剧情介绍

  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.

评论:

  • 天歌阑 2小时前 :

    这个黑白对路,和极简背景相得益彰。台词,表演,人像特写都是教科书级别的。

  • 可俊逸 8小时前 :

    试图以《爱德华二世》的方式拍出一部严肃史诗,但除了摄影之外,其余部分一板一眼,改编更是缺乏灵气,令观众败兴。将《麦克白》影视化的作品有很多,有一座大山无法被跳过,那就是黑泽明的《蜘蛛巢城》,众多影视化《麦克白》在改编与本土化的水准上无出其右者。对于如此举世闻名的著作,去理解它,接纳它,融化它。不要一味瞻仰它。无法将它化成自己的东西,如何能游刃有余地将他人的故事创造出新的生命力呢?看看黑泽明对于人物性格与形象的设置,障眼法式精准的调度,他的改编为何成功不言而喻。本片中“雾”是一项很关键的意象,运用得十分巧妙,这一点倒是与《蜘蛛巢城》颇为相像,或许亦是受到了黑泽明的启发。遥想之前,科恩兄弟拍摄《逃狱三王》,从《奥德赛》中汲取养分,充分发挥自身特色,充满灵气,而今却不见。

  • 师梦桃 2小时前 :

    删繁就简,打造了神秘的史诗,黑白影像展现了光影艺术。丹泽尔与科恩嫂都不错,唯独故事弱了点。

  • 彤嘉 6小时前 :

    不知道拍摄意义何在,女巫演技惊人,男主也还不错,女主没什么发挥且感觉过于现代。

  • 年沛槐 7小时前 :

    印象最深的是Macbeth去刺杀Duncan那场戏:拱顶的影子在地上排列整齐,仿佛正等人去搅乱,M便踏上它,一步步向前,光影在他脸上逐次闪过——看啊,悬垂的匕首就在前方!就像我手中的这把。握住

  • 姿露 7小时前 :

    古典悲剧的宿命捉弄借以极其冷峻和风格化的影像+声音风格被无限放大。看正片其实反而没有看trailer时那么惊喜,因为全片都是如此风格。但也太享受了,future classic.

  • 卷彬郁 8小时前 :

    极简、黑白、莎剧台词。华盛顿不够疯狂又太疲倦

  • 夏侯俊能 3小时前 :

    诗性表现主义摄影和莎剧很搭 《午夜钟声》珠玉在前

  • 卫舒尧 1小时前 :

    不太欣赏得来这种舞台剧(古典)转换成的电影,不过总算是对《麦克白》这个IP有了一些些了解

  • 前含双 4小时前 :

    是看过的第一版的《麦克白》,不存在有没有创新性的问题。整体都很舞台剧化,摄影光影美学和各个的舞台搭建很引人注目,对白都是诗歌型的,把宿命感都铺陈开来了,还是挺对口味的

  • 冯和悦 2小时前 :

    虽然但是有什么必要来又看一遍麦克白的故事啊

  • 方飞语 7小时前 :

    【2】如果只是单纯“复古”,其实已不值得被肯定。况且真挚与否另说,德莱叶时代可不会有这般空洞的造型化倾向。正如沃卓斯基的新作也仅有一人执导,结合作品某种程度的转向,值得思索。

  • 凭德曜 6小时前 :

    画面、光影都是一流的,台词照搬莎士比亚,所以演员也像是对待(新潮)舞台剧那样去演。麦克白夫人达到了不是主角胜过主角的效果,论演技论气场,丹泽尔华盛顿真心比不过冰血暴小女警

  • 公冶芳蕤 6小时前 :

    无与伦比的构图、光影和画面,把舞台搬上荧幕来讲述被说了很多遍的老故事,电影的艺术气质那么浓,丹帝演得那么好,又怎么会不好看?A24每次都太能戳中我的喜好了~丹帝再冲一次小金人影帝吧!!

  • 卫珲升 6小时前 :

    Harry Melling出场出戏

  • 公羊秀颖 5小时前 :

    3.5。丹泽尔华盛顿的表演精准到极致,但是并没有让人觉得特别出彩,反倒是女巫的表演令人印象深刻,虽然很大程度上归功于造型和妆容。摄影真的绝了,用表现主义那一套布景和构图,变形的、图形几何化的场面调度,来表现这样一个摒弃宏大叙事、侧重内心情感之黑暗扭曲的悲剧史诗,再贴切不过了。

  • 卫宇昂 0小时前 :

    表现主义的重现契合麦克白暴君性的一面,可电影的优点也仅限于此。

  • 光小楠 4小时前 :

    如果剥去了莎翁的名号,这也就是一个普通的寓言故事,如果再除去科恩卖力表现的镜头,这也就是个一无是处的寓言故事

  • 区绮烟 0小时前 :

    影片戏剧感很强,不管是用光还是摄影。大咖云集,演员的功力深厚。

  • 接雨真 0小时前 :

    照搬罢了,即使配上了顶级的演员和绝妙的摄影,精巧的置景,这依然是照搬。

加载中...

Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved