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.
这种电影完全不必带着脑子看，因为看完很快你就不记得了
时间旅行的外壳，父子亲情的内核，好在相对完整均衡，好看好玩的爆米花。
netflix折腾了漫威这么多人，不怕斯坦李踹翻棺材板吗？
亚当一号：我们还行吧？
给三星都算是多给的吧，故事太平庸了，就是爸爸后面出现的情节还有一些温情加分吧～～～
一般在穿越影视里很少能见到多个版本的“自己”直接见面并都快速的理解情况，还能前往第三个时间线把故事讲完，这是一种之前少见的创意。当然，故事层面就是传统爆米花了。
20多年后，当瑞安·雷诺兹蓦然回首时，发现自己已经演了20多年的贱兮兮的话痨角色，不知道是喜还是悲。电影方面，无论是大的设定还是小的细节，都是一通无脑的胡编乱造，毫无逻辑可言。
Ryan Reynolds也就这样了，流水线量产的电影可不值得我认真观看。
算是我看过最差的时间旅行的电影之一了，剧本极其敷衍。
所有时间穿越题材的电影，没一部让我觉得把悖论解释的令人信服满意的。
我从不懂科学，也从不理解它，超越了生死的不幸和黑洞，穿越的无奈与甜蜜，名为亚当，无法创世。
好稳定的三星 喜欢三个人最后同框丢球 小时候的亚当好机灵
不要细究逻辑的科幻片 瑞安 为何总接这种片
第一次带宝宝去看电影，没想到这么萌萌的一部电影她居然哭的稀里哗啦，可能找不到妈妈对她来说太可怕了，她真的以为小萌鸡们要找不到妈妈了，在电影院就哇哇大哭起来，真是感性的小姑娘
故事没有展开啊，就真的是描述了一个计划，直到最后实现了它。以为是个宏大的科幻片，其实是个披着科幻外衣的合家欢片，也还可以。
【2022.01.08/中影南方IMAX/No.1】甜甜妹和甜甜爸妈看的第一场院线电影！甜甜妹大部分时间能专注于电影上，紧张的时候会捂眼睛或别过脸。最后美佳妈妈和萌鸡们拥抱时，我看见前几排的小男孩抱了抱他的妈妈，甜甜妹回头看看我，当我以为会得到一个温暖的拥抱时，她说：“我要到爸爸那坐。”....
前面一边看一边心里吐槽，后面反倒有点意思了，一个爸两个娃打破各种物理定律反转大作战，当个儿童片看行。
挺好看的，故事比较俗，但小男孩戏份挺好。整体也比较完整。
6.5分。整个就是商业科幻片流水账的产物，无论是故事，人物，桥段都太一般，看得完全提不起劲。各种特效都让给了飞行部分，勉强过得去，但也就这样了。没有惊喜，没有感动，没有意外，就这么平淡开始平淡结束，实在是没意思呢。说起来RR自从演了死侍，怎么什么角色都一股死侍的话痨味道啊，这么下去要被定型了哎？？
很简单，又有些道理在里面，国产意外惊喜，家长都感动了
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
