The question of dubbing (The Passion of the Christ, and others) (1 Viewer)

[Terry St]

quote:I don't watch subtitled films. I don't watch dubbed films. I am not a fan of *any* foreign film. IMO, if a film is good enough, it will eventually be made in the USA. I know that this stance isn't popular among the film snobs, but that is the way I feel. NO amount of arguing will change my mind on that, so don't even start...

I could respond to this, but I think Ebert did an admiral job when responding to a similar attitude a reader expressed about B&W films. Just substitute "foreign language" for "black and white" and it works quite well.

quote:But you are right that many moviegoers and video viewers say they do not "like" black and white films. In my opinion, they are cutting themselves off from much of the mystery and beauty of the movies. . . . Moviegoers of course have the right to dislike b&w, but it is not something they should be proud of. It reveals them, frankly, as cinematically illiterate.

I have been described as a snob on this issue. But snobs exclude; they do not include. To exclude b&w from your choices is an admission that you have a closed mind, a limited imagination, or are lacking in taste.

Just a word to the wise. Be careful who you call a snob.

 

[george kaplan]

quote:I absolutely refuse to watch a "dubbed" version of any film

I presume you've never seen The Good, the Bad & the Ugly or any of Leone's other westerns. Non-dubbed versions of these don't exist, but if they did you'd have some actors talking English, some Italian and some Spanish or other languages.

Almost all movies are dubbed (ADR), though in most cases it's by the original actors. On the other hand, lots and lots of films have at least some of the lines dubbed by non-actors. James Earl Jones in the Star Wars films. Paul Frees in everything from Tora! Tora! Tora! to Some Like It Hot. If the principle in being opposed to dubbing is that a dubber can't emulate the actor, then there are tons of great movies that you need to cross off your list, even if they are in English.

 

[MattHR]

quote:IMO, if a film is good enough, it will eventually be made in the USA.

Do you mean if a non-U.S film is good enough, Hollywood will either remake it or rip it off?

Hell, it doesn't even have to be good. Hollywood will remake or rip-off anything.

I'm always amazed at the number of people who have no idea just how many Hollywood "hits" are based on prior (and almost always superior) foreign films.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

quote:I agree about not dubbing movies but having a dubbed track on this movie will be vital for my parents who are in their 70's. They REALLY want to see it but subtitles on their 32" TV are not going to cut it for them.

Keep in mind Gibson originally wanted to release this movie without subtitles and designed it to be understandable even if you didn't know the dialogue. So peopel shoudl be fine even if they can't read them.

 

[Scott Leopold]

quote:

I don't watch subtitled films. I don't watch dubbed films. I am not a fan of *any* foreign film. IMO, if a film is good enough, it will eventually be made in the USA. I know that this stance isn't popular among the film snobs, but that is the way I feel. NO amount of arguing will change my mind on that, so don't even start...

That's just amazing.


Just a quick little tangent. I refuse to go to museums. I'm not a fan of any "artist". I figure if a piece of art is worth seeing, my two-year-old will eventually draw something similar.

 

[Patrick McCart]

quote:I don't watch subtitled films. I don't watch dubbed films. I am not a fan of *any* foreign film. IMO, if a film is good enough, it will eventually be made in the USA. I know that this stance isn't popular among the film snobs, but that is the way I feel. NO amount of arguing will change my mind on that, so don't even start...

No, you're absolutely right!

Who needs "Nights of Cabria" when you can see "Sweet Charity"? Who needs Metropolis when you have Just Imagine? Who needs Diabolique when you have the Sharon Stone version? Who needs Seven Samurai when you have Three Amigos?

 

[Ricardo C]

quote:

on the issue of dubs. Let's be realistic here. A dub is going to be - I'll be generous here - at least 80% accurate and in many cases even higher. So your not even close statement is subjective and without import.

How many languages do you speak? This isn't a snide question, I'm just curious as to how many dubs you've been able to evaluate and compare with the original audio track.

Me, I've listened to some 75-100. Usually Spanish dubs of English-language films. And while the script may be translated, the meaning is not. Grammar is off, lines are awkwardly rewritten so that the Spanish reading will be the same lenght as the original one, and worse of all, the voice actors give these completely artificial performances that sound nothing like actual spoken Spanish. In their effort to present a region-neutral reading, their voices sound stiff an unemotional to the point of being incapable of delivering the emotional impact of the original performances.

Simply presenting a faithful translation of the script isn't enough. About the only film I've seen where the Spanish dub was in any way close to the original audio track was The Phantom Menace. The voice actors actually resemble their English-speaking counterparts, and the script lent itself well to translation. It's actually quite good. But it's one of only a handful of exceptions.

 

[Ken Seeber]

quote:Almost all movies are dubbed (ADR), though in most cases it's by the original actors. On the other hand, lots and lots of films have at least some of the lines dubbed by non-actors. James Earl Jones in the Star Wars films. Paul Frees in everything from Tora! Tora! Tora! to Some Like It Hot. If the principle in being opposed to dubbing is that a dubber can't emulate the actor, then there are tons of great movies that you need to cross off your list, even if they are in English.

George, this is a spurious argument that serves only to drag this thread off course. You bloody well know what someone means when they say they don't like dubbed films. They aren't talking about ADR or voice overs, they're talking about replacing the original language track with a foreign language track.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

Ricardo, from what I've seen English and French dubs tend to be much better produced than Spanish ones. Part of the problem is that it takes longer to say things in Spanish than in English, so it can be hard to match things up. Also, I suspect that they're being cheap on the dubs. Not to mention every Spanish-dubbed movied about teens seems to be dubbed by 40+ year-old actors.

 

[Lars Vermundsberget]

The one who wrote the initial question/statement and I obviously come from different worlds:

quote:I see no reason to ever purchase or watch a movie that isn't spoken in my language.

This sounds pretty much preposterous from my point of view or my part of the world. Most of the movies I watch are "foreign" (including the English-language ones). And practically none of them are "dubbed".

I'd say reading subtitles can be a bit like riding a bicycle (or a number of other things...) - in the beginning it takes a little while to get used to, but eventually you'll hardly notice it. Unless, of course, you actually have a seeing or reading problem in general.

The best way to understand a given movie is to know the language, of course. I happen to understand the foreign languages English, German, Danish and Swedish quite well and guess I'm more "fortunate" than a lot of people in that respect. But when watching a movie in a language one does not understand, I'm quite convinced that subtitles is a lesser evil than dubbing. I think I have a pretty good idea of what I'm talking about.

Besides, one does eventually learn quite a bit of other people's language (and perhaps culture) that way. Not a bad thing...

 

[Carl Walker]

To all: I refuse to argue on this point. I hate foreign films and I WILL NOT WATCH THEM. What do you care??? If I'm missing out on something, THEN SO BE IT! I guess it is just my loss, huh...

quote:I'm always amazed at the number of people who have no idea just how many Hollywood "hits" are based on prior (and almost always superior) foreign films.

My point exactly. I don't care how "superior" a foreign film is, the US remake is fine with me.

 

[Ricardo C]

If you didn't care for an argument, then perhaps you should have thought twice about dropping a bomb like "I hate foreign films!" in a film-centric forum, don't you think?

At this point, your needlessly confrontational refusal to discuss your views seems rather trollish. "I'll say whatever I want, and if you don't like it, GET OVER YOURSELVES!" isn't a very constructive atittude.

 

[Ernest Rister]

People read subtitles *every day*. When they watch cable news, there is a ticker running along the bottom, and people seem to be able to "multi-task" quite well, or else they'd drop the ticker. Watching a foreign film with subtitles is less-difficult than watching CNN headline news, because the subtitles in the foreign film correspond to the image on scree, while the ticker on CNN headline news does not correspond to the image on screen and so you have multiple stories juggling in your mind. Not so with a subtilted film.<

"I hate foreign films and I WILL NOT WATCH THEM

I guess this label of "foreign films" must mean "films with characters speaking non-english languages". The question remains, though -- how can you hate something you've never seen? If you will not watch a non-english movie, how do you know you hate them, or are you prejudiced against foreign films, using your experience with a few to taint your feelings towards all?

 

[Michael Reuben]

Let's not get side-tracked. Mr. Walker, since you don't want to argue the point, you don't belong in this thread. Do not submit any further posts here.

Everyone else can stop arguing with Mr. Walker, and get back to the original topic(s).

M.

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

quote:I presume you've never seen The Good, the Bad & the Ugly or any of Leone's other westerns. Non-dubbed versions of these don't exist, but if they did you'd have some actors talking English, some Italian and some Spanish or other languages.

Of course I have and own every one of them as well, and with the exceptions of these films being as they were recorded under Leone's directorial consent and released theatrically as such, I do still refuse to watch foreign language films dubbed for American audiences as they were not originally produced or presented as such. Every other spaghetti western I own on DVD gets played with subtitled original language tracks and I don't believe I've ever once played any with alternate English voice-overs. Same for the extensive collection of Asian amd French cinema in my collection. For me it's an issue much like oar, of appreciating the original full-scale comprehensive production as it was initially intended to be seen. I don't need to have my movies "dumbed down" or my art manipulated to enhance my understanding or enjoyment of a film. Not every movie I own is an American made effects driven blockbuster smash... many times I'll watch movies which are introspective and evoke feeling which are not necessarily pleasant or lively and some of which are at times even difficult to take in, but I do it because I love movies and can appreciate the conception and creativity of the art. For this very reason, I prefer to watch my movies in their original form, language and all.

 

[John Besse]

quote:

quote:I don't watch subtitled films. I don't watch dubbed films. I am not a fan of *any* foreign film. IMO, if a film is good enough, it will eventually be made in the USA. I know that this stance isn't popular among the film snobs, but that is the way I feel. NO amount of arguing will change my mind on that, so don't even start...

That's just amazing.

Just a quick little tangent. I refuse to go to museums. I'm not a fan of any "artist". I figure if a piece of art is worth seeing, my two-year-old will eventually draw something similar.

I wish I got to this one a little sooner. It would be more like saying... "I like art, and I like museums. However, I hate abstract art and will not go to an abstract art museum. It is category specific, not the entire genre. Basically what your response to his arguement sounded like to me is, "I hate foreign/subbed/dubbed films and I will not watch any movie at all".

quote:People are entitled to their own opinions and beliefs, and I have no problem with others feeling differently. Some members seemed to get all too upset and start giving the original poster a hard time because they share a different opinion. If you prefer to watch a movie with subtitles, that's your choice. If you prefer dubs, that's your choice; and if you prefer not to watch it at all, that's your choice. That's the beauty of it.

How appropriate and how true. That is a really unbiased opinion, or more or less the truth.

Now, back to why I started this topic that ended up as a war on dubbed and subbed films... Since Mel Gibson actually intended for there not to be any subtitles at all, and since the subs can actually be turned off, I am going to buy this film. I will also check out the audio for the hearing impaired and see how that actually pans out. It took 71 posts and specifically the one from Matt Hankinson that just convinced me to purchase this movie on Tuesday. Matt, I really do appreciate you taking the time out to finally answers the questions that I was looking for.

 

[Ricardo C]

quote:

It would be more like saying... "I like art, and I like museums. However, I hate abstract art and will not go to an abstract art museum. It is category specific, not the entire genre.

Actually, "abstract art" is a genre within a medium. I'm not quite sure what your distinction between "category" and "genre" is. Saying "I refuse to watch foreign films" is a sweeping dismissal of many genres and styles that have nothing in common other than the fact that they were not produced in the United States. The original analogy is perhaps a little too harsh, but there's no denying that the person opposed to watching any foreign films at all is not simply skipping a "genre". They're ignoring a subset of the film medium more wildly varied than you'll ever see in the American mainstream film industry.



The other day, I read a rant by a comic book fan who said he refused to buy indie comics, thereby sticking together a group of vastly diverse literary genres and artistic styles that have nothing in common except that they are not produced by the Marvel/DC/Image corporate studios. I mean, what the hell does Megan Kelso's self-published "Girl Hero" have to do with Rob Liefeld's technically-indie (since he's no longer at Image) "Youngblood"? And back to film, what does a Venezuelan drama like "Huelepega" have to do with a Japanese horror film like "Ringu", other than the fact that they're "foreign" to Americans?

 

[MattHR]

quote: I will also check out the audio for the hearing impaired and see how that actually pans out. It took 71 posts and specifically the one from Matt Hankinson that just convinced me to purchase this movie on Tuesday. Matt, I really do appreciate you taking the time out to finally answers the questions that I was looking for.

You're welcome. The optional audio track is for the visually impaired, not the hearing impaired. People with vision impairment could have problems with the small subtitles, whether at the theater or on DVD.

I am looking forward to rewatching this film without subtitles (Gibson's intent), and then again with the "visual commentary" track.

Thanks to DVD, we have these options.

 

[Neil M]

I prefer the original audio for any movie. I also don't use subtitles the first time I see a foreign movie on dvd. However, I find it hilarious that some people have the need to attack those who would prefer to have dubbing. Is it really that big of deal? Did you ever stop to think that some people don't care about the acting? They just want to know what the hell the people are saying. As long as your original audio and subtitles are there, you have absolutely nothing to complain about. It is the way they want to view the movie, not the way you want to view it. With dvd, studios should be able to please everyone. They should always present the original version along with options for those who choose to view it in a different way.








I just want to make the point that with foreign films, subtitles are not always part of the director's original work. If we're going to attack those that want dubbing, then we should also attack those who want subtitles. Subtitles could draw your attention away at a critical moment that the director wants you to focus on. Also, as has been stated before, subtitles can be translated horribly.





Does anyone understand my point? To attack someone who has a difficult time reading subtitles and wants a dubbed audio track would be like attacking someone who is hard of hearing and wants subtitles. In both cases, they just want to be able to experience a movie in their own way. Is that so wrong? I certainly don't think so. Some people need to get off their high and mighty movie pedestal and realize that they are not the center of the movie universe. As for those who don't like foreign movies because they're too lazy (nothing wrong with being lazy sometimes) to read subtitles or listen to horrible dubs, you're really missing out on a lot of great movies. I think both sides argue successfully why they prefer their methods and it should be left at that.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

I prefer to experience a film in its own original language and I'll always choose subtitles over dubbing. But having said that, I do have to admit that sometimes your eyes are so busy reading the bottom of your screen that you're not "really" seeing the acting/facial expressions/events on the screen.