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.
“所以我几时都话，破产係日本老人唯一嘅出路”
3.5 好无厘头的日式搞笑好长的广告哈哈哈哈/天海这都是些什么梦中情T造型🥰
“人生百年，只要活着，就得花钱。”“牡丹饼吃不下三个。”“人生百味，挑贵的体会。”
结果到最后也没解决老后问题，哈哈哈。改变的是观念。像老太说的那样，人还是任性点活比较好。
广告片，合租都能美化，看看年纪大了还有人租房给你吗？
影片改编自垣谷美雨的小说《老何所依》，导演依旧遵循日本影片的经典套路来改变生活的思路，以此来实现大团圆的结局，将一个中年家庭的无奈和窘迫展现的淋漓尽致。影片后半部分，通过繁杂的数字以及对金钱担忧的逐渐减少和各种充满生气的故事情节，将影片拉回了正轨。整部影片穿插着不少的喜剧元素，在压抑窒息的氛围里得到一丝的舒缓。个人觉得影片有些无趣，虽然也有搞笑成分，但依旧避免不了昏昏欲睡的感觉，妥妥的爆米花片。
养老是大部分人的担忧 只有少数发达国家地区不需要担心 天海佑希不太会采购啊 一进去就被销售连环施压 看着都可怜 都是打肿脸充胖子的家伙 老太太在这家玩的更开心
前2/3看得有些为剧中人焦虑忧心，但代入感很强。后边强行he实属没必要了，虽然是提供给大家一个新的生活方式思路选择。ps天海女王演这种角色好违和啊哈哈哈哈哈
大爱天海，看到最后天海买下她喜欢的包包，我好开心啊。
还不错，但本以为是看养老吐槽片，没想到是婆媳生活片，老太太和天海都很可爱，使得整个电影也很可爱！（但卖掉房子住群居屋真的要慎重呀！
挺有意思的日本片子，一开始以为是贩卖焦虑的内容，但影片中无不体现的正能量一点点治愈了观众。
但女王和五郎意外很有cp感！他俩太可爱了！
这就是个宣传sharehouse的广告片啊
还不错，但本以为是看养老吐槽片，没想到是婆媳生活片，老太太和天海都很可爱，使得整个电影也很可爱！（但卖掉房子住群居屋真的要慎重呀！
以为很沉重的社会问题，出乎意料地轻松有趣。电影结论是不要被政府和机构制造的焦虑裹挟，如婆婆对媳妇那句“人还是活得任性些”。婆婆一次心绞痛之后意识到“我已经活到了随时死去都不奇怪的年纪，我要办生前葬礼”。于是一袭白衣白发欢乐地以女王姿态和亲朋好友办party。有子女也好，住share house也好，都是不错的选择，人终究是群居动物。再次深刻意识到，时代对代际的影响，在日本影视作品里，昭和那代人往往洒脱乐观行事乖张，泡沫年代踏入社会的，忧患意识更强，所以“你真是没缺过钱”这种话常是年轻人对长辈说的。我爸妈看我可能就是这样的，也没啥好怪来怪去的，不仅是人不同，更是时代不同。ps小寿寿都演小龙爹啦？！虽是日式鸡汤，但乐观一些，总是不坏的。
这一口号被专家解读宣扬出来，引起社会一片哗然，仿若加剧不敢老，怕老的恐惧焦虑感，让人内心使终期上八下惶恐着。
渐渐地婆媳关系缓和，生活并不会让你喘息，婆婆又犯了心脏病。
怎么说，困难总会过去的，只要你坚持下来！ps：这似乎是合租养老的广告片！
看完觉得自己要好好存钱了。share house模式并不让人感冒
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
