Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club - Page 19

Brook K · 06-09-2003, 03:34 PM

Of course subs aren't perfect but they are a million times better than the alternative. I've said it a thousand times before in various discussions, but I'll repeat it again. If I'm watching a movie with Catherine Deneuve, I want to hear Catherine Deneuve's voice and not Mary Jane voiceactor, Jean Gabin, not Bob the ADR guy etc.

I barely even notice them anymore, but I probably watch more subtitled movies than English movies these days.

Jeff, I'm floored by your statement on Ikiru. Care to elaborate? I think it is one of the 2 or 3 best films ever made and is the most humane and truthful film about real life I've ever seen and it is still just as truthful, real, and impacting today as it was 50+ years ago. For me, Ikiru, and it's brother-in-arms, Tokyo Story, describe modern life as it truly is.

Chris, I also preferred Aparajito to Pather Panchali for some of the reasons you state. Haven't seen Marienbad so I can't discuss, but I have read reactions similar to yours.

Lew, what do you mean "wake up to having no free will"? Doesn't that go with the territory for any married man?

Personally I just throw out the cyncicism when it comes to the romance in romantic comedies and (most) musicals. It's inevitable the couples fall in love and get together to live happily ever after. It's the getting there that's the fun.

**HTF Ads**

Simon_Lepine · 06-09-2003, 04:02 PM

Chris, to me the point of Last Year at Marienbad is the disjointed narrative and the rejection of anything that you would expect in a traditional movie. It's like reading poetry, the form is not the same as a novel. It tries to do something different and break from 40 years of traditionnal film making conventions.

To me, the movie is about the perception of reality based on the subjective nature of our memories, so I think the treatment is really appropriate to the subject.

george kaplan · 06-09-2003, 04:36 PM

Quote:

To Have and Have Not never gets the respect that the earlier Casablanca receives, but is in some ways a better film.

Lew Crippen · 06-09-2003, 05:31 PM

Brook, I understand about wanting to hear the original actor’s voice, but not everyone is Gabin or Deneuve.. I’m thinking of the number of mindless Hong Kong action films I’ve seen where the subtitles are done in a big time hurry for a small market. Often in Singapore or Malaysia you would get subtitles in English that were done by the TV station translators who were also under mandates by the government as to how they could translate. So the amount of time which the translators had to translate a film combined with meeting the censor’s requirements meant that what was sometimes presented was likely not very accurate.

Actually this used to happen in Australia. Channel 28 (or the SBS) carried a lot of foreign films and the translation was often done by the TV station (though they may have contracted it out). The SBS was the very poorly funded government network (well down the pecking order from the ABC—the main government funded network). Here too, time and money meant the often the subtitles were not the best. At least in Australia, you did not have to worry about the government’s position on any subject.

My point is (I think) that sometimes you might actually prefer dubs.

I guess I have to watch Last Year at Marienbad again. I probably went three or four times when it was released and maybe once again 10 or 15 years later. All this (the first few times) to figure out what it meant. IIRC, Rssnais claimed that it had no meaning. Maybe not, but I don’t really remember that it was that hard to figure out what was going on—it is just that what was going on was not necessarily filled with meaning. Or if it was, that the meaning was not very easy to understand. It was (and again from an imperfect memory) very stylish and elegant. Perhaps enough for some, but I came to the conclusion that it was an exercise in intellectual futility. Perhaps I will feel differently when I see it again.

So did anybody else figure out how to play the match game?

OcieB · 06-09-2003, 08:19 PM

I hate dubbing, it totally ruins the film for me; im a subtitler all the way.

Brook K · 06-10-2003, 12:44 AM

Well, I think we're talking about two different things Lew. You're giving examples based on TV viewings or cheapie video stuff done in the countries where you lived and I'm talking about mainline US/European/Asian Film or video releases. I'm sure there are cases you can list where a dub would be better, but those aren't cases where I'd be buying a DVD or watching something in the theater in that manner (except as below

The dubs I approve of:
Godzilla films - because I grew up watching them that way and it's the only way I've ever seen one. And the dubbing's half the fun.

Fitzcarraldo - I know it was recorded in English, but watching it in German just "feels" right to me.

And I suppose I would be ok with the dub on Das Boot since they brought back the cast to do it, but I've never watched it dubbed.

george kaplan · 06-10-2003, 01:07 AM

What's the proper way to watch The Good, The Bad & The Ugly?

a) with the 3 main characters speaking English, and everyone else speaking Italian (subtitled)

b) with everyone speaking Italian, dubbing the 3 main characters and subtitling everything

c) with everyone speaking English, with dubbing for everyone but the 3 main characters.

It seems that if it's important to hear the voice of the actual actor, that a would be the correct way.

If the original theatrical release is important, then b would be correct.

It's hard to think of any justification for c, but that's certainly my preference.

Kirk Tsai · 06-10-2003, 02:06 AM

I'm not sure movies where filmmakers intentionally wanted dubbing qualifies in the exact same discussion. Seems like a somewhat different issue. In the case above, C is justified because the filmmakers intentionally did this. Dubbing was not a home video decision.

But Lew, regarding movies such as the majority of HK action flicks, I agree that their subtitles are often inaccurate, if not downright silly. Nevertheless, the dubs are usually as atricious when they reach this country. This is why I don't quite understand the argument here. In the worst case scenarios--bad dub or bad sub--I still rather choose to hear the originally intended vocals that the filmmakers choose. A good dub just doesn't come by often.

And I go back to our experiences in Asia. Lew, don't you think seeing subtitles so often on TV and in the theaters conditions us to be used to it? It's like what Brook said, I barely notice them.

Also, going back to where this discussion started, I don't really have a problem with German actors speaking German while acting as Spainiards. This is not so much different from Jude Law speaking English while acting as a Russian in Enemy at the Gates or Nic Cage speaking English in Captain Correli's Mandolin. Whether they choose to use an accent or not is another conflicting issue though.

Lew Crippen · 06-10-2003, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Well, I think we're talking about two different things Lew.

We are indeed. I’m probably just being a bit anal in pointing out that lots of subtitling is pretty bad.

But it is not limited to quickie movies. Check out the number of Criterion DVDs that make the claim to have ‘new and improved’ subtitles. Obviously meaning that the subtitles which we saw when the films were first released, were in fact pretty bad.

Quote:

What's the proper way to watch The Good, The Bad & The Ugly?

Or for that matter George, the proper way to watch one of your all time favs, Cries and Whispers, which has on my Criterion DVD soundtracks in Swedish and English. IIRC, most of the actors such as Liv Ullmann did their own dubbing. But I do think that Bergman had some of the parts dubbed by different actors. (As an aside, the major fault I find with his The Magic Flute is that it is sung in Swedish—I know the score and libberto very well and expect it to be sung in German.)

Now this (the English dubbing) was clearly intentional and far different than the method used by many Italian directors, including such icons as Fellini, where they made films (and some on the S&S list) with the intention of dubbing all of the dialogue later. Fellini famously told an actor to just count—this because he had not yet decided on the dialogue and as it was all going to be recorded later anyway, he really did not care.

Quote:

And I go back to our experiences in Asia. Lew, don't you think seeing subtitles so often on TV and in the theaters conditions us to be used to it? It's like what Brook said, I barely notice them.

I'm with you and Brook on this Kirk. I barely notice that I’m reading subtitles. And actually often don’t. For M. Hulot, (for example) I just turn them off.

Don’t take any of this to mean that I prefer dubbing, only that I think the issues to be a bit less binary than some.

Lew Crippen · 06-10-2003, 10:27 AM

The Wind Will Carry Us is the most accessible of all of Kiarostami’s films (at least of those that I’ve seen). And it is hard to imagine why. Many, perhaps most of the film’s characters never (or rarely) appear onscreen. A team of engineers arrives at a remote village for some unclear purpose, but it seems to have to do with waiting for an old woman’s death—perhaps to observe and film the event and the subsequent funeral and mourning.

Time passes, but things don’t really seem all that linear. Which day is which is not clear.

A man (whom we don’t see) is digging a well on a hill (or is it a well—again this is not clear).

The protagonist (the one engineer we see onscreen) is perhaps missing a funeral of his own in order to observe another’s. Or perhaps not, as we only hear his side of continually interrupted cell phone calls.

But somehow, even though the purpose of the characters in the film is not clear (and the reason for the film, is also not clear), we are drawn into the world of this small, remote Iranian village. We become accustomed to the rhythm and pace of life there—which is something the unseen outsiders never do. In the end we are totally absorbed in the minutia of this world and accept the validity of their existence.

Here is a chance to immerse ourselves in a completely foreign existence, non-the less valid for its foreigness. A great achievement.

Brook K · 06-10-2003, 01:29 PM

And yes as Kirk said, I didn't make it clear, but my comments were regarding home video. Dubbing decisions made by a director are their call - Fellini, Argento, etc, are dubbed intentionally with no sync sound recording.

But, while Bergman may have approved the dub for C&W, it is still something done for a specialty market. If someone wants to watch the dub that's their call, but I'm watching in Swedish.

Also note though, that I'm not going to turn down the chance to see something I've never seen before just because it was dubbed. If a dubbed Diary of a Country Priest or Late Summer showed up on my doorstep, I'd definitely watch.

Lew, I liked The Wind Will Carry Us but not as much as Taste of Cherry. There was a discussion on a movie listserv I'm in yesterday about how Kiarostami is unpopular in Iran and Iranians generally feel he makes art movies for Western markets and not movies that Iranians themselves can enjoy. One of the members said he had talked to an Indian man who had an encylopedic knowledge of Bollywood but barely knew who Satyajit Ray was and said something like "Oh yeah, him, he makes art movies for film festivals".

Had a major scare yesterday. Heard a big POP! and thought I blew a speaker. Quickly figured out that my right rear was out, but after unplugging it and switching speakers around to make sure it wasn't wiring or a blown amp channel, I replugged the speaker and it worked fine. Damn Pulp Fiction menu. From now on I'm keeping my receiver muted when I navigate menus.