The Criterion Collection

[Scarface32]

Look what UPS just sent me.

[AnamorphicWidescreen]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

Jackie Chan has stated that he prefers his films to be seen in dubbed form rather than in subtitles because he doesn't want audiences distracted from fully viewing the images. Obviously, his films are a far more visual experience based on action and stunts than dialogue driven dramas but, in all honesty, unless you can speak and understand the language(s) being used, then whether it's dubbed or subtitled, either way it's a compromise as there are often subtleties of language that cannot be directly translated either way.

This is obviously a matter of personal preference, but I personally find dubbed films extremely distracting - there are no cases I've seen where a film is dubbed and the voice matches up with the mouth moving on the speaking person; plus, it's fairly obvious when watching some of these films (especially those old kung fu movies) that the person speaking wouldn't be speaking English with an American accent...Lastly, if the voice is dubbed it seems to mess up the way the the sound works in the film...

A good example of what I'm talking about are the two versions out there of Polanski's underrated '70's thriller The Tenant. This takes place in Paris, and the English dubbed version is terrible. Conversely, the original French track is much better....

I guess one of the other reasons I like watching foreign movies with the original language (even though I don't understand most foreign, non-English languages) is that I want to get the "full effect" of the film, and hear the original voices. I especially like French & Spanish films, since I like the way those languages sound.

I may also be unusual in that I don't mind reading the subtitles. In fact, in many cases I prefer foreign/subtitled films to English-speaking ones...

[jw007]

Originally Posted by blu-bry

I really enjoy films like this where the setting actually turns out to be a character in the story. Especially when it is a very dark character!
I see similarities to "Picnic at Hanging Rock", "A Passage to India" and these types of films.
In Black Narcissus the monks who were there before the sisters ended up clearing out for some reason, and now the sisters were being tested. I see the location as a dark presence - or even inhabited by a dark presence to the point of testing the faith and the resolve of the sisters. Depending on how far you want to go with it, this presence may have "inhabited" Sister Ruth. At the very least her faith was tested, and she failed.
To over simplify, I guess I just really like films where the bad guy is a place. It has been months since I've watched it. I need to go back and see it again!

Yes! I also loved Picnic at Hanging Rock too for that same reason - the mystical/mysterious setting. You can even say that the Del Toro film The Devil's Backbone uses a place that can be a character as there is a lot of tragic energy there. Same goes for Tarkovsky's Solaris with the space station being its own character. Last Year at Marienbad also is haunting and the setting itself is a character.

I would love to see someone do a prequel for Black Narcissus and focus on the "brotherhood" of monks that lived in that place of "dark presence" that you say.

How come nobody does prequels of classic films (pre-1967)? I guess the studio owns the rights and classic films like Black Narcissus must ethically never have prequels or sequels unlike today's films. I'd love to see a director such as Peter Jackson direct this. Or Wong Kar Wai. Or maybe a younger director such as Duncan Jones.

[Mansinthe]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

This is same reason Enter The Void is in english, so the focus is on visuals, but tbh I can still take in visuals and read subtitles...

im so used to subtitles that i have no problem following a foreign language movie (korean for example) with foreign language subs (eng ).
watching anime fansubs since i was 15 with eng subs. (12 years now) ..

sometimes i dont get how native english speakers could be annoyed by foreign movies with eng subs... srsly you guys have it even easier...

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I used subtitles when I watched Jackie Chan's first three Police Story movies a few years ago, but those are not exactly labyrinthine plots. Subtitles are second nature to me, even during visually spectacular scenes.

No, they're not which is why I added the caveat that they are mainly visual films.

Originally Posted by AnamorphicWidescreen

This is obviously a matter of personal preference, but I personally find dubbed films extremely distracting - there are no cases I've seen where a film is dubbed and the voice matches up with the mouth moving on the speaking person; plus, it's fairly obvious when watching some of these films (especially those old kung fu movies) that the person speaking wouldn't be speaking English with an American accent...Lastly, if the voice is dubbed it seems to mess up the way the the sound works in the film...

A good example of what I'm talking about are the two versions out there of Polanski's underrated '70's thriller The Tenant. This takes place in Paris, and the English dubbed version is terrible. Conversely, the original French track is much better....

I guess one of the other reasons I like watching foreign movies with the original language (even though I don't understand most foreign, non-English languages) is that I want to get the "full effect" of the film, and hear the original voices. I especially like French & Spanish films, since I like the way those languages sound.

I may also be unusual in that I don't mind reading the subtitles. In fact, in many cases I prefer foreign/subtitled films to English-speaking ones...

But are you getting the "full effect"? Firstly, no matter how fast you are at reading subtitles, your experience of watching the film is different from how you would be watching it if you actually understood the language, I mean you are still shifting your focus from the film itself to the subtitles, even if it's only for the briefest moment. Also, you are at the whim of the translations, which are often abridged in order to avoid having a novel's worth of subtitles on the screen, so subtleties of language and dialogue may be lost.

Like you say, it's personal preference (and I can go either way) but I often get the sense that there's some definite snobbery towards dubbing in favour of subtitles which many view as the "correct" or even the more "intellectual" way to go.

[Forget it kid]

Originally Posted by Ben-hur

I really hope so. But then again, WD is owned by Warner Brothers, and Criterion rarely deals with them. But like you said, since criterion did the remaster there is a slim chance. Let's cross our fingers and wait!

I'm just trying to think of a movie from criterion that was only released digital so far. So it seems very plausible to me. On the other hand this maybe the first sign of criterion turning digital

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

No, they're not which is why I added the caveat that they are mainly visual films.



But are you getting the "full effect"? Firstly, no matter how fast you are at reading subtitles, your experience of watching the film is different from how you would be watching it if you actually understood the language, I mean you are still shifting your focus from the film itself to the subtitles, even if it's only for the briefest moment. Also, you are at the whim of the translations, which are often abridged in order to avoid having a novel's worth of subtitles on the screen, so subtleties of language and dialogue may be lost.

Like you say, it's personal preference (and I can go either way) but I often get the sense that there's some definite snobbery towards dubbing in favour of subtitles which many view as the "correct" or even the more "intellectual" way to go.

it is the correct way to go. just as watching movies w/o them being "formatted to fit your television" is the correct way to go.

but if you can only tolerate the dub, then be my guest. I'm not going to go all "David Lynch" on anyone who isn't accustomed to reading subtitles or more simply put - just doesn't want to.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by octagon

Speaking of Carlos, let me veer off a bit and plug another really great film in a very similar vein...



I'm not going to try to describe or sell it - the review here does a much better job of both than I could (particularly post-ambien as I am now) but it's really freaking good (hmmm, perhaps I underestimate my current level of eloquence).

I'll second this. I saw it on Netflix last year, and gave it a 4/5 ("Really liked it") there, and a 7/10 on IMDb.

[The Stick]

Originally Posted by blu-bry

I really enjoy films like this where the setting actually turns out to be a character in the story. Especially when it is a very dark character!

Good to see some discussion on what is probably my favorite Criteron film.
I love the setting in BLACK NARCISSUS. It's one on the most sensual films in that you can almost feel the cold breeze that wafts through the corridors of the palace. The rhythmic beating of the distant drums and the exotic sounding names is strange to the ear...I also love the look of the beautiful use of close-ups throughout.

My take on the "dark presence" has to do with a more earthly explanation though - that is: human nature...but more specifically unrequited love.

I'm thinking anybody who has ever experienced unrequited love know what a powerful emotion it can be and how much it can be a driving force to one's behavior.

Sister Ruth's attraction to Mr. Dean is the primary manifestation of the "presence".

I think what originally drove Sister Clodagh to the sisterhood and told in dramatic flashbacks was motivated by unrequited love.

I like to think also that the reason why Mr Dean chose to hide out in the mountains and behaves the way he does (eschews meaningful relationships with women) is due to a painful relationship in the past.

I also think it serves as a metaphor for British Imperialist intentions in India.

Anyway...fantastic film and one I can watch over and over

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

it is the correct way to go. just as watching movies w/o them being "formatted to fit your television" is the correct way to go.

but if you can only tolerate the dub, then be my guest. I'm not going to go all "David Lynch" on anyone who isn't accustomed to reading subtitles or more simply put - just doesn't want to.

You've just proven my point re: snobbery. Thanks.

With only a hint of facetiousness, the "correct" way to go would be to become proficient in the language in question and watch it without dubbing OR subs, both of which are compromises.

[KrugerIndustrial]

Finally finished the Three Colors trilogy which I enjoyed tremendously. Prior to purchasing the set I often read reviews stating Red as Kieślowski's masterpiece of some sort. That in mind, I felt disappointed and it wasn't until the final thirty minutes that my mind did a complete turnover, and I finally felt the magic touch. Hard to choose your favorite but -- and while it may not be aesthetically or structurally the best film -- White is the one I had the most pleasant viewing experience with. One thing that I find extraordinary with this set is that all of the films, despite their own little issues, have something special to give, and I feel that subsequent views will only further deepen that feeling. Highly recommended.

[tenia]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

You've just proven my point re: snobbery. Thanks.

With only a hint of facetiousness, the "correct" way to go would be to become proficient in the language in question and watch it without dubbing OR subs, both of which are compromises.

The debate usually reaches this point.
But I would tend to think that having the real voices of the actors is a better compromises even if it means quickly looking at them instead of waht's happening on screen.

On the other hand, I rarely feel I'm missing things when reading the subs.

[Scarface32]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

But are you getting the "full effect"? Firstly, no matter how fast you are at reading subtitles, your experience of watching the film is different from how you would be watching it if you actually understood the language, I mean you are still shifting your focus from the film itself to the subtitles, even if it's only for the briefest moment. Also, you are at the whim of the translations, which are often abridged in order to avoid having a novel's worth of subtitles on the screen, so subtleties of language and dialogue may be lost.

Sometimes I pause the video to read the subtitles, look around at the scene, and then unpause. Though if a film has an English dub option, I prefer to put it on. Most foreign films (outside of anime) don't have dubbing options. The only ones I own with a dubbing option are the Dragon Tattoo trilogy, Run Lola Run, and most of the Godzilla films. All the others are subtitle only.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

But are you getting the "full effect"? Firstly, no matter how fast you are at reading subtitles, your experience of watching the film is different from how you would be watching it if you actually understood the language, I mean you are still shifting your focus from the film itself to the subtitles, even if it's only for the briefest moment.

There is at least one case where the "distraction" of the subtitles worked to great effect, and it's made me wonder every time I've seen the film what it would be like to understand Swedish and not be distracted by the subtitles. It's Tarkovsky's The Sacrifice, and a description of the scene in question follows, with spoiler tags (I don't think it spoils much, but I don't want any grief).

[Show spoiler] The protagonist is out with his son tending to a sapling. Along comes a postman on his bicycle. The postman stops, and gets into a protracted philosophical discussion with the father. Eventually, the discussion comes to an end. The postman gets on his bike and starts to ride away, when he's jerked to a stop. Turns out, the whole time he was talking to the father, the boy had taken a piece of rope and tied one end to the sapling, and the other to the bicycle. I didn't notice any of this the first time I saw the film, because I was busy reading the philosophical discussion in the subtitles. The sudden jerk as the rope stops the bike was as much a surprise to me as it was to the postman.

I imagine that someone who understands Swedish might notice what the boy is doing, and is waiting in anticipation for the "punch line". Or perhaps they're caught up enough in the discussion that even without requiring the subtitles, it comes as a surprise. But being distracted by the subtitles really worked.

[Mansinthe]

Originally Posted by jayembee

[Show spoiler]I imagine that someone who understands Swedish might notice what the boy is doing, and is waiting in anticipation for the "punch line". Or perhaps they're caught up enough in the discussion that even without requiring the subtitles, it comes as a surprise. But being distracted by the subtitles really worked.

did notice that while watching the movie for the first time.
maybe you just have to be used to it... (i watch everything with subs, even US movies)

used to watch german silent movies with english subs as well (sometimes that "old german" is hard to read on really old movies)..

[AnamorphicWidescreen]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

But are you getting the "full effect"? Firstly, no matter how fast you are at reading subtitles, your experience of watching the film is different from how you would be watching it if you actually understood the language, I mean you are still shifting your focus from the film itself to the subtitles, even if it's only for the briefest moment. Also, you are at the whim of the translations, which are often abridged in order to avoid having a novel's worth of subtitles on the screen, so subtleties of language and dialogue may be lost.

Like you say, it's personal preference (and I can go either way) but I often get the sense that there's some definite snobbery towards dubbing in favour of subtitles which many view as the "correct" or even the more "intellectual" way to go.

You're correct in that the subtitled English translations may not always include everything that was actually said; one of my favorite scenes in Lost in Translation is when Bill Murray doesn't believe (probably correctly) that he got the full English translation of something that was said in Japanese

Also agree that to fully appreciate a film, you probably need to learn the language in question and watch it that way. However, IMHO subtitles are a good compromise; I can hear the language as originally spoken, and, though I'm probably not getting the "full story" in the subtitles, it's better than nothing...

This whole discussion reminds me of a conversation I had with a co-worker who speaks Spanish about 3-4 years ago; I mentioned to them that I enjoy watching Spanish movies subtitled in English, specifically The Motorcycle Diaries, Amores Perros, Talk to Her, etc. My co-worker was astounded that I would watch these movies without understanding Spanish; I mentioned that I like films, and don't mind the subtitles - but, they were still puzzled

[Mansinthe]

if you really wanna find out if you are a fast reader you should check out some HK blurays ... sometime i get the feeling they do really translate everything.. it might sound "engrish" to a native speaker but there are probably around 2-3 times the amount of sentences of what you are used to compared to a "well go usa" release of the same movie.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by AnamorphicWidescreen

Also agree that to fully appreciate a film, you probably need to learn the language in question and watch it that way.

Of course, but it begs the question of how many languages do you need to learn fluently in order to enjoy a sufficient breadth of world cinema? I would've needed to understand (at the very least) Latin, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Hungarian, Greek, German, Dutch, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Icelandic, Finnish, Russian, Ukrainian, Czech, Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi, Turkish, Hindi, Vietnamese, Cantonese, Mandarin, Korean, Japanese, Tagalog, and a few African languages. And I'm sure I'm forgetting a few.

However, IMHO subtitles are a good compromise; I can hear the language as originally spoken, and, though I'm probably not getting the "full story" in the subtitles, it's better than nothing...

And by the actor who originally spoke it. It's great when the original actors can be called upon to do their own dubbing (several of the major actors in Das Boot, for example), but the voice actors who typically do the dubbing aren't necessarily getting the right inflections and rhythm of the dialogue that the original actor and director tried so hard to accomplish.

[EPlay]

Although I can understand most Japanese, I always watch with English subtitles as something may come up that I don't understand. I also find it interesting how something is translated. Once in a great while I'm thinking "That's not what he said!" in my mind.

[Roninblues]

Originally Posted by octagon

Speaking of Carlos, let me veer off a bit and plug another really great film in a very similar vein...



I'm not going to try to describe or sell it - the review here does a much better job of both than I could (particularly post-ambien as I am now) but it's really freaking good (hmmm, perhaps I underestimate my current level of eloquence).

It was a keeper for me as well.