Disappointing Trends in Movies

Dark Jezter said:
I fail to see how dubbed dialogue destroys the performance anymore than listening to a language you don't understand and having to read a translation at the bottom of the screen.

Sorry, I just get annoyed by people who act like watching foreign language films in subtitles is somehow superior to watching them dubbed. Anime fanboys do this a lot, and it's one of the biggest reasons why I don't hang out in anime fan communities anymore.
For me, its all about seeing the movie/show/whatever as it was originally intended to be seen. But I'm not going to get into a dub/sub argument, as both sides have valid points and its really just a thing of preference. Those arguments are why I avoid the anime community. :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Kaodi said:
Two things about this: a) A lot of what people hate about dubbing probably has to do with instances of BAD dubbing. If I see a Hong Kong Jackie Chan film, ideally it would be great to have him to the dubbing himself, but barring this, have someone with a similar accent and voice, and it isn't too bad. There is one of his films though, where his voice seems to have been done by some large jawed, butch Causasian male, and it sounded pretty bad coming from his character. There is just something -way- more aesthetic about hearing the right voice from the right person. If that annoys you, so be it, but I believe it to be the truth.

I prefer neither subtitles nor dubs. I don't think subtitles are fantastic and the only possible way to watch foreign language films, nor do I think that dubs are awful trash intended for unsophisticated louts. I do, however, hate the arrogance I often see from people who act like watching only subtitled foreign films makes them inherently more intelligent and sophisticated than dub-watchers, or that watching a movie in subtitles is the only "true" way to watch it.

b) I don't mind dubbing in anime at all. I don't think I have ever seen an anime cartoon with subtitles, though I'd like to. Since these are cartoons, there isn't really an inherent right voice, though there are still original voices, good voices and bad voices. I think most anime fanboys probably are turned off by performances that truly are subpar when compared to the original Japanese.

From my own expirience with anime fanboys (i.e. being treated like a leper for defending dubs), there's also an element of elitism in there; they see dubs as a sign of "mainstreaming" anime, and this threatens their unique, non-conformist status. If anime becomes cool and everyone starts watching it, then they will suddenly be considered part of the unwashed masses.

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
For me, its all about seeing the movie/show/whatever as it was originally intended to be seen.

Then technically, shouldn't you be watching it in the original language with no subtitles at all? :)
 

Dark Jezter said:
Then technically, shouldn't you be watching it in the original language with no subtitles at all? :)

You'd be amazed how many times I've done this and how much you can actually understand. :) But really, adding text at the bottom is much smaller of a change than changing voice actors, etc.

Like I said, I've got no problem with dubbed movies/anime...I simply prefer subtitles. The wars that go on about which is better are all horribly pointless, as its completely a matter of personal taste. I started my watching of non-English movies/anime with subtitles, and so that's where my preference has always been.

EDIT: Also, in live action movies, I really really prefer subs...as many times you can tell that the voice just doesn't go with the person.
 

- Count me in the "hate for jerky camera know no limit" gang.

- Skinny, tooth-pick arm women beating up men twice their size. Is it possible for a non-anorexic woman to star in an action film?

- Men are idiots, women are smart and here on earth to prevent stupid men from doing too much damage. I'm sick of this trope.

- Let's make fun of Christianity (and Catholicism in particular) in every possible way, even (especially) when it's a sidetrack from the plot.
 

Lord Pendragon said:
As StormRaven says, I think it's all about the money. Hollywood isn't making any kind of statement about gay men. They're merely responding to what they believe their audience wants and is willing to pay for. Gay men may want to see more romantic plotlines that reflect their interests. But if more straight men are turned away from a movie than gay men drawn to it (who wouldn't have seen the movie otherwise), then that's a losing proposition for Hollywood.

It's more blunt than that: gay men (and women) make up a vanishingly small fraction of the potential audience for a movie. Only a few percent of movie goers are likely to be gay, as opposed to the overwhelming majority who are straight. Pandering to a group that consistutes a few percent of your potential audience isn't likely to be a profitable endeavor.
 

Storm Raven said:
It's more blunt than that: gay men (and women) make up a vanishingly small fraction of the potential audience for a movie. Only a few percent of movie goers are likely to be gay, as opposed to the overwhelming majority who are straight. Pandering to a group that consistutes a few percent of your potential audience isn't likely to be a profitable endeavor.
As evidence, witness the spectacular nose dive of Ellen (the original sitcom, not the more recent talk show) when it became all about being gay.

DeGeneris herself was quick to blame the Network for not supporting her enough, but let's face it; that's preposterous. Ellen was one of their biggest hits. It got cancelled because no one wanted to watch it anymore.

And this is lesbianism; which you believe to be more "acceptable" to audiences. As others have said, movies that feature gay romantic plotlines are most likely going to tank bigtime with mainstream audiences, and therefore lose big bucks. El cheapo low budget indie films, on the other hand, if picked up for distribution on DVD, might have a shot.
 

I believe there's a film called Brokeback Mountain coming out (pardon the pun) this year that has a gay story line:

The new film from Academy Award-winning director Ang Lee. An epic love story set against the sweeping vistas of Wyoming and Texas, Brokeback Mountain tells the story of two young men - a ranch-hand and a rodeo cowboy - who meet in the summer of 1963, and unexpectedly forge a lifelong connection, one whose complications, joys and tragedies provide a testament to the endurance and power of love. (Source: IMDB)

Larry McMurtry wrote the screenplay. Jake Gyllenhal and Heath Ledger are the two male leads. I'm not sure if it will be a flat-out gay romance, since there are also female leads, but whenever I've seen it mentioned in the gossip magazines, it's been referred to as a "gay cowboy movie." Now, since I don't really trust anything a gossip magazine tells me, I'm going to just wait until it actually comes out to see what it's truly about.
 

Joshua Dyal said:
As evidence, witness the spectacular nose dive of Ellen (the original sitcom, not the more recent talk show) when it became all about being gay.

DeGeneris herself was quick to blame the Network for not supporting her enough, but let's face it; that's preposterous. Ellen was one of their biggest hits. It got cancelled because no one wanted to watch it anymore.

It depends on how it's handled, really. Ellen made the mistake of doing a full bore about-face in-your-face move, and making the show totally about her sexuality as if that could sustain a comedy show. If she had made it a natural organic part of the show and character, that show would probably still be running today since itwas pretty darn funny. She just dropped the ball. . Buffy probably has the best depiction of a gay character I've ever seen on TV; it was almost incidental, flowed naturally from the circumstances, and never became the sole focus of either character. That's how to handle it, I think.
 

If TV shows that are in-your-face about homosexuality are a recipie for failure, explain the success of Will and Grace.

I think Jack is frickin hilarious but occasionally I do feel uncomfortable with the homosexual references, so I personally do not watch it very often, but it has a large following and is a very funny show.
 

Dark Jezter said:
I fail to see how dubbed dialogue destroys the performance anymore than listening to a language you don't understand and having to read a translation at the bottom of the screen.

Sorry, I just get annoyed by people who act like watching foreign language films in subtitles is somehow superior to watching them dubbed. Anime fanboys do this a lot, and it's one of the biggest reasons why I don't hang out in anime fan communities anymore.

Dubbing does not destroy the performance but it certainly does distract from it since so much of it is done badly with inappropriate voices. I like hearing the original voices since they often communicate emotion and more through tone and pacing. Some dubs are good. THe Studio Ghibli ones have been very, very good and they don't distract from the film. Some parts of Princess Mononoke might even be better for the dubbing, given the voices involved.

So much of it is done badly, though, and I think that the subbed copy is, in that case, indeed a superior product. It's still not as good as knowing the language, though, especially for the humor titles. A lot of anime humor stems from regional dialects, language play, the nuances of the various terms of respect, puns and other things that are almost impossible to translate. I live Neo-Ranga for having a translators notes add-on for the DVD where they explain the translation process more fully. It's totally fascinating.

Using the 'sub is superior because it is sub' is still foolish because of this very fact - even the sub you're getting is still chaning things because otherwise you'd need about thirty lines of text to put some parts in context. (OK, in this scene, Amiko's tone and use of the word 'X' indicates she's really playing up the distance between her and her sister since she's using a term of respect normally reserved for an older relative of a higher social status).
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top