环，85分钟时长刚刚好，没有一点冗杂
我其实最想看的是控辩，但是法庭纠问完全不出彩。反转的情节有点太硬太虚幻……最后的立意很高啦，可是总觉得哪哪都有点牵强……
看到智叔就不禁泪目了，这么好的演员以后。再没机会看到他的作品了。虽然还是一个普通的剧本，但最后的价值上的很感动。
这个电影里面所有的弹幕都在问如果受害人的父亲不是富商那么这个案子还能够真相大白嘛？
不知道是不是原著漫画的关系，整出戏都是那么浮夸胡闹，真是让人生理不适，生田斗真真的需要那么用劲夸张吗？全片唯一的亮点可能还是铃木亮平饰演的金毛狮王
氣氛烘托的巧妙，可以說是多線時空重疊的昆池岩，不過這鏡頭剪輯真是讓人想害怕都難，誰能想到看個鬼影還要暫停。
不至于这么低分，气氛营造相当不错，比《昆池岩》吓人多了，尹美黎同学少一点傻笑在惊悚程度上可与伽椰子和贞子一战。比起热评所说的灵异版《致命ID》，这片更像是《恐怖游轮》和《寂静岭》的结合体，多重死亡循环+表里世界这么个设定，看着男主在交错重叠的时空中一路逃命，有种亲自玩恐怖游戏的代入感，还挺刺激。就是想法不错，执行的却不到位，时间线和逻辑链不知道是剪辑问题还是剧作能力不够，呈现出来的很混乱。其实结合宗教元素，特别是佛教的因果轮回之类的概念，讲个严丝合缝的死亡循环类故事可能会比现在这样各种乱七八糟的脑洞混杂在一起好看得多。
比昆岩池还是要好一些，但把韩国神婆，日本地缚灵，藏传佛教的金刚杵糅合到一起，也只是一个脆弱的缝合怪而已。
一班老戏骨很棒，但是一众配角的演技实在辣眼睛啊
我愿称之为：驱魔时空行者之昆池岩，剧情比较单薄，恐怖镜头有几个，也就看个刺激。
片荒时期看看还是可以的，概念挺好的不同时空的鬼相互交叠，只不过弱得一逼的男主让人觉得简直对不起他母亲那么有名的血脉，无限打怪，男主已经死了，但他死在哪个关，由你来猜
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
