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.
拍给金敏喜的电影情书，金敏喜身上有少女的娇羞、不知所措和小情绪同时又兼顾成熟女性的妩媚与知性，确实很美很有味道。非常日常，真实得有些像创作和恋爱纪录片。
洪常秀后期电影的最大问题，就是影像没有“血色”，他试图通过对话从人性中提炼出“物质成分”，看似举重若轻的表面，背后却是一长串深深的脚印。
我是真的被突如其来的电影本身给齁住了。还是更喜欢洪尚秀绵里藏针的人物对话，不合时宜发言却不自知的男人，将其拉走的女人、转头假装要加酒不接茬的女人。超高对比度的黑白画面，白色字幕隐身一半，不知道这又是什么特殊的粗糙美学。
彼此欣赏的二人作为一面相互指认自我的镜子，在相知与相吸的同时，实则也是一个在相恋(自恋)的过程，而电影短片的制作与那一抹原本黑白电影上的彩色，也恰恰是这一对自我欣赏的高潮。但在结尾电影又并未停留在这一对自我欣赏的高潮之中，而是通过一个细节，通过一个未能响起的闹铃，使另一个差异性主体开始在这一相互指认的镜像关系中产生新的困惑与疑问。
我是需要洪导在述事结构上的刺激来理解影片的观众，所以这部并没有特别明显的结构刺激的一如既往的对话合集会让我有点闷，当然这种镜头内镜头外对金敏喜的盛赞实在是~~~~嗯，不用刺激我也懂了啦~~~~
我浑浑噩噩地度过了我人生中的前三年。前三年浑浑噩噩地被度过在我人生之中。我在给别人录音的时候听到了隔壁情侣的发疯吵架。最后我在拍摄自己电影的过程里和女主角深陷爱情的泉井。曾经我以为自己厌恶一切东西，工业和虚伪的技术都是破坏艺术原真的垃圾。结果我自己最后也丧失了作为诗人的天性。我不清楚我讲的话或者我做过的事儿，对于我一切的过去我只想逃避。我站在天塔上看到的不是风景，而是自己。下一秒我来到公园里碰见了你，你还是老样子，一张嘴巴两只眼睛。你告诉我我否定一切没有意义没有意义。最后，我卸载了虎扑，剔去了长发，灵光涌现，不能自己。我是自私的，我曾经为了及时上厕所踩碎过一片郁金香花坛和两座自动喷水的机器。我也是虚伪的，因为我一直自诩真诚且对真诚的代价毫不在意。最后我看见了你，然后拍了你，你就是我的意义。
—真可惜，它很好看的
“花这么好看，不用彩色拍好可惜呀。”“我们可以用彩色拍。”🌻乏味是真的，但被最后温柔到也是真的。
4.0。这是看过洪导导演在场感最强的一部了，以前的他更多展现是风趣的一面，即时享乐的样子，这一次是真正的浪漫。
第一部洪常秀。怎么讲，这大概不是让陌生观众来认识他的那张名片，且我对片外花边没有很多了解也并不怎么care，但黑白转彩色那一瞬真的有冲击到我，电影是什么呢，电影可以只是表现爱意的介质。p.s.敏姐，太 美 了。
简单巧妙、轻盈舒服。无论再怎么做减法，对白依然是洪常秀最有魔力的部分，而他对「电影」本身越来越淡然，反而越来越让人喜欢。
就，还是那样子。3.5 @Berlinale
一般洪的电影都属于休息时刻，不投入感情和思考，懒洋洋看几个角色互相夸赞，洒洒陈芝麻。人物没有弧光，都是老树一样稳定的品性，在每个洪尚秀平行宇宙都能构建起一桌酒局。这部意外的很喜欢，可能因为小说家偶尔在一旁的蹙眉让我突然代入进去，不能继续在宇宙边缘静止观察。她对创作和感受和规则和人情和性的表达头一回让我觉得哦，原来就是这么回事，原来在老树林中做一只有眼睛的鸟就是这样的生活状态。结尾看她抽烟的时候也好想抽烟，一口长气叹了出来。总之就谢谢洪尚秀吧，希望他继续用李慧英。
—对
“花这么好看，不用彩色拍好可惜呀。”“我们可以用彩色拍。”🌻乏味是真的，但被最后温柔到也是真的。
好吧，你牛逼，你做到了，我们也羡慕死了
导演是有多爱金敏喜这个演员，那种老去艺术家对青春的渴望，逐渐斑白头发，仍旧向她诉说着，心中的情书，成了一部电影。
#2022柏林主竞赛# 看完之后只觉得自己是个小丑。
后面转为彩色，就有种走入现实的感觉，在洪导镜头下，金敏喜实在很美，那发自内心的喜悦，不知道还以为这是他俩结婚时播得一些纪录片段……
全片都可看作一场关乎电影创作的自我指涉，从早期痴迷于雕琢结构到此刻随心所欲举重若轻，洪无疑已经达到了一个新的创作境界。片尾的影像既是一种真实的在场又充斥着梦的呓语，倒不如说是一种纯粹的创作冲动——影像在完成的刹那便如烟雾般消散，从而完成了对自身的忘却。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
