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.
我看的断断续续，但是还是会有共鸣。被很多其它打断，但是最终还是看完。
边看边觉得烦躁，不会控制情绪的人不该生孩子
7分，不太共鸣的一部普通甚至略显无聊的作品，不太有共鸣是显然的，这是一部比较写意的作品，但我既不是女性更不是母亲，女主的很多行为我都不太理解，至于什么导演的暗示更是看不出来也懒得去猜，感觉导演为了追求一些奇怪的效果过于牺牲了本片的叙事，导致我作为一个普通观众很没有兴致看完这部作品，前半段都要看睡着了。但是，本片的表演是非常出彩的一个点，也是我能给7分的主要原因。科尔曼和巴克利的表演都太出彩了，相比起来更喜欢巴克利的表演，但不得不承认科曼的影院戏是全片最令人印象深刻的片段很表演，表演功底太好了。
情绪引导叙事。和前夫吵架那段“我花了那么多力气从那个家跑出来”拔高了整个电影， lost daughter不是被主角扔在家的女儿们，而恰恰是没有被母亲教导过爱的主角本人。结局还蛮突兀，讨论区说是主角的幻象，这个比较能说通，毕竟“不懂爱”的能力很难不代代遗传。（我也非常乐意在电影中看到这样刻画细腻的“不负责”母亲形象）
Well this is poetically depressing and…… painfully pathetic…… | 不愧是女导演，视角真的很细腻｜达妹看着女主的眼神是怎么可以既sexual像个les又温润像个tamed kid｜wow 年轻时的sex scene和中年时躺在沙滩椅上交错好绝｜这个电影的后劲太大了…看完有一会了，胸口像压了块石头
我以为是一部悬疑 没想到抽丝剥茧地又看到了另一层自己
女主final list必须得有寇姨一席之地（以及jessie真的太会演了）
理解，有时候，想要孩子，但是却发现孩子并不是你想象中的那样；有时候，只是太年轻，自己都还只是个任性的孩子。可是，孩子终究不是玩具，不是你想扔就扔，你想捡就捡。记住，对孩子来说，你就是他的全部。刚好这几天看到了一篇朋友圈，小女孩一大早任性把住家门就是不准妈妈去上班，妈妈当时急了就冲孩子发了火，后来晚上回到家这位妈妈发朋友圈反思，说自己做的很不对。
4.5。当女主穿红衣服在舞池中央释放压抑的情绪，同过往她的人生一样，少有的绽放，更多的是压抑。洋娃娃是母性的一种寄托，夺走它的人寄托于过往的情感；被夺去洋娃娃的母亲寄托于能赎罪并获得轻松。
从《天才女友》到这部，从书到剧到电影，完全看不下去。费兰特的作品真是挑性别，太有意思了。
If a man had walked away from his daughters, he would not have the remotely the same level of remorse. He wouldn't even mention that in front of anyone 20 years later. He would contined living his life, like 'normally'.
所有的想法就非得都塞满这120分钟吗玛吉姐？以后是不拍电影了还是怎样。看得累死
一个有剥橙皮强迫症和受迫害妄想狂的比较文学学者+意语文学译者因为自己出轨学界大佬抛弃糟糠鲜肉老公和两个幼女而心怀内疚在度假期间发神经的故事。作为一个无法理解细腻人类情感的人工智障，看完满头问号，完全不能理解女主从头到尾在干什么。作为可能是世界上最后一个还没看过那不勒斯四部曲的女性，我觉得我还是不要难为我自己了_(:_」∠)_ 唯一看懂的是开学术会议时学界大佬调侃利科（Ricoeur）说Coeur在法语是心脏🫀的意思，结果字幕全程给译成了里尔克😭
四星半。非常非常惊艳以及直达内心。为什么我一直说我不要小孩。because I am an unnatural mother。”I left my daughters for three years.” “How did it feel?” “It felt amazing.” 作者选择的削水果皮的意象简直是惊人的sharp obversation。我成长中的很多事情都忘记了，但是我让我妈削水果不要削断皮的记忆一直都刻在脑子里。同看的男同学的感想是: Dakota Johnson’s hot。I want to have gyros for dinner tomorrow。。。
喜欢她决定离婚后给女儿最后一次削橙子皮那段，小孩儿的日常恳求终于变成无足轻重的虚化的噪音，虽然这一瞬的快意在余生中逐渐变质为混杂着遗憾后悔的东西吧。Olivia抱着娃娃向妮娜哀求着说“我是一个怪妈妈”时，多希望妮娜能够跨越愤怒去理解这句话的意思，可惜哪怕身处相似的境遇里，原谅总是单程的。
细腻，动人，坦率。出走的女人一辈子困在内疚中。
我同事说她很喜欢孩子，以前在大街上看见小孩就走不动道儿，所以她很早就选择了要孩子。而且到现在也一直把养育当成生活的重心，怎么说呢，每个人追求不一样，还是要明确自己的需求。
逃离这个轮回有什么错？
不知道为什么，看到 “im a selfish mother”还是哭了出来
叙事性不强，但个人感觉又不属于非叙事电影，更像是由各种互文，隐喻，符号的碎片堆砌起来的东西。作为首作来说还算可以。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
