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.
主要是剧本扎实
优秀的韩国历史电影，很多重要的命题都抛出来了。可惜都没有真正深入探讨，人物塑造略显模式化，影片风格也经历了几次转变显得形式不够统一。
有思考、没惊喜 也不太需要 很像《大明劫》前后那两年的国产片
看之前被豆瓣的长短评把期待值拉得挺满，实际看下来觉得挺中规中矩的。不过，难得也是这般中规中矩，的确呈现了一种汉儒在观众心目中应然而然该有的调性。尤其这种调性颠覆了中国影视剧中什么纪晓岚、何坤之类的角色，看起来特别耳目一新。是个好片子。
百感交集的人生写意。中国历史上同样的故事非常之多，从满腔抱负，到耕犁自省。韩国人知道什么是东方文化的好东西，一部一部的把它拍出来。借古喻今，汲取东方哲学智慧。我们一边嘲笑人家是野种，一边空灵的自豪我们有渊源的历史文化。
4.警察的那一套为了正义的暴力执法逻辑是真的恶心到了，都做到这位置了，警察局什么样你不知道？跑去听村民诉苦的戏码实属多余.
很多东西都不必要
当下中国几无可能拍出这般反功利的电影。影片本身蕴含的文化意义甚至超出了电影的范畴。弘扬传统文化之于民族复兴的极重要意义，依旧未能为当下中国社会所普遍认识，而它却多年不间断地在为东亚邻国文化提供养分。韩国人把我们的一些文化传统据为己有当然令人不屑，但同时也是对我们长期漠视自身传统的讽刺。谈回电影，薛景求的古装扮相出人意料地讨喜，至于电影本身，难称经典，但还是不得不说，韩国人能拍出这样的电影，足够令中国人感到汗颜。
名字➕黑白題材本以為會是晦澀難懂的文藝片，沒想到竟是如此平易近人，沒想到還可以從這個角度的故事傳達出通透豁達包容平等的思想。“不要再看了，免得心生愛意的” 但誰能不愛這樣的薛景求呢！！！
看了上海最近防疫的新闻，突然和这部电影的两位主角有了深深的共情。。。开始也许是昌大的愤怒，最后就是丁若铨的绝望。。。
男主好不容易成为两班，才发现这个体系是以吃人为生的，内心受到的冲击可想而知，而真理可能是：什么理论都不应该成为束缚发展的桎梏，若不对就应该将其打破。
李俊溢绝对是经典日影爱好者，从致敬《切腹》的《思悼》，到这部里经典的小津机位，甚至于《素媛》里的那种明媚色调也很日影，水墨构图很好的融入了故事而不是形式主义汇演布景板，自打李俊溢放弃花里胡哨的古装大片，准确的说是立下不过损就隐退又厚脸皮反悔之后，就神奇的变的很靠谱，表演上来讲，老薛真的还是很稳当的，毕竟棒影方法派第一人
充满中国文化的韩国电影，李浚益执导。影片讲述丁若镛的兄长丁若铨进行流放生活的同时著作了鱼类图鉴"兹山鱼谱"的故事。《兹山鱼谱》是韩国古代最全面和详尽的鱼类学书籍，是极其重要的海洋渔业文献。在韩国海洋生物学史上，被誉为“韩国最早的鱼类学书”，对韩国而言，意义重大。电影中有《论语》《大学》；有古诗，绝句；有中国悠久的历史文化；有我们所熟知的一切，被隔壁拍了出来。
现实意义大于电影本身，大段的卖惨和虐待太不节制，虽说是基于事件本身改编但人物形象太单一，不过有勇气抵抗制度本身就是好的。
PS：新年第一天给自己注入一些正气。
主角丁若铨为了活命可以轻易改口叛教，也可以抛弃君君臣臣的儒学。如果上帝忍见信徒为他赴死，那这个上帝不信也罢。如果君王将百姓视为芥蒂，那这个世界也不需要君王。借助儒学，他接触了西洋学，但仍将书斋命名为“复性斋”。人活到这个境界已经是佛陀得道级别的通透了，最后在创作鱼谱时执笔而亡，天人合一。不执著于理念，就没有理念的冲突。
中国有苏轼，李白杜甫白居易，陆游李贺辛弃疾等等名家，他们的一生或得意风发或失意落魄，但是从他们心里写出的那些诗句如此隽永，他们的生平也应该是值得一拍的吧。可惜的是这样的故事让韩国拍出来了。这部电影里的人文关怀，对于儒家治世的思辨，西学己用的开放，都表达的很棒。虽然某些地方有些夸张和刻意，但不否认最后的感情非常真挚。还有什么比博物学更好的学科呢！
晦暗之世，外王处处碰壁，内圣湮没无声，读书又究竟有什么用呢
魟鱼要走的路，只有魟鱼知道；鳐鱼要走的路，只有鳐鱼知道。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
