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.
其实一贯如此，她是开心麻花的锚，负责了她参与的每部电影的情感重量，即便在昨晚的小品中。
很好看很好笑！煽情也恰到好处完全不尴尬！是那种又有笑点仔细想想又很辛酸的荒诞电影。
一个中年高管的日常，展示的扭曲的平衡挺现实的，一点都不可笑
耍了半天手腕，最后还是没玩过实习生。让我看到了作为一个企业家的“责任”，还有干活给钱就完了，别老说什么“we r family ”这种屁话，最后不还是该开就开了么，几个反转剧情还是挺有意思的，哈维尔-巴登老了，都开始演企业家了。
我怎麼覺著這老闆不錯，還幫著解決員工生活，情緒😌
3.3星。不烂的喜剧。1.本片在春节档逆袭只有一个原因：差异化。2.话剧感太强，电影质感大打折扣。3.比起鸡同鸭讲跨服交流的戏中戏，本片最大的优点其实是真诚---戏里角色对表演真诚的热爱，戏外演员对电影真诚的坚持，片尾花絮魏翔杀青时的眼泪让本片立刻升华。4.即便是喜剧，让马丽演一个人见人爱的万人迷大明星会不会略勉强？又美又沙雕的女演员你能想到谁？脑子忽然想起《东成西就》里的王祖贤。5.为追梦而坚持努力的人是最能打动人的。
因为员工着实也是不靠谱，导致没看出什么黑色幽默的讽刺…
所谓的平衡？维稳？Javier Bardem老得有点快啊
高仿“喜剧之王”之“魔幻时刻”。原版更好看，虽然但是，能成功把我逗笑也是一种胜利啊~（春节档真该多些这样的片，好过看到晦气的XX）
“公正的天平下面藏着一颗子弹，还有无数带着鸡屎的鸡毛…”
巴登老师把一个道貌岸然的老板气质拿捏的死死的。本是西班牙的故事，却读出了不少中国的“心眼儿学”。
主题当然是对伪善资本家的讽刺 但另外一方面呈现出来的 当个老板也真是不容易 在欧美那些多少还在乎点人权和民主的国家当老板就更不容易了。
《李茂扮太子》与《这个杀手不太冷静》，马丽、其他开心麻花系演员与谐音梗片名是相同的，控制了变量，或许开心麻花出品确实是更好一些的。
3.5/5 | 老版的情怀，员工的血与泪。
因为抖音看了魏翔的经历有点不忍心说狠话
难以共情，因为中国的老板比这个老板傻逼多了嘻嘻
可看性还是挺强的，是那种轻喜剧的讽刺手法。整个故事很连贯，从头到尾，所有事情都串联在了一起，一个看似其乐融融的天秤厂其实在老板的龌龊手段下补了一个又一个窟窿。哪有老板和员工如父如友的企业，只有利益相互纠葛取得双赢的企业。被电焊戴耳机涨了知识，我见过的厂子再吵也没有给人戴降噪耳机的。
虽然站在老板的角度能理解其动机，但公司终究是反人性的存在
原声的笑点几乎全都听懂了，周围老头老太太笑挺开心的哈哈哈，感觉导演想玩儿的那套讽刺和幽默还稍微差点儿意思，我感受到了他的意图，但是火候还不够
想起刘強东，囗囗声声我兄弟，裁起员来赶紧滚。本片揭示了资本家的虚伪，噢，不!那叫客气。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
