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.
影片在故事的呈現上非常保守，成功總是出現在不斷的失敗之後，不管過程中遇到到多大的挫折，淚水與汗水滴了多少，結局一定是一面面金牌在等著他。
三星半，电影语言有很多问题，但是吴君如和两位男主演技确实太能打了
本来还想去买一场中英的戏现场围观一下梁仲恒，结果一看ig居然就已经离职了…
吴君如同仔既对手戏差唔多场场都泪目，出戏主要目的应该都系励志吧，黑暗部分都系浅尝辄止。觉得可惜了，呢部戏宣传得好d，食住奥运个势可能票房可以好些少
港版阿甘终成苏神。令人震惊的是，这样一部正能量体育片竟颇有岁月神偷之遗风
弟弟那句“我不是篮球队的，我是足球队的啊，妈”
二十年前麦兜故事之后，吴君如再次饰演奥运选手的母亲。
看之前以为是妈妈激励孩子拿冠军的故事，原来是拿了冠军之后依然一地鸡毛的故事
从电影艺术创作角度看着就有点闷，但是respect的是可以为了特殊群体发声和控诉。
3.5 很港风，吴君如还是很适合这样的角色的~~ 演员们都演得很ok~就是这片子比起传记片还是贴合亲情励志片~
比起摔爸洛奇这种运动片，这片更多地是延续了香港近几年关乎与写底层与人的关系之间的讨论。像是沦落人，一念无明这样的。关于残疾人自己的身份认同，家庭关系的段落，运动员的处境，以及中港关系的一些隐喻。
温情表现十足，题材挖掘不够
奥运会选出来的是人类最强健的体魄，残奥会选出来的是最不屈的灵魂。“不平凡”的人一样可以追求梦想。
此片让人想起吴君如另外一部让人泪流满面的《岁月神偷》
前半部分都还很工整，情绪也到位；只不过最后的一场戏太没有逻辑，不明不白的就跑了第一。同时，这种基于真实原型改编的电影最后的感动更多是原型角色本身。
由于对这部电影的过于期待，明知删减版也还是买了票，不过要在大成都找一家放粤语版的影城真是不容易。
说回电影，前面剧情转折过于简单，好在各主角演技在线，剧情现实：弟弟哭诉妈妈对哥哥的偏心，妈妈哭诉拥有残疾儿子的艰辛，哥哥哭诉希望被当成普通人看待的真心。
这种电影能尽量拍得不煽情不励志，是很不容易的。整部电影看下来，更多像是一种纪录片的感觉，会觉得是认识了另一位“苏神”。这类电影应该普及，让全社会发现残疾人其实也是普通人。
这部电影情绪调动还是过猛了些，亲友中有类似的残疾家庭，更明白生活的艰辛与不易。同工同酬道出了体育运动员背后的辛酸。奥运光环之后的运动员，也只有极少数能在体育的道路上继续前行。而其它大多数褪去光环，成为普通人。何况残疾运动员。
真的是尬，各种尬，除此之外没啥想说的，吴君如也上了年纪了，搞笑不起来了，还是岁月无情啊，钱小豪也是沦落到要么配角中的配角，要么就是网络电影恰烂饭
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
