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.
偶有环绕相守
被过誉了。在影像上Zhao和马利克根本没法比，马利克是有非常丰厚的影像基础来引导视听的，并且马利克的镜头是有着极强流动性和运动感的，不是说你对着个自然景观调调色然后放上极其抒情的音乐就可以的。其次这个主旨就如同白左一般，只是表面上的无病呻吟根本没有深入的内容，更像是找了一个社会议题去迎合学院派的口味，但拍着拍着发现自己深入不进去选择了一个更简单并且迎合大众的主题继续拍，一切都是精英式伪善的视角和无病呻吟。影片唯一做的不错的，是影片拍出了一种现代人的孤独感，而这种孤独感主要是科恩嫂那股气质和她演技衬托出来的，Zhao如此平庸的技艺居然能在这个时代能横扫奥斯卡，美国电影真的在走下坡路了。
一处悬崖下有上百个燕子窝，燕子飞来飞去倒映在水中，那一刻彷佛我和燕子一起飞翔。如果心是一片旷野，活着便为了这样的瞬间。（再次，她不叫科恩嫂，她叫Frances McDormand
不是传统的homeless的故事，更多的是自我选择的放逐
看到中间突然明白了，赵婷对大众关注的主题，例如中西部的衰落、资本化的工业、愈来愈分化的贫富差距等避之不谈，是因为这本就是一部很直白的情绪电影，可能同样经历了一地鸡毛般的生活，对弗恩这种选择逃避社交的孤独感尤为感同身受，即便她说过上路是为了铭记死去的丈夫，可行为本身就是在逃避，跟海边的曼彻斯特那种自我惩罚不同，弗恩一边在路上一边享受着自我感动，Dave的儿子说了解一个城市最好的办法就是匿名戒酒会，弗恩的所作不也是一场无止境的互助会吗
dedicated to the ones who have to depart. See you down the road. 生活在钢筋水泥中久了看到广阔荒芜的地方 真觉得心胸开阔。但我的心态终究是从一个旅行者角度来思考，而这种荒芜对于nomads或者the homeless来说是一种生活方式甚至是the only way to choose, 因此我的向往显得很何不食肉糜 拜托我自己 别这么矫情了
“You leave a big hole by leaving.” “That one is on me.” searchlight上面没有20世纪真不习惯。威尼斯获奖影片也终于有中国人拍米国鸟不拉屎的地方和苦痛挣扎的底层人民了（我这扭曲的心理..）基特里奇之后，科恩嫂再次塑造这样顽强倔强孤独的女性：不得不告别的无家可归的黑狗，小溪里岩石间雀跃的自己，像大神却也有痛的张不开口的伤痕的RV Community组织者，朋友传来的视频里那个让她觉得一辈子没白活的燕子窝群。坐在Dave家客厅设想自己在这里生活下去的背影，最后还是决定离开。她开去海边，悬崖风暴里飞翔的鸟，她脸上带着笑。无论是Dave还是储物空间里过去的家具，那些都代表着family life in house, 她最后一个都没选
想起了《美国甜心》，想起我们这一代人，这是我们的未来吗？
亲人的离去，治愈需要多长时间？“回忆在，人就在。”我相信这句话。从完全接受的那一刻起，不再和情绪做对抗，我知道自己已不再需要被“治愈”。
随着女主慢慢的进入了她的生活，感受了她的情绪，最后理解了她的人生。
继承自前作的细密，这种细密的根基是自信。结构并非段落拼装而成，而是切断的动作和不连续的空间织出来的浑然一体，人物的情态就在无限细小的镜头单元中以近乎不可见的速率发展推进，就像微积分一样消去了所有情节棱角。
人有多种活法，选择自己喜欢的方式就好。别人能不能理解你的孤独，不重要。
继承自前作的细密，这种细密的根基是自信。结构并非段落拼装而成，而是切断的动作和不连续的空间织出来的浑然一体，人物的情态就在无限细小的镜头单元中以近乎不可见的速率发展推进，就像微积分一样消去了所有情节棱角。
为了山间轻流的小溪
由衷感叹，独立勇敢又坚贞的硬核女性，本应拥有幸福啊，但好像只有漫无边际的孤独。
lovebifan：让我想起《猜火车》里的那段经典台词，生活中就是有人不想买他妈的大电视，而选择不停地在路上，看群山，看飞鸟，looking ahead, to the day you die.
游牧之行，无依的心；翻山越岭的迁徙，不过是内心的一场放逐。视角虚实难分，风情画式影像用旅途的不易映衬着心灵的苦修，将其视作解谜或解脱似乎都并不影响它若有似无的社会性；阶级与落寞在一切的最终都形成了忧伤的通感，意韵凄苦却坦荡、悠远而迷人。
借用了一个美国的故事来讲述一种非常普遍的生活选择和方式，每个在路上的人应该都能感受到相似的情感；人们总因为各种原因上路，在快递仓库与自然美景、房子与van之间，不断挣扎又喘息，可能真是上路了，而能更深刻体会到这种感受，有时候，有些情绪无处言说；赵婷还真是挺厉害的，情感把控很到位，平和也可以很有力量。
有点失望，要不是女主的演技，实在无法忍受废柴般的镜头。
期待看到“不得不上路”的部分多一些从而引发一些批判，但看到的似乎多是他们主动选择了这种生活方式？太浪漫化了吧~
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
