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.
“NBA ✖️ 洛奇” 体育场上的小人物逆袭美国梦
终于明白为什么一直觉得Brad Pitt与《点球成金》这部电影莫名的不搭，果然还是Adam Sandler更适合这类角色。
3.5⭐as himself
虽然是美式运动片的一贯套路，中间的曲折离奇最终都会走向成功，但过程中挥洒汗水，一步步努力超越自己还是挺燃的。
作为一个篮球电影，竞技部分太弱，为啥会有喜剧类型的分类。这个剧情真的是太扯了
不过拍的确实不错 尤其是最后的人员介绍看的很燃 给八分
电影的可看性和节奏蛮不错的，但也没什么新鲜感，中规中矩，故事很套路。但比较让人感慨的是，这种程度的体育类型片，国内也几乎见不到。
虽然这样的故事不可能发生，但是看到这么多熟悉的面孔还是要打个高分
看的好燃 可惜我不咋看篮球 哈哈哈几乎不认识
昨天勇士夺冠了，虽然我不是库里的球迷，但是看见他夺冠后泪洒赛场，也从心里为他高兴，这三年来从低谷再重回巅峰实在太不容易了，这就是现实中真正发生的励志故事
还行，比较套路，可能就是因为桑德勒点开。然后因为看到我们队（最后，故事是隔壁州的75人），好感又upup，虽然今年总冠军我们输了，但是，格林公式完美完成，这也不错，杜老四耻辱柱给我狠狠钉死，舒服了～
It's an open book, but still gets you.
Tobias真帅！演得也不错，全片看看球员教练老板们凑活了，别的就算了
套路没有新意，励志部分也并不动人，整个片子的精华是最后的群星混剪。
NBA、运动、励志、战胜自己，挺好的，商业片的剧本。没能在NBA幕后元素上有表现，怎么说挖掘篮球运动员跟看洛奇的感觉是一样的，就有点怪异。
另外教授，骨头都有好多镜头，，，，
除了一帮真球员上场以外，也没啥特别之处，主要我不是篮球粉，可能很多细节看不出来，很多球员也不认识。总归故事中规中矩，跟同类型比较区别不大。PS：因为是桑德勒就是喜剧吗？！6.6
勒布朗监制的大片，其实主演埃尔南戈麦斯打得还行，空间型3d也是有地方可打，希望现实中也牛掰起来。华子演的还不错，未来可期~
American Dream 对年轻人和中年人同样有吸引力，不过大个球员能防守能三分，还能跑能跳，模板是谁？球星们的纷纷亮相很惊喜，华子在里面演技真好。
拍得很工整的体育励志题材，符合类型片的所有元素和套路，起于寒微，识于伯乐、身负过往、决于一战的套路齐备，但真正的主角仍然是亚当·桑德勒饰演的球探，在寻找新人的路上，寄托了他的辛酸往事与理想抱负，当然，其实也是桑德勒自己对于篮球运动浓浓的爱，光是看各路NBA名人客串的阵容就知道他的人脉与热忱，大量彩蛋会让篮球迷津津乐道，属于私货提纯，粉丝订制的项目了。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
