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.
20年过去了，法律已经教会你怎么「做人」，社会偏见则一如既往。在固化阶层思维里，警察永远正确，弑警者永世不得超生。警察的儿子放下枪的那一刻是片中难得的温暖，每个人都有难过的坎，说服自己放下的那一刻真的需要勇气。
刑满释放的杀人犯真的只值得人们贬低鄙视吗？不管何时，欺凌别人的人都是丑恶的。
请问一个五岁小女孩能端起一把猎枪吗？还扣动板起杀死了上门要帮忙她们的警长。
请问一个五岁小女孩能端起一把猎枪吗？还扣动板起杀死了上门要帮忙她们的警长。
虽然包裹着一个老套故事的外壳，但其中探究的犯罪者的社会接纳度、受害者家属的心理伤痛等问题仍值得思考。“人生总要继续，”但总有些人的人生永远停留在过去。
人与社会的关系，偏见，阶层，很多时候才是人的不幸根源
拍出了另一面的西雅图，是码农的泡泡世界里没有的那一面
所有的现实主义题材，都应该加分。虽然感觉中间节奏不够紧凑，但看完后，余音绕梁，才能说明问题，当年速度与激情的两位男女主，一个虽然成为the one，但演技仍有待提升，另一个成了重刑犯，但却光芒四射，尤其最后姊妹相拥时的克制，生生逼出我两滴眼泪。推荐！
当时说出真相不可以吗？就算妹妹开枪，也不用做牢，你们可以生活在一起不比去做20年牢香吗？
各大营销号的吹水，其实也就是一般，真的审美疲劳，影业的质量不行，这是一部为获奖而存在的电影，所以在我这种大众眼里，一般。曾经的演员、演技派要么人至中年要么老年暮霭，要么息影要么偶尔客串，新晋的连何为幽默活力都不明所以，嬉笑胡闹的新生代，电影圈也是青黄不接，宁愿《东城梦魇》肥温的压抑，也不喜欢桑德拉的这张苦瓜脸。替稚幼的妹妹背锅20载，了不起的亲情！
2021外影十佳～
萨德拉·布洛克的演技不输东城梦魇的凯特·温斯莱特，整部剧也足够克制。可惜后面为了救赎，为了达到一个光明的结局，剧情走向太过刻意。
看下来剧情线也还算简单明了，桑德拉的表演也还可圈可点。
由于节奏缓慢，剧情过度无聊，看半小时就弃剧了
桑德拉的表演隐忍、沉重，背负了太多的责任和爱，这才是真正的投入角色，一个悲伤的故事，生活总要继续。
其他还好，只是被杀警长的两个楞头青儿子的角色设置不合情理。
撕心裂肺的愛，有養育過孩子的人應該比較能體會
同时侧面映射出，重刑犯回归社会之艰难
剧本很好，里面的人物塑造很丰满。整个故事层层递进，叙事中带点悬疑。桑婆的演技炉火纯青，眼神中有沧桑与隐忍，坚定与不疑，值得二封。
自愧不如，甘拜下风！
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
