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.
今年最正统的西部片。从故事到画面，从对白到配乐，无比复古，无比传统，在这个科恩兄弟和昆汀用各种现代手法让西部片不那么西部的时代，在被政治正确绑架的好莱坞剧本陷入低能死循环的时代，《老亨利》让人重新回到约翰韦恩和伊斯特伍德纵横好莱坞时那个传奇的西部岁月。全片不仅没有黑人，甚至没有女主，剧本如主角般隐忍而克制，但该出手时绝不拖泥带水。荒凉、冷寂、写实却不沉闷、传奇而不夸张，让人重新踏上《原野奇侠》与《不可饶恕》中那块充满生死无常、人性狡诈、传说往事、宿命传承的剽悍西部大陆。
十九世纪的法国巴黎，那些迷失在浮华里的年轻人，都突破了巴尔扎克的文字，通过这部电影向我走来。再有理想和才华，没有靠山，都只是挣扎的过河卒子。小说巴尔扎克写了八年，电影虽然也长达两个半小时，但已经把那个时代法国浮世绘的感觉拍出来了。
散发着小地主气息的十九世纪文学巨作。改编yyds
Vincent真的好会选角色…虽然拍得不算太好，但巴尔扎克拍电影比读起来更有趣哈哈哈哈哈。最重要的是印证了那句话，确实，总有人写的东西会被留下，会被记住。
-很有智慧？那是做作；
你有才华，你有梦想，现实需要你的才华，但不要你的梦想。怀揣着文学梦的单纯的人，因为生活放下自尊虚心求教，学着变坏，学着报复。最后还是要抱团，利益永远至上。但其实你还有才华，你曾经也有过了最美的爱情。大家爱的不是你的才华，当你的才华让别人害怕的时候才是才华也是很讽刺。男主轮廓好英俊。喜欢卡洛琳，夫人是好是坏到最后都没分清，或者只是自私吧，我以为很难看的文艺片，竟然意外很好看，都停不下来
小民喜好的就是谣言，造谣的媒体自然成为社会焦点。连捧带杀，多家媒体火力并开，谁又会想到这仅仅是为了制造热点，收割韮菜。男主有幸经历这一切，即便幻灭，平生亦足矣。
名著已经忘了，但巴尔扎克，批判现实主义的代表作家，好像是这么背的，哈哈。呈现在大屏幕上真的很绚丽，巴黎，爱一个人就把他送到巴黎去，恨一个人也把他送到巴黎去。不会引进的，真的引进就会删掉很多，没法看。
有一天，在加利利海上，两个评论家坐在一艘船上，突然间耶稣出现了，行神迹在海面上行走，一个评论家对另一个说：“瞧见了吗？他甚至不会游泳。” ——如果一本书很感人就说它故作伤感，很古典就说它匠气，有趣就说肤浅，很有智慧就说它做作，如果它很有启发，那就说它哗众取宠好了。
好多熟面孔，包括été 85的男主。故事没有太多新意，但相关的历史背景还是蛮有意思的。
一部穷小子闯荡巴黎上层社会浮生录，改编自巴尔扎克同名小说，今年凯撒最佳影片。断断续续看了三次才看完，不过越到后面越精彩。吉亚诺利在法国影坛的地位确实尴尬，作者化痕迹较弱，但改编水准颇高。看到媒体舆论与社会现实的关系时，联想到时下的社会环境，相信会让很多人会心一笑。
“停止幻想，开始生活。”傲慢的贵族对于渴望拥有贵族身份的人无疑是更加蔑视的。
种地打鸟憨农民，暗格藏架撑，高草丛潜行，猪圈夜宵加餐，传奇双枪反围剿林中对杀，悍匪易屠，冷枪难防，小子终会变老头……故事够老派，Tim Blake Nelson 够可爱
Vincent真的好会选角色…虽然拍得不算太好，但巴尔扎克拍电影比读起来更有趣哈哈哈哈哈。最重要的是印证了那句话，确实，总有人写的东西会被留下，会被记住。
没读过原著，但电影还算吸引人，很多旁白，感觉在让观众贴近原著，古典的配乐也不错，有一首很熟的曲子我却说不出曲名。故事描写的主人公的经历和那个时代的报社，职场，剧场和我们现在的社会差不多，或者说现在的世道和那个时代差不多，花钱买流量，花钱捧一个人或者贬一个人，铺天盖地难分真假的各种新闻，现在谁都可以写文章发视频，搞得我妈都不知该吃啥该干啥了。主人公经历了花花世界的起起落落终于又回到最初的起点，一个外面的世界很精彩外面的世界很无奈的故事。
影片改编自巴尔扎克同名小说。原著小说问世于19世纪40年代。但竟然发现哪怕放在现如今，也是一样具有极强烈的现实意义。本片可谓制作精良，人物的容妆服侍、背景的搭建装饰，都非常用心，几个古装年轻帅小伙也都相当养眼。只是虽然精良，但片长可能有点短。大部头的小说改编成电影都会遇到这种难题吧。
虚荣的幻灭，新生的开始，质朴的时代，诚挚的爱情、友情，前现代时代
看完电影倒是对鸭鸣报名字的由来有所领悟，一个感受：要在世俗意义上活得有点尊严，有没有才华不要紧，有没有头脑才是关键，19世纪的法国是这样，现在亦如是。
因为 蒂姆·布雷克·尼尔才看的，小格局西部片，没想到他的真实身份是。。。。
前半段的巴黎描述的真好，后半段就有点赶进度了
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
