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.
哎，这种故意为之的复古画面是为了省经费吧，啥啥都看不清……
第一个，第三个故事是我最喜欢的，第二个故事结尾稍微有点俗套，第四个故事感觉是有隐喻的，但没怎么看懂。致命录像带也算是我伪纪录片的引路人了，可以的话请一直出下去
第三个真的吓到我了，不过我还是没懂这个和一开始的特警有啥关系？
几个故事的恐怖血腥程度也都还可以（除了最后一个搞不太清楚），但就是画质全程保持录像带的质感实在太难以观看，模糊的质感看的头晕，看完全片都没看清任何一个演员的脸
1.鼠人2.殡仪馆守灵3.科学怪人4.吸血鬼
评论都是咋回事？这一部明明不拉垮啊，除了主线不行，第四个生涩难懂，其他三个故事都水准之上。尤其人体机械改造那一集，惊艳。
V/H/S 系列真是伪记录越拍越好看的奇葩。
又是录像故事的拼接。中间一段有点像《弗兰肯斯坦的军队》，但是拍得比后者好，当然，也仅此一段可看了。
【2.5】没有印象特别好的短片，但这部至少有起死回生的迹象，全方位地好于上一部《病毒》，且串场线又回到了熟悉的阴宅里的“观看”，给人一种似乎有意要与《病毒》划清界限的幽默感。
近期的“致命”系列有点多，从致命感应到致命催眠，还是录像带系列最为致命
ratman和摄像头女孩我都挺喜欢的，可能隐喻太政治了，我没看懂
血浆是够了，就是晃得人有点头疼，也没什么剧情，第二个守灵堂的故事还挺紧张的，其他的一般
1=3＞2=4=主线故事，两个不错，三个不太行，所以只能给三星。
作为致命录像带爱好者我竟然今天才知道出了第四部 这还是我昨天看完夜间小屋顺着导演摸过来的 我才发现这味道演的作品我几乎都看过 这部在vhs系列里面太平庸了 有点失望
11/10/21：我到底看了些什么呢？这是一部血淋淋的cult片子。虽然是很原始有点新意，但是一点营养也没有。其它的部分不予置评，但在创意上给3.5星吧。- 新加坡
也就改装机器人那part能看，其次鼠人和守夜人烂中带点搞笑，最后一个故事超级烂。
执着于普利策的记者和赛博教授的这两段故事很精彩
还可以，略逊前面几部。
够劲儿但是不恐怖...
分段式一大好处就是遇到一个喜欢的故事的几率提高了
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
