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.
Spielberg and his endless budget only make the film visually appealing, but the old chemistry is missing. One of the drawbacks is the altered storyline does not make sense; the second half entirely lacks focus. Not even mentioning the overloaded autotune. It’s good that they cast real Hispanic actors. Rita Monroe is still killing it!! (She is absolutely terrific, but her role in the remake is a stretch. )
好想打1颗星，基本完全照着原来的版本复刻来的，不知道它翻拍的必要在哪。对了，店主新的设定为一位女性，也许有新的表达，但我完全没有耐心。在前不久错看了老版还必须看完，所以忍受了2个多小时之后，这个新版几乎每一分钟都挑起我的怒火。跳啊得再好看表演再热辣，也显得虚假。WOT
每一部西区故事都是Anita传，顾名思义除了Anita其他基本都是垃圾。以为原版男女主之间的龃龉和脚演技已经够糟糕了，新版男女主真的讨厌升级，电影演员最怕人丑胆子大演俊男美女，雪上加霜的是俊男美女配上原版就不讨喜的智障人设，他俩出现在我眼前的每一秒都是对我人生的糟践。斯皮尔伯格的摄影和调度每一帧都写满了我厉不厉害，可惜成熟（注意是成熟不是优秀）的技巧加在一滩屎身上也只会让人更反感这滩屎，至于音乐剧层面我已经完全忽略了。
震惊，也太无聊了，难以想象是斯皮尔伯格拍的。
红色，是愤怒，是发泄。压抑后的痛哭，与我而言，好像不那么明显
打架泡妞，泡妞打架，不注意看还以为是印度片。但印度片还有帅哥美女，对抗强权啥的。这个真是要啥没啥，种族话题跟人家的种姓制度也没法比。只有结尾的枪击事件还像回事儿，只是略显生硬。难不成75岁斯皮尔伯格也被挂名了。4
其实评分这么低的原因很好理解，因为这不像电影，更像是一部舞台剧，所以很挑受众。
看这版西区故事前，我一直很担心，因为老版的剧情实在糟心，但斯皮尔伯格几乎化腐朽为神奇般地用镜头，调度与高质量的舞美碾压过平庸的剧情叙事，让歌舞成为本片真正的主角，而叙事逻辑反倒退居其次。
分全给cinematography，以及女配男配。男女主真的不行，文戏硬演，唱段的画面和声音都是硬生生的割裂感。也难怪拿America片段做宣传，DeBose和Alvarez老道太多。而有Faist的画面Ansel再高也没存在感。我看的最后一场musical theater就是澳巡的西区故事，我宁愿再看一遍那个。这电影烂番茄新鲜度95，搞笑来的？
最震撼我的是斯皮尔伯格的摄影，影机的运动行云流水，动若脱兔，举重若轻。斯老师很有点得道成仙的味道
歌舞部分竟然被压缩至此，绝大部分叙事通过常规方式表达，这点在我看来算是加分项，尤其是不能保证演员唱功的前提下。不过女主演的唱功好棒哦！难怪找她来演白雪公主！可惜中后段不管是布景还是叙事又有点回归舞台剧的感觉，变得有点古怪，最后的结局也是显得很戏剧化。总体还算不错的一部音乐剧电影吧，可能我本来就对这个剧本无感……男主94年的已经这么多主演了🐮🍺
{★★★★} 这个世界像需要禁断的恋爱一样需要有社会回响的悲剧--Arthur Laurents的悲剧如此冲击我的原因是它只撕开了伤口、却不等待愈合，它的角色捧着各式各样的美梦，但在最后，没有人的梦幸免于难。说比唱多，歌比舞多，但我两眼缭乱，心怀温柔。我爱街头的痞子行军，爱体育馆的百花齐放，爱镜头的每一次运动与游览。六十年后我们仍感伤同样的故事，这是世界变好了还是变差了？或许都没有，只是我们还惦念着永不老去的、美的昙花一现。
12.28 amc 看睡着啦 可能是前一天没休息好 一开始就睡着 然后后面也在睡 最后还提前走了 所以基本没看出个所以然来 男主觉得还挺眼熟结果是那个fault in our stars里面的 其实跟我想象中的歌舞片还是有点差距的 个人感觉唱的没那么好然后跳舞也没有特别有美感？反而觉得挺不伦不类的（小声
其实我不太想再看一版西区故事，但考虑到他是斯皮尔伯格，还是得看一看。斯导的镜头和调度没得说，能够漂亮地重现一些经典场面。
电影拍得相当工整，大师出品，品质之选。就个人不喜欢这个故事，纽约移民区现代版罗密欧与朱丽叶~~也就算了，移民冲突矛盾这个美国标签就好不了了也不提了，故事里满山满谷智商为负的男性角色实在有碍观瞻，这是一部隐性的女权电影吧。
后半部改编超出预期！音乐的重新编排塑造出了截然不同的人物性格，对女权主义的放大也很值得称赞（我觉得这故事里性别冲突高于种族冲突）缺点是除了主角外，帮派中其他成员几乎没有表现。以及再怎么改也无法超越老版里开篇与体育场的群舞和结尾相拥瞬间的枪声带给我的震撼（但我很喜欢这版Riff的音色！）
斯皮尔伯格的窘境在于他当年创造的影像风格成了当今好莱坞最常见的风格，即使把这种风格做到极致，我挑不出毛病，却也难以感受到太多惊喜
文本本身吧放在现在看就挺无聊的。改编做的音乐歌舞部分是OK，但选角挺不行的，男女主表演都不太行，配角还都比较出彩。
让我在两星和三星间纠结就足够说明问题了，哥嫂cp值得所有的赞美，2021年真的不要再拍罗密欧朱丽叶了，男主杀了女主哥哥然后的床戏让我想冲出电影院
完全照搬了西区故事？之前看过一版音乐剧巡演，就觉得挺一般，照搬的电影虽然比舞台的空间更丰富，但薄弱的故事岂不是更撑不起来？
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
