# Original language, subtitles or own native language



## 1234plet

Hi,

Sometimes I have looked  at some German channels and I have noticed that they often exchange the original language in the movie (with real people also) with German voices. And I know Germany isn't the only ones who do that. 

Do you prefer to watch a movie in your own native language? 
I couldn't imagine what it would be like to see a movie and the hear Tom Cruise or Angelina Jolie talk Danish. I would find that very weird. I prefer subtitles. 

What do you prefer?

Thank you.


----------



## badgrammar

I prefer Original Version with subtitles, no matter what the language.  The only exception to this rule is for Kung-Fu movies, I don't know why .

But in France, I think a lot of people prefer everything "dubbed" in French.  From films to interviews with famous personalities, most network stuff is dubbed or a French voice-over has been added.  I find that especially annoying when it is a well-known person, in an interview, for example, and instead of letting people hear the sound of his/her voice and read the subtitles, there's a French voice speaking over it.

I know in many countries there is little dubbing, just subtitles, and that contributes to people understanding and speaking more languages, notedly English.


----------



## 1234plet

I also find it very annoying when trying to see an interview too and then it's just a very different voice! 

Also, nusing subtitles - I really don't mind at all, because in an English, for example, movie there are always some words you don't really understand.


----------



## ireney

The only things dubbed in Greece are either programs for very young children or soaps from Latin-America (the other kind of imported soaps we have is of the American variety and those are subtitled; go figure).

I am all pro-subtitles especially when actos are invloved since acting is a combination of the expression of the body and the voice; of the same person.
In addition, with subtitles, when you know the original language, you can rant endlessly about how stupidly something is translated, how they chose to ommit a crucial word (that's one of the problems of subtitles by the way) etc. With dubbing you can only go "but that doesn't make any sense!"

Add to that the fact that, as I mentioned, I am used to subtitles and you'll understand how I view dubbing.

P.S. Using subtitles for French movies on DVD _but not relying on them_ helps me dust off my French. That's another great thing about subtitles


----------



## Outsider

I prefer subtitles, but I'm biased: almost everything here is subtitled.


----------



## Cracker Jack

I prefer the original version with subtitle.  Dubbing, at least in Europe is practiced in France, Germany, Italy and Spain. I am not sure if there are other states that do this.  I don't see any advantage in embracing this.  Those who advocate this are dubbers themselves.  But the poor masses are the ones who are deprived.

I do not favor this because it is out of bounds, off-key and outrageous.  The dubbers could never do justice to the emotions dished out by the actors.  It's like stopping the viewers from getting real.  I can make an allusion on dubbing to plastic flowers.  They look real but they are fake.  So why spend so much in dubbing?  The budget for dubbing could be diverted to other productive enterprise.

While I share with the observation about dubbed kiddie shows, it is an insult to the intelligence of the people viewing.  This is especially true for those who are learning English, the language spoken in which majority of 
films.  I'm not in favor as well of dubbing French, German, Italian and Spanish films.  Come on, let's get real.  Dubbing represents cultural decadence in the movie industry.


----------



## Frank06

Hi,

Over here, in Flanders, only movies for kids have a voice over. New children's movies in cinemas, I mean animation movies and the like, even come in two versions, the original one with subtitles one and the translated one (voice over).
On Flemish TV channels, most if not all foreign films, interviews etc. are subtitled. Actually, almost everything which is not in Standard Dutch (the Flemish way) is subtitled, and this even includes series from the Netherlands, interviews with Belgian people who speak a local dialect etc.
One big exception that comes to my mind is a language game / quizz that includes players from Belgium and the Netherlands. No subtitles for that one .
Flemish TV news and especially *radio *news bulletins often have interviews with journalists and correspondents from the Netherlands (and even South Africa) which are not subtitled (or paraphrased on the radio) either.
BTW, some Flemish series that are broadcasted in the Netherlands have subtitles too...

In Wallonia, the French speaking part of Belgium, they follow most of the times the French tradition of using a voice over.

I prefer to listen to the original soundtrack and read the subtitles. Probably because I am used to that. Subtitles vs. voice overs has never been an issue in Flanders, and I never heard anybody complain about subtitles.


Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## Fernando

In Spain, foreign films are usually dubbed, both in TV and in films. 

In Catalan/Valencian-speaking territories, Galicia and B.C. films are dubbed to Spanish in cinema theaters and in Catalan/Galician or Basque in autonomous TV.

I prefer to choose the original version in DVDs (with subtitles in the original language, just in case), but I prefer dubbed version for TV films (when watching them without commiting my five senses).


----------



## BlueWolf

I prefer dubbed films, unless there's a specific reason (for example those films based on different languages). If I want to see the original one, I watch the DVD in the orginal language. Reading subtitles is annoying for me. Moreover it would mean children couldn't see many films and dyslexic people couldn't follow them very well (if they can)


----------



## fenixpollo

*Another Pro-Subtitler here!*   American audiences prefer dubbing, so most foreign content that comes on TV is dubbed. Dubbing used to be more common here. The original Mad Max was dubbed, to erase the Australian accents and make the film more marketable in the US!

There are couple of other threads on subtitles: here and here.

You should add a poll to your thread.   If you don't know how, ask a moderator.


----------



## badgrammar

I really think it is a question of both viewer demand and old habits...  I'd say the majority of French viewers don't want to have to read subtitles, and have been habituated to not having to.  But one of the big factors as to whether things are dubbed and subtitled is the number of viewers in a certain language. 

For example, there are not enough worldwide speakers of Dutch to create a real market that would make it economically feasible to dubb everything coming out (real dubbing being far more expensive than subtitling).  With both French, English, the total number of potential viewers on the market make it worthwhile.


----------



## cutu

The original language is the best, with subtitles.
for 2 reasons :
- I like the sound of MOST languages.
- seeing someone moving his mouth and hearing something else , bothers me to be honest.


----------



## Tsoman

Almost all foreign language movies here are subtitled (with the exception of kung fu movies)

I really hate dubbing. Super distracting


----------



## moura

I prefer strongly wathching movies with subtitles. John Wayne would not be Jonh Wayne if he spoke in Portuguese. For me that would sound almost, if not totally, ridiculous. I saw a month or 2 ago, the  touching Rio Bravo. What a shame if it were doubled... Lots of senses would be lost. I think the characters are a whole, and their voices must be indivisible. I spoke about JW, but I remember other famous actors. For example Meryl Streep or Julia Roberts, or Harrison Ford or Anthony Hopkins. If I heard them with a fake voice, it would be terrible.

But for children, of course, I think it is wise to double the movies, because they are learning their native languages and it is more natural for them to hear the people, or toys or animals speaking directly to them, instead of hearing and reading it. 

There is something in double real films (not animated) unnatural - sometimes from a long distance from the screen and just hearing some mumbling it is possible to see if it is doubled or not - it just don't fit.


----------



## cyanista

badgrammar said:


> I really think it is a question of both viewer demand and old habits... I'd say the majority of French viewers don't want to have to read subtitles, and have been habituated to not having to. But one of the big factors as to whether things are dubbed and subtitled is the number of viewers in a certain language.


 
It is also true for Germany and Russia. Practically everything is being subtitled dubbed and people are used to it. A German friend of mine refused to watch a subtitled movie on ARTE (a cultural TV-channel) because he thought it'd be tiresome. And it is, without much practice. I find this a pity but I don't think the situation going to change anytime soon.


----------



## Etcetera

In Russia, all films are dubbed. The translation and dubbing are usually just awful, but there's nothing to do about it. There's one or two cinemas in the two capitals where you can enjoy a movie in the original; as for TV, satellite television is too expensive for most people. 
As for me, I strongly prefer subtitles! I think it hardly needs any explanation.


----------



## divina

You know, it's funny, because although I prefer subtitles with any Spanish movie or TV program, I don't care if they're in Spanish or English. If they're in English, I can practice my listening skills by listening to what is being said in Spanish, and if they're Spanish, I get to see how the words flow together (word order) and stuff. Sometimes I can take sentences from the Spanish subtitles and use them in the "real world" for example in one movie I was watching on TV, I remember somebody saying "Debo irme," meaning "I have to go" in English. So from that I learned to add the "me" at the end. Stuff like that.


----------



## natasha2000

fenixpollo said:


> *Another Pro-Subtitler here!*  American audiences prefer dubbing, so most foreign content that comes on TV is dubbed. Dubbing used to be more common here. The original Mad Max was dubbed, to erase the Australian accents and make the film more marketable in the US!
> 
> There are couple of other threads on subtitles: here and here.
> 
> You should add a poll to your thread.  If you don't know how, ask a moderator.


 
Really? 

I was sure that in The USA all movies are subtitled... I really don't know why, I guess I have seen some Serbian movies with English subtitles, so I thought... Well.. Anyway, I am really, really amazed...
I Serbia, all movies, series, everything is subtitled. Only documentaries and cartoons are dubbed. Is it necessary to say which are my preferences? 

The only good thing about dubbing that I can see is for bad translators... Their shameful ignorance cannot be discovered so easily... I worked for some 6 years for one Belgrade TV station, translating movies and series... It is a really responsable job, since you wouldn't really want to sign a movie full of mistakes... Because, yes, in Serbia, each translation is signed, i.e. your name appears at the end of the movie... so, if you did a good job, everyone will know, but they will also know if you screwed it...


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

I prefer dubbing, but must admit to being somewhat frustrated last week when watching La Grande Seduction with English subtitles.

The over-enthusiastic translator had seen fit to include in the subtitles such helpful notes as "cat purring", "church bell rings", and "people shouting".

Go figure!


----------



## natasha2000

Chaska Ñawi said:


> I prefer dubbing, but must admit to being somewhat frustrated last week when watching La Grande Seduction with English subtitles.
> 
> The over-enthusiastic translator had seen fit to include in the subtitles such helpful notes as "cat purring", "church bell rings", and "people shouting".
> 
> Go figure!


 

Chaska, is there any possibility that you had a copy of a movie with subtitles for deaf people? I have seen many of those, and they usually put in subtitles everything that goes on in the movie, since deaf people cannot hear anything (logical, isn't it! )...

PS: I am sure there's some more "pollitically correct" expression for deaf people, but right now I am simply blocked...I apologize.


----------



## Outsider

LOL. Around here, it's usually the opposite problem. Translations are compressed as much as possible (perhaps due to lack of space). For instance, if the guy asks "Do you love me?", and the girl replies "Yes", they don't bother to write down _Sim_. Everyone knows what "Yes" means, right?


----------



## natasha2000

Outsider said:


> LOL. Around here, it's usually the opposite problem. Translations are compressed as much as possible (*perhaps due to lack of space).* For instance, if the guy asks "Do you love me?", and the girl replies "Yes", they don't bother to write down _Sim_. Everyone knows what "Yes" means, right?


 

Not perhaps, but YES, for sure. As I did this job for some 6 years, I know perfectly what it means to have to find some shorter way to say something, and yet try not to lose the quality of translation... Normally, you have two lines and only thirty spaces, and each subtitle should be on the screen at least for 2-3 sec, so a spectator can read it without problems... And sometimes it is not possible, since a character is speaking to fast, or scenes are changing too fast... So, you are not only limited by space, but also by time. Not once I spent days in trying to squeeze some English sentence that in Serbian is twice as long... There are some rules, though, and one of them is about repeating things. If for example, a character is saying one word a hundred times, I will not write it a hundred times. It is enough to write it once or at most twice, but more frequent case is once with dice dots...


----------



## Heba

Here, almost all movies and programmes are subtitled while cartoons , children's programmes , Latin American telenovelas and documentaries are dubbed.

Personally, I prefer to listen to the original language and read the subtites. I wish they stop dubbing Latin American telenovelas; I think they would help me more with my Spanish if they were subtitled.


----------



## Hakro

There's practically no dubbing in the Finnish TV.
The films, interviews etc. are always subtitled. I think there's a good possibility to learn foreign languages by covering the subtitles and trying to understand the language.


----------



## natasha2000

ireney said:


> The only things dubbed in Greece are either programs for very young children or *soaps from Latin-America* (the other kind of imported soaps we have is of the American variety and those are subtitled; go figure).


 


Heba said:


> Here, almost all movies and programmes are subtitled while cartoons , children's programmes , *Latin American telenovelas* and documentaries are dubbed.


 
Is there any special reason for dubbing Latin American soap operas? We have them, too, but they are certainly not dubbed...

I find it interesting phenomenon to dub only Latin American sopa operas while all other movies are subtitled... Are only English movies and series subtitled?


----------



## Outsider

In Portugal, too, Latin American soap operas were dubbed a few years ago. So were a few American ones. The dubbed versions were in Brazilian Portuguese. It must be cheaper to buy from Brazilian networks than to dub it all over again.


----------



## Hakro

On the other hand, I remember when watching a dubbed Western in the French TV, John Wayne was speaking French - in the real personal voice of John Wayne, but in French. 
I was told that these voices are pronounced by the actors of la Comédie Française.


----------



## natasha2000

Outsider said:


> In Portugal, too, Latin American soap operas were dubbed a few years ago. So were a few American ones. The dubbed versions were in Brazilian Portuguese. It must be cheaper to buy from Brazilian networks than to dub it all over again.


 
Ok. I understand this. It is quite logic.
But I do not understand dubbing of Latin American series in other countries.


----------



## ireney

natasha2000 said:


> Is there any special reason for dubbing Latin American soap operas? We have them, too, but they are certainly not dubbed...
> 
> I find it interesting phenomenon to dub only Latin American sopa operas while all other movies are subtitled... Are only English movies and series subtitled?




Well the reason will sound strange! They have discovered that the audience for these soaps is usually 
a) women of a certain age who cannot read fast for whatever reasons (failing eyesight or poor education being two of them)
b) women who will do some work while watching the series so they cannot remain glued to their TV 

Dubbing seems to work for them although it's of the worst quality ever! Mind you, I don't have a very high opinion about soaps in general but I must admit that they only one I ever saw with subtitles (honestly I did! I was zapping, noticed there were subtitles and I actually watched the whole episode) was more.. "watchable" than the rest (that must tell you something about the quality of dubbing).

By the way you wouldn't believe the quality of subtitles either! The times I wanted to scream my head off ! The times my mom turned around asking me "ok, WHAT did he/she say?" because the translation just didn't make any sense.

I realise the problem of time and space but what one writes must
a) make sense
b) not alter the meaning of the original! (we're talking about adding a three or four letter word sometimes. A "but" or "although" [4 and 3 or 5 letter words in Greek] can make a lot of difference)


----------



## natasha2000

ireney said:


> Well the reason will sound strange! They have discovered that the audience for these soaps is usually
> a) women of a certain age who cannot read fast for whatever reasons (failing eyesight or poor education being two of them)
> b) women who will do some work while watching the series so they cannot remain glued to their TV
> 
> Dubbing seems to work for them although it's of the worst quality ever! Mind you, I don't have a very high opinion about soaps in general but I must admit that they only one I ever saw with subtitles (honestly I did! I was zapping, noticed there were subtitles and I actually watched the whole episode) was more.. "watchable" than the rest (that must tell you something about the quality of dubbing).
> 
> By the way you wouldn't believe the quality of subtitles either! The times I wanted to scream my head off ! The times my mom turned around asking me "ok, WHAT did he/she say?" because the translation just didn't make any sense.
> 
> I realise the problem of time and space but what one writes must
> a) make sense
> b) not alter the meaning of the original! (we're talking about adding a three or four letter word sometimes. A "but" or "although" [4 and 3 or 5 letter words in Greek] can make a lot of difference)


 
I see... Well this is for me, at least, a reason good enough to dub something., although I must say that Greek TV station owners are more thoughtful than Serbian ones... The result is that even women in the country with 4 grades of elementary school now can say a couple of words in Spanish....

Another problem that appears in the movies translating business is that it is not well paid and those who pay, usually do not care too much about the quality. In Serbia, unfortunatelly I also could be a witness of unheard stupidities in translations, but when I saw how this bussiness work, I don't wonder... Usually, you have to work very fast, and not all translators with a conciousness will accept it, and especially not for the fee they pay. So, it can happen that a movie is translated by people who "speak" language and not by professionals. Of course, sometimes a profession is leart on the way, meaning, while working, you're learning on your own mistakes... But the worst translations I saw were done for video clubs during sanctions. At that time, a piracy was reigning Serbia. I muself saw Forest Gump on video just right before the premiere in the USA. Usually it was a copy of a movie shot in the cinema. So, like copy, like translation... Those "translators" were translating some 5-6 movies per day, so you can imagine the quality of those translations. The "star" which gets the prize was one movie whose translation was entirely "invented", meaning, nothing was translated, but the completely new dialogs were invented ... But those times are luckily, behind us. I don't know the situation today as far as movie translations are concerned, since I do not live there anymore, but I am sure that now piracy is reduced to minimum and nowdays it is impossible to find a pirat copy of a movie in a video club, just like in any other country in Europe.


----------



## 1234plet

Thank you for all replies.

Here in Denmark, movies for smaller children are also dubbed, but not for adults.


----------



## Maja

fenixpollo said:


> The original Mad Max was dubbed, to erase the Australian accents and make the film more marketable in the US!




My vote goes to subtitles!!!


----------



## karuna

I used to see subtitled movies in my youth and it was never a problem to read them fast enough but now I feel that often the subtitles are too fast. I often need to stop the playback to read them fully. I don't know if it is my reaction becoming slower due to age or the quality of subtitles are decreasing. I actually like dubbing when it is very well done but subtitling is ten times better than a second rate dubbing.


----------



## ERASMO_GALENO

Hi,

I prefer subtitles as well, because they keep the original sound, that always is better than any dubbing.

And there are dubbings and dubbings... Some months ago I saw a Japanese movie, set in the Samurai Era, dubbed in Spain (no offense) and I couldn't get that into my head.

Greetings,

*Erasmo.*


----------



## Daddyo

Lately, I've noticed in the newer movies that sometimes a few scenes include Spanish dialogue, but there is no subtitling or dubbing. And some movies go as far as switching a good portion of the movie to a foreign language with the corresponding subtitles in English (one example: Tarantino's "Kill Bill" En -> Jp). I prefer subtitles myself, because I feel the connection with the actors better, or the cultural gap between the society that produced the film and mine is more poignant in this manner.


----------



## Etcetera

I'd like to ask another question regarding subtitles. 
If you're watching a DVD, there's usually a possibility to choose the language of the subtitles. You can read the subtitles in the language of the original or in your native language. What do you prefer?
Personally, I prefer to watch English movies with English subtitles. The translations are sometimes so odd!


----------



## rsweet

I prefer subtitled movies even when a dubbed version is available—even when the original is in a language I don't know at all. The dubbed track almost always sounds flat compared to the original.

I often watch French films with the French subtitles on, but it's a bit frustrating because the subtitles and what's being said hardly ever match. When I was in France, I was able to read the subtitles for the hearing impaired while I watched, and that was great—the spoken and written words were the same.


----------



## übermönch

I may occur as a heretic regarding the other answers, however I prefer *non-professional dub*s where the original voice is left with an interpretation (which, at best, can be turnt off ). My second choice would be subtitles, if the movie is in a language not completely foreign to me, i'd even prefer them;  a *professional full dubbing* is, indeed, worst thing can be done to a movie.

As to regional stuff, the remarkable oddities in German speaking area is that dialect speakers are usually dubbed in interviews; in Luxembourg French, English and German programmes aren't translated at all; in Ukraine everything is dubbed, unless it's in Russian - then it's only subtitled - sometimes they even show movies dubbed to Russian with Ukrainian subs . Probably because the languages are so similar.


----------



## Etcetera

übermönch said:


> As to regional stuff, the remarkable oddities in German speaking area is that dialect speakers are usually dubbed in interviews; in Luxembourg French, English and German programmes aren't translated at all; in Ukraine everything is dubbed, unless it's in Russian - then it's only subtitled - sometimes they even show movies dubbed to Russian with Ukrainian subs . Probably because the languages are so similar.


Not only. The chief reason may be that all Ukrainians (or almost all) know Russian. Or at least understand it perfectly. 
As for professional dubbing - ough, I hate it! I still shrug evey time I remember watching Pirates of the Caribbean in Russian - after having seen the movie in English. I'll never do this mistake again!


----------



## Honeypum

I prefer the original version with subtitles, always.

I think you lose some content if the movies are dubbed, the original voices are an important part of the film.

In Spain is really difficult to find cinemas where you can watch original version films, and that's the main reason why I usually don't go to the movies.

In Argentina, all foreign language movies are subtitled excepting those on TV, where subtitles are not usual and the movie is dubbed (usually by mexicans or Central America people).


----------



## natasha2000

ERASMO_GALENO said:


> Hi,
> 
> I prefer subtitles as well, because they keep the original sound, that always is better than any dubbing.
> 
> And there are dubbings and dubbings... Some months ago I saw a Japanese movie, set in the Samurai Era, dubbed in Spain (no offense) and I couldn't get that into my head.
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> *Erasmo.*


 
It's just that you're not used to Spanish dubbing, just as I feel odd when seeing The Simpsons dubbed in Mexico....


----------



## almostfreebird

ERASMO_GALENO said:


> Hi,
> 
> I prefer subtitles as well, because they keep the original sound, that always is better than any dubbing.
> 
> And there are dubbings and dubbings... Some months ago I saw a Japanese movie, set in the Samurai Era, dubbed in Spain (no offense) and I couldn't get that into my head.
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> *Erasmo.*


 
I wish I could see the movie!  It would be hilarious to see Samurais speaking Spanish!


----------



## KaRiNe_Fr

I seriously doubt we can find a lot of people prefering dubbing than the original with subtitles in this forum. 
But, it is said that "The Persuaders" ("Amicalement vôtre") is nearly better in French than in English: because the two French actors (mainly Michel Roux but also Claude Bertrand) dubbing the famous couple Curtis-Moore were adding again 2nd degree humour  into the dialogs. I don't know if it's very true as I didn't watch any episode in  English... I've to do that one day.


----------



## invictaspirit

I have to agree with all the posters who hate dubbed films and TV.  I want to hear the real voices of the actors.  Not some guy in a sound studio.

Despite what some might expect, here in the UK we never dub foreign-language movies into English.  They are always subtitled on TV and always on DVD, though one or two DVDs have a dubbed English option.  Even this is pretty rare.


----------



## Hakro

invictaspirit said:


> I have to agree with all the posters who hate dubbed films and TV. I want to hear the real voices of the actors. Not some guy in a sound studio.


I agree, but I can't help adimiring the French actors imitating for example the voice of John Wayne, in French.

On the other hand we must remember that many other sounds in the films are not original. For example, the car tyres usually squeal also on gravel roads, at least in American films. There's no subtitle for these sounds, unfortunately.


----------



## Vanest

Hello everyone!

What an interesting thread! I would like to share a funny sub-title anecdote with you: When my mother and father were dating (in the seventies) they went to see Rocky I here in Quito, Ecuador. The movie had Spanish sub-titles. My mother speaks English and Spanish, but my father only spoke English. It was so difficult to understand what Stallone was saying, that my mother had to read the sub-titles and then translate them back to Enlgish for my father! 
This is why I always prefer sub-titles, of course.  In Ecuador almost all movies presented in cinemas are sub-titled, (with the exception of children´s movies) but EVERYTHING on TV is dubbed and it is AWFUL!!! It is so awful that I don´t even have a TV anymore. 
It´s as bad as this: A film originally in Japanese will be dubbed NOT from Japanese, but from the dubbed English version! Basically, this happens with almost all languages that are not English or Portuguese, I mean, they aren´t dubbed from the original, but from an English version (I am not sure about French.)
But, strangely, many people prefer dubbed films here. For example, my grandmother refuses to go the cinema if the movie has sub-titles!
Well, thats the dubbing/sub-titling situation in Ecuador! (at least from my point of view!


----------



## Thomas F. O'Gara

Interesting subject, this. And more complicated than it appears at first blush.

All other things being equal, I prefer subtitles, and I think most language enthusiasts will agree...at least for movies produced in one of the languages that they know.

Having said that, dubbing is something of an art form, having its own peculiarities and pitfalls, and some practitioners are better than others.  What's more, there is the cultural factor always looming...in general, American audiences won't accept subtitles, once you move away from art movies shown at highbrow theatres (sometimes American news broadcasts will even use subtitles for people speaking English, if they think the average American won't understand the speaker's accent!).  When a non-English language foreign movie becomes really popular in the USA - a rare occasion except for kong fu movies - it will definitely get dubbed in, even if the original language version was already released; this happened with the old Russian movie "Москва слезам не верит" (the English dubbing was dreadful) and "La Cage aux Folles", which had the curious distinction of having two dubbed in versions in English.

In general, French audiences also tend to prefer dubbing.  Spanish audiences tend to be half-and-half between dubbing and subtitles, in my experience; one ever-present problem with Spanish is the considerable variation from dialect to dialect, particularly regarding what is considered to be vulgar or obscene language.  This usually results in the Spanish dubbing being considerably tamer in language than the original.  

I've seen the Latin American telenovelas that other writers have mentioned, and I believe that most of them are produced in Brazil with the express intention of being distributed worldwide, with dubbing; I've even seen them dubbed in Arabic - Modern Standard Arabic, of course.

Some of the best - and worst - dubbing work I've seen has been on movies dubbed in to Russian.  I remember seeing "The Lion in Winter" dubbed in to Russian, and it was admirable.  However, on a lot of material on TV the Russians use a strange dubbing system where you can hear the dialogue in the original language underneath the main sound track, which I find extremely distracting.


----------



## natasha2000

I must say that at least I, really do not care if dubbing is done well or not. In Spain, they are very proud of being one of the best in dubbing, and they really do it excellently, but I still prefer original version. 
The odd thing is that some Spaniards actually don't know the real voices of American actors, so they recognize them according the voices of dubbing actors!!! Can you imagine someone who doesn't know how stupid Stalone sounds, or what an irresistible accent Sean Connery has? 

In a Spanish version, Stalone is a nice bariton with excellent pronunciation, accentuation and diction....Can you believe it?


----------



## Namakemono

> The only good thing about dubbing that I can see is for bad translators... Their shameful ignorance cannot be discovered so easily...


 
Yes, they are so ignorant that they have to spend hours thinking what phrases sound appropriate speaking in Spanish, how to deal with accents, and what phrases match the actors lip movements, adding notes on the intonation, etc. Truly a work for dumb translators.



> The odd thing is that some Spaniards actually don't know the real voices of American actors


 
That is quite fortunate. At least our voice actors pronounce full words.



> In a Spanish version, Stalone is a nice bariton with excellent pronunciation, accentuation and diction....Can you believe it?


 
If he mispronounced words, spoke with Italian accent, and mumbled, we would shoot our TV whenever he was on the screen.


----------



## natasha2000

Namakemono said:


> Yes, they are so ignorant that they have to spend hours thinking what phrases sound appropriate speaking in Spanish, how to deal with accents, and what phrases match the actors lip movements, adding notes on the intonation, etc. Truly a work for dumb translators.
> 
> 
> 
> That is quite fortunate. At least our voice actors pronounce full words.
> 
> 
> 
> If he mispronounced words, spoke with Italian accent, and mumbled, we would shoot our TV whenever he was on the screen.


 
What is your point?

Why do you feel the urge for such sacastic comments?

I translated movies in Spain, too, as well as in my country, and I know what I am talking about.
I also saw Stalone in Spanish and original version. Those two voices don't look like at all.


----------



## Namakemono

natasha2000 said:


> What is your point?
> Why do you feel the urge for such sacastic comments?


 
As a translator "en ciernes" who will probably work on the audiovisual field, I find your previous comment insulting. I find dubbings more interesting than subtitles, and I don't think translators who do dubbings are worse or think they will not be caught easily if they're "shameful ignorants". That's a prejudiced point of view, and I replied with sarcasm.



> I also saw Stalone in Spanish and original version. Those two voices don't look like at all.


 
Yes, but is there something wrong with that? Should the person who dubs Schwarzenegger have Austrian accent, poor diction, and little acting skills?


----------



## invictaspirit

But surely this is missing the point.

Stalone and Schwarzenegger are not SUPPOSED to have good diction, beautiful voices etc etc.  It ruins the effect of their characters.  Why should The Terminator speak well??

If Stalone has good diction in dubbed Spanish movies...this isn't an exercise in clever acting or good oratory...it's just wrong!  He's supposed to sound like a shaved monkey.


----------



## Namakemono

Do you watch dubbings often? Do you know how awkward they are when you don't know what the actors are saying? Bad diction should never be used in dubbings. Unpleasant voices stick out like a sore thumb in dubbings, even if the original actor's voice is hideous.


----------



## invictaspirit

I used to try to watch dubbed films in my Madrid days, mainly in an idle/casual way, on TV. I never watched one at the cinema. I always chose V.O. places.

You'd have to teach me more about the point of dubbing, I guess, if you feel I'm missing the point.

My view, which you are welcome to correct of course, is that a film is the work of the director and the actors. If the point of a character, his identity, is that he is a rough, uneducated, mumbling guy then...that is the point of the narrative, right? If you change his diction in translation, you change the character, you change the identity and you change the narrative.

In Spanish language films surely there are characters who speak badly...for a variety of different reasons of characterisation. If someone made a movie about a gang of very 'chulo' guys from Vallecas, the actors would speak like 'chulo' guys from Vallecas. If, in Italy for example, those characters were dubbed speaking perfectly clear Italian, I can't see how it would work? If 'Amor es Perros' was dubbed in the UK (it wasn't, it was sub-titled) I would think it was nuts if the dubbing actors spoke 'well', with good diction, in a movie about some poor guys who get money by organising dog-fights.

Aside from watching dubbed films in Spain and Germany, I have little experience of them. Feel free to educate me.


----------



## Vanest

Namakemono said:


> Do you watch dubbings often? Do you know how awkward they are when you don't know what the actors are saying? Bad diction should never be used in dubbings. Unpleasant voices stick out like a sore thumb in dubbings, even if the original actor's voice is hideous.


 
Which is why subtitles are so much better! When a movie is subtitled the viewer gets the orginal voice and everything that goes along with that PLUS a translation that is usually a lot closer to the original meaning precisely because the translators don´t have to worry about finding words that fit the shape of the character´s mouth when speaking. 
Of course, this is just my opinion and I completely respect your line of work and I do think it´s very valuable in Children´s movies and I believe you when you say that it is very hard work and not at all a job for someone ignorant, of course not!


----------



## Namakemono

Dubbings were imposed by Franco as an attempt to preserve Spanish culture. People are so accostumed to watch dubbed movies, that they don't want to watch subtitled films. We have our fetish actors (I adore Juan Antonio Bernal, the actor who voices Kiefer Sutherland). 
In books, the speech of characters is also changed in translations (they are more likely to speak better), so dubbings are not to be blamed exclusively. 
Using accents (for characters who are not supposed to have them or are only a dialect of the language of the movie) and broken language in dubbings is plain awkward, and sounds unnatural and artificial. However, if the characters speak perfect Spanish (with idiolects and differences, mind you), the audience will not once feel uncomfortable (in fact, they will not wonder who the voice actor is or where he's from). If they spoke broken Spanish, the audience would start thinking "Why is this adult from Madrid speaking like a drunk teenager?" I'm certain the director and the actors don't wish for their audience to think about that.



> translation that is usually a lot closer to the original meaning precisely because the translators don´t have to worry about finding words that fit the shape of the character´s mouth when speaking.


 
That's one of my most hated false myths. Subtitles are often SHORTER than spoken lines and include more plain words and less idiolects, and even less information.


----------



## rsweet

I guess it's all what you get used to. I have a friend in France who absolutely loves _Columbo_. When I told her that I couldn't imagine Peter Falk speaking French, she told me that she was so attached to the _voice_ of Columbo in the French version that she didn't know if she could bear to have it change. I guess it's all what you associate with the original.


----------



## Bettie

cyanista said:


> It is also true for Germany and Russia. Practically everything is being subtitled and people are used to it. A German friend of mine refused to watch a subtitled movie on ARTE (a cultural TV-channel) because he thought it'd be tiresome. And it is, without much practice. I find this a pity but I don't think the situation going to change anytime soon.


 

Really, once in Germany, around six years ago, I went to the movies expecting the movie to have subtitles, because it's the way it is in Mexico and no, it was an American movie in German.

I prefered movies with subtitles and even tv shows, and in Mexico almost all tv shows in cable tv have subtitles.


----------



## Vanest

Namakemono said:


> "translation that is usually a lot closer to the original meaning precisely because the translators don´t have to worry about finding words that fit the shape of the character´s mouth when speaking."
> 
> That's one of my most hated false myths. Subtitles are often SHORTER than spoken lines and include more plain words and less idiolects, and even less information.


 
Yeees, you might have a point there... I remember that when I watched 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon' with subtitles in Spanish I felt that I was missing out on so much becuase I had the impression that the actors were saying so much more than what appeared in the subtitles. BUT, I still would prefer that to a Spanish version because it just doesn´t seem 'natural' or 'realistic' to me. But, as has already been said, I guess it´s a matter of what you are used to.


----------



## natasha2000

Namakemono said:


> As a translator "en ciernes" who will probably work on the audiovisual field, I find your previous comment insulting. I find dubbings more interesting than subtitles, and *I don't think translators who do dubbings are worse or think they will not be caught easily if they're "shameful ignorants".* That's a prejudiced point of view, and I replied with sarcasm.


 
I think you misunderstood me, or you simply chose not to understand me and to get offended. I never said that all translators who translate for dubbed films are bad. This was not my idea at all. I am, too a translator of movies and I know how hard is to be limited in translation, and how good you have to be in order to do this job well. Bit you have to admit, that in our line of work as in all lines of work, there are also people who are not professional and if their translation is dubbed, their bad work is not noticed since the original cannot be heard, which is not the case when a movie is subtitled. Each one - dubbing or subtitles - are not an easy work, because both are limited by something - dubbing by the words that will match with the shape of the mouth when actor pronounces the words in original language, and subtitles by space, and both by time. As I have already said, I have seen subtitled translations that are shame for the profession. BTW, I really do not see why are you offended. If you do your work well, there is no reason to feel ofended by what I have said. Those bad translators are menace for you, too.



> Yes, but is there something wrong with that? Should the person who dubs Schwarzenegger have Austrian accent, poor diction, and little acting skills?


 
As a matter of fact, there is. Because this is Swartzeneger. 
And I think you're not well informed. I remember seeing "Snatch" in dubbed version, and it was excellently done. The actor that dubbed Brad Pitt, was excellent, because he spoke as a real Gipsy, very difficult to understand, with its typical ways of talk, not too much different from the real Brad in this movie (I saw original version, too). But the thing is, and what all pro-subtitles people here want to say, that no matter how good dubbing actor is, he can never be the original. Actors act with their voices, too, and acting is an art. And if art CAN be imitated, then it is not art anymore. This is my humble opinion.

I would like to add, that, considering that I saw with my own eyes the enormous work of so many people behind dubbing, all those actors, sound technicians, translators, lectors, directors etc... Days, even weeks of work, depending on what is done... I don't think that it is worth it. So many people involved, so much money and time spent, so much effort, and the result is just another immitation. People should see the actors in full, including their voices, even though they are not pleasant nor understandable.



> That's one of my most hated false myths. Subtitles are often SHORTER than spoken lines and include more plain words and less idiolects, and even less information.


Am I supposed to be offended now?


----------



## Namakemono

natasha2000 said:


> Bit you have to admit, that in our line of work as in all lines of work, there are also people who are not professional and if their translation is dubbed, their bad work is not noticed since the original cannot be heard, which is not the case when a movie is subtitled.


 
Quite the opposite. If the translation is bad, the dubbing will be worse. You don't know if a line sounds awkward until you read it out lout. Subtitles allow for repetitive structures, short sentences, etc. Dubbing requires creativity and knowledge of the audience's expectations. It mystifies me how you can think a bad translation work will not be noticed if it's a dubbing. When you read subtitles, you sometimes don't know if the translator is actually a native speaker or someone who spent a couple of years in Spain (if you don't believe, you should see some video game translations). When you're watching a dubbed movie, you immediately know if the translator knows what he's doing.




> BTW, I really do not see why are you offended. If you do your work well, there is no reason to feel ofended by what I have said.


 
Basically, you said dubbing is the field where hacks feel more comfortable. You underestimated the work of translators on the field.



> As a matter of fact, there is. Because this is Swartzeneger.


 
Expand on this. Why should we hear Terminator saying "Folferé" or "nedsedsito tu gggopa tuds gafads"?



> I remember seeing "Snatch" in dubbed version, and it was excellently done. The actor that dubbed Brad Pitt, was excellent, because he spoke as a real Gipsy


 
I watched the movie, and I recall that the voice actor only mumbled and had a light foreign accent. But in this case, his bad speech was necessary for the movie to make sense. In most movies, it would bother people to no end.



> I don't think that it is worth it. So many people involved, so much money and time spent, so much effort,


 
40.000.000 happy Spaniards think otherwise. After watching in OV some movies I had previously watched dubbed, I can say they're not missing out on much in most cases (there are exceptions like "The Shining").



> and the result is just another immitation.


 
Like book translations?



> Am I supposed to be offended now?


 
Offended by what? You offended me with your opinion on dubbings. I have stated facts here (subtitles do have less information and translators are encouraged to use a plain language), and I haven't said subtitlers can be hopeless hacks and get away with it.


----------



## natasha2000

Namakemono said:


> Quite the opposite. If the translation is bad, the dubbing will be worse. You don't know if a line sounds awkward until you read it out lout. Subtitles allow for repetitive structures, short sentences, etc. Dubbing requires creativity and knowledge of the audience's expectations. It mystifies me how you can think a bad translation work will not be noticed if it's a dubbing.


Well, let's retrocede a little bit into history and see how well Franco used dubbings in order to make lovers in borther and sister etc. I am telling you something that I was told by an dubbing actor here in Barcelona, who lived and worked during Franco's regime. I am not talking about bad translations meaning - it does not sound natural - but in misinterpeting the whole action or a dialogue etc, just as Franco did. If you for example have two people living in the same house under the same roof, and in the real movie they are lovers, Franco's regime made them brother and sister, and if in the real movie they werwe borther and sister living in incest, Franco's regime made them lovers. In the same way, works bad, uncovered translation. If a man comes to the door and asks for help, and translator translates something different, even though it sounds good and completely natural in a translation, it is still bad translation because it is invented, and not translated dialog.



> When you read subtitles, you sometimes don't know if the translator is actually a native speaker or someone who spent a couple of years in Spain (if you don't believe, you should see some video game translations). When you're watching a dubbed movie, you immediately know if the translator knows what he's doing


This doesn't have anything to do with a quality of translation. If someone "spent a couple of years in Spain" doesn't mean he is necessarily a bad translator. I spend "a couple of years in Spain" and I have never been to any English speaking country, yet I can affirm I speak and write better both Spanish and English than many of natives of these two languages. the question is in knowing to do the job, and this is something beyond the knowledge of the language. You have to be able to see the correct meaning of what is said and also be able to transmit it to another language in a right and natural way. You're talking about some people who are not proffesionals and who would mainly do literal translations. These kind of "translators" are menace for the whole profession, because they lower the level and prestige of a real professional work, no matter if it was dubbed or subtitled translation.



> Basically, you said dubbing is the field where hacks feel more comfortable. You underestimated the work of translators on the field.


This is what you wanted to understand. I heve never said such a thing, nor think like this. I think that you are the one who has a little problem with selfesteem. I really don't have the remedy for your frustrations.



> Expand on this. Why should we hear Terminator saying "Folferé" or "nedsedsito tu gggopa tuds gafads"?


 
No. We should hear the real one. 



> I watched the movie, and I recall that the voice actor only mumbled and had a light foreign accent. But in this case, his bad speech was necessary for the movie to make sense. In most movies, it would bother people to no end.


 
Well if it had a light foreign accent, then it shouldn't have had it. Because Pitt is supposed to be a Gypsy, but the local one. So, here in the end, dubbing did NOT reflect the reality of the movie.



> 40.000.000 happy Spaniards think otherwise. After watching in OV some movies I had previously watched dubbed, I can say they're not missing out on much in most cases (there are exceptions like "The Shining").


 
This is because 40 000 000 Spaniards got used to dubbed films a long time ago, and they simply cannot change the chip in a day or two. It is completely understandable, not only for Spain, but for all other countries that dub movies. Nevetheless, you say there are exceptions, like Shining, for example. I highly doubt you will ever find a single person accustomed to subtitles who will say there are exceptions when dubbing is better than subtitles.




> Like book translations?


Books don't have voice. I have already said, it is not only the matter of understanding or pleasantless of what you hear, it is also the other part, unpleasant, ununderstandable, that is a part of an actor's acting. I don't speak Japanese or Hungarian, but I still prefer seeing the original version to dubbed movie. Why? Because, as I already said, actors act with their voice, too, not only with words they pronounce. I like to hear stupid, and intelligible italian-macho-accented voice of Stalone as much as sophisticated Scottish accented Shean O'Connery's voice. I don't want only to understand what they say - I want to feel the emotion they transmitt with their voices. This is something that book does not have. Book is limited to words, and only words. Luckily, film art is not.



> Offended by what? You offended me with your opinion on dubbings. I have stated facts here (subtitles do have less information and translators are encouraged to use a plain language), and I haven't said subtitlers can be hopeless hacks and get away with it.


So you can spit on my work, and on the other hand, I cannot express my opinion because you'll be offended? Very nice, indeed. Besides, I was not the only one who said dubbing sucks.


----------



## cyanista

Thomas F. O'Gara said:


> Some of the best - and worst - dubbing work I've seen has been on movies dubbed in to Russian.  I remember seeing "The Lion in Winter" dubbed in to Russian, and it was admirable.  However, on a lot of material on TV the Russians use a strange dubbing system where you can hear the dialogue in the original language underneath the main sound track, which I find extremely distracting.



I like this strange system.  Seriously, I strongly prefer it to 'full dubbing'. Once you've adjusted your hearing you can take in both the actors' voices and the Russian translation. Watching English, German and French films as well as some Brazilian soaps on Russian TV channels I was able to figure out quite a few words and expressions in corresponding languages.  
And it's perfectly clear why they are doing this: it's very much cheaper and faster. They mostly get four people (two males, two females) to dub all actors in the movie because it doesn't matter that much when you're able to hear the original voices in the background.


----------



## invictaspirit

> 40.000.000 happy Spaniards think otherwise. After watching in OV some movies I had previously watched dubbed, I can say they're not missing out on much in most cases (there are exceptions like "The Shining").


 
Namakemono...I have now twice half-supposed an opinion of yours, or wondered if you have only half-expressed it and I would like to clear it up.

Are you saying that in most cases, with some exceptions such as 'The Shining', Spanish dubbing has improved foreign films? That is to say, you deem them lacking in some way that was corrected in Madrid?

Apologies in advance if I have misunderstood or read too much into your posts.


----------



## Namakemono

> If you for example have two people living in the same house under the same roof, and in the real movie they are lovers, Franco's regime made them brother and sister, and if in the real movie they werwe borther and sister living in incest, Franco's regime made them lovers. In the same way, works bad, uncovered translation. If a man comes to the door and asks for help, and translator translates something different, even though it sounds good and completely natural in a translation, it is still bad translation because it is invented, and not translated dialog.


I fail to see how that makes a translator ignorant. Also, manipulations change with the times. You too manipulate texts to suit their audience better.


> If someone "spent a couple of years in Spain" doesn't mean he is necessarily a bad translator. I spend "a couple of years in Spain" and I have never been to any English speaking country, yet I can affirm I speak and write better both Spanish and English than many of natives of these two languages.


You will probably be better at making subtitles for movies than dubbings. I don't mean that's bad and I don't mean to offend you. Take it as an example.


> I highly doubt you will ever find a single person accustomed to subtitles who will say there are exceptions when dubbing is better than subtitles.


Bad actors and secondaries sound better in dubbings. Also I'm talking about what Spaniards want. The English tone says nothing to most Spaniards. They are more easily moved when a Spaniard tells them something with Spanish tone. I know Finns find it laughable.


> So you can spit on my work


What? Where?


> Are you saying that in most cases, with some exceptions such as 'The Shining', Spanish dubbing has improved foreign films? That is to say, you deem them lacking in some way that was corrected in Madrid?


Yes, they lacked the voice of a Spaniard which would reach the Spanish audience better. But some actors' work simply can't be improved.


----------



## invictaspirit

Fair point. (Your last, replying to mine.)

Well, I'm going to amicably agree to disagree. I don't come from a culture that has a tradition of this, so all I can do is estimate how I would feel if I did. If I watch Almodovar, I want pure Madrid or pure Barcelona or whatever. British voice-actors, no matter how skilled, would inject a flavour of London into something that is supposed to be purely Spanish. As was mentioned earlier, a dubbed version of 'Snatch' is going to add a slice of Madrid to a film that is supposed to be an uninterrupted stream of underworld London.  If I watch 'Amelie' I don't want Soho getting in the way of Paris.  etc etc. To me, that is wrong and subtracts something.

I know a lot of madrileños who would agree with me (look at the profusion of V.O. cimenas in the last 15 years)...but I concede that most would agree with you. It is what we are used to that counts in the end.

Still...I can't get away from the view that a film is a work that is better experienced in an original a state as possible, without overlaying something supplementary, or adding the inevitable cultural filter of dubbing.

Having said all of this, I really admire the work of the dubbing industry. It must be fascinating for linguists, technicians and actors alike...and I respect that level of dedication in any field.


----------



## almostfreebird

natasha2000 said:


> This doesn't have anything to do with a quality of translation. If someone "spent a couple of years in Spain" doesn't mean he is necessarily a bad translator. I spend "a couple of years in Spain" and I have never been to any English speaking country, yet I can affirm I speak and write better both Spanish and English than many of natives of these two languages.


 
Those natives who you say speak and write worse than you would be offended or admire you.


----------



## Namakemono

Also, how many of those are translators? Even if your spelling and grammar is better than theirs, they determine what's idiomatic and what is not. You have to be *very *familiar with one culture before doing dubbings. In subtitles, as you said, the original culture has the upper hand.


----------



## natasha2000

OK. I suck as a translator since I translated for subtitles and not for dubbings. And dubbings I made were only documentaries and not real movies. 
You're the gratest and the best translator in th world.
I admit it and I quit this thread.
It was supposed to be a light hearted chat about dubbings vs. subtitles, but obviously, you take it too seriously. Just get off my back, please.

BTW: I have some 300-350 movies with my name on it. How many do you have?


----------



## Namakemono

natasha2000 said:


> You're the gratest and the best translator in th world.


Instead of backing up your points, you just use a cliché reply.


> It was supposed to be a light hearted chat about dubbings vs. subtitles, but obviously, you take it too seriously. Just get off my back, please.


Insults I said on this thread: 0
Insults you said: 1
I'm simply mystified as to how can you think ignorant translators are not noticed when they do dubbings, but they are when they do subtitles.


> BTW: I have some 300-350 movies with my name on it. How many do you have?


Zero, but what does that have to do with anything? Do I need to grow a mullet to say mullets are horrible?


----------



## invictaspirit

It is a pity that this thread turned into a bitching-fest.

I never knew movie translators (or wannabe movie translators) could get so hot under the collar.


----------



## badgrammar

There is certainly nothing to get too worked up about here - there are good and bad dubbings, that is for sure.  There are more or less talented translators who do them, and it isn't an easy job considering.  Likewise, subtitles often "bite"...  Still, I prefer them and rarely watch dubbed films or even tv series (I'd usually rather go without than watch series/movies dubbed in French).

One thing on this forum, which I think Natasha is conscious of, is that we try not to take offense too easily, and try not to "take the bait" when egged on.  Sometimes it's quite difficult .

Let's get back to the question at hand, what do you prefer, subtitles or dubbing and what is the norm in your country?


----------



## Cereth

Original language and Subtitles please!

Specially If the movie is japanese animation, Japanese really put an extra effort by selecting a great voice cast.

The only dubbed movie I liked was Shrek because Eddie Murphy is not as funny as the mexican actor who voiced "donkey"


----------



## Bettie

Cereth said:


> Original language and Subtitles please!
> 
> Specially If the movie is japanese animation, Japanese really put an extra effort by selecting a great voice cast.
> 
> The only dubbed movie I liked was Shrek because Eddie Murphy is not as funny as the mexican actor who voiced "donkey"


 
Animated movies are usually very good in Spanish, at least in Mexico.


----------



## badgrammar

Recently I watched "Kung Fu Hustle" in V.O. one night, then with the kids in the English dubbed version another night.  I thought it was exceptionally well-made, one of the best I've seen.    It really seemed to capture the spirit of the original, the lip movements were well-synchronized, and the cultural references and jokes were funny (now that's hard to do in a dub translation! Bravo!).


----------



## natasha2000

badgrammar said:


> One thing on this forum, which I think Natasha is conscious of, is that we try not to take offense too easily, and try not to "take the bait" when egged on. Sometimes it's quite difficult .


 
Thank you, Badgrammar, for understanding me. As a matter of fact, it is.

I would like to add, while I really prefer movies in VO, I really enjoy Spanish dubbing of Disney's animated movies and cartoons. It is really done excellently. I saw three or four times "Searching for Nemo" only because of that forgetful fish Dolie, dubbed by marvelous Anabel Alonso.
I also got so used to Spanish version of Simpsons that now it would seem to me odd if I had to see them in OV. I guess it is just a matter of what you are accustomed of. While I do like Spanish dubbing of Simpsons, I had the chance to hear Mexican dubbing of the same series, and it just didn't sound... good. But as I said, it's the question of habits. I also saw some episodes from the first serial of Simpsons, and the very same drawing was different than the one I am used to watch, and it really looked strange...

EDIT: I adore when Bart says: Multiplícate por cero! It's just that I cannot imagine this said in another, funnier way. And it is NOT the original! Wierd!


----------



## badgrammar

Natasha, you are right that some films are vvery wel done, Nemo in french is great, as are many of the D@sney productions!  There are some great dubbed versions out there, and I do recognize that. 

Maybe it depends on the film:  If it is a "film" that we are meant to sit back and take in, not running back and forth to the kitchen or while jungling other things, then it is a pleasure to sit back and take it in just the way it was made.  So I would not see a film I've been dying to see in a dubbed version.  But in languages I do not know, and mixed in with lives activities, I cna occasionally see the sense in following a dubbed version.

No problem Natasha, I've been known to go off at the handle too


----------



## Cereth

mm It is funny because I really dislike Dubs from Spain, they never make laugh....Simpsons on Spain-spanish no way!! I prefer dubs from Mexico or at least from Chile


----------



## natasha2000

Well, Badgramar, I understand your point, but this is not my case. I wil ALWAYS prefer to watch any real movie (meaning: with real actors) in VO. Because, as I said, I understand that actors act with their voices too, and the voice is inseparable part of them. Adding other voice to some real actor is as if you took him away his arm or leg and put a different one. It doesn't matter if it is a language I do not speak - Japanese, Danish, etc... Language can also be used as an artistic tool. Typical example is Jim Jarmush's "One night on Earth" where you have five stories in five different cities in the world and each one is shot in the original language: two first ones in English, since they happen in LA and NY, the third one in French because it is situated in Paris, the third one in Italian (Rome), and the fifth one in Finnish, because the story is situated in Helsinki. Can you imagine Bennigni speaking in French or Spanish, or even in German? I cannot.

On the other hand, there are cartoons and animated movies. the characters are drawings. They are not real actors, real human beings. There you can have more freedom in tracing their characters. And this is where dubbing can shine in its full splendor. I really, really enjoy any Disney movie dubbed in Spanish, because it is excellently done. I also know many cartoons with Bugs Bunny, Silvester and Tweetie, Duffy duck, and many others that I simply cannot imagine in any other language except Serbian. They are dubbed so well, and besides, I am so accustomed to these specific voices, that any other version, even the original one, or another Serbian, equally good, but with other voices, looks fake in comparison with this one that I know.

I think this is so subjective thing, and I can understand people in Spain and their preference for dubbed versions - once you get used to something, it is very hard to get rid of the habit. And even if you can, the question is: Do you really want it?


----------



## natasha2000

Cereth said:


> mm It is funny because I really dislike Dubs from Spain, they never make laugh....Simpsons on Spain-spanish no way!! I prefer dubs from Mexico or at least from Chile


 
jejeje.. as I already said... Question of preferences and habits...

I just remembered something...

I remember we had in ex Yugoslavia some cartoons traditionally dubbed by Croats. There were somo comics, too, like Alan Ford, which was translated by Croats. I remember I was crying of laugh when I read the comics or watched the cartoons, they were so well done.
When my country split, we continued to have comics of Alan Ford, but now translated in Serbian dialect. I stopped to read them. They weren't funny at all, even though the translation was good, too. But it's just that I learned and all my life read Alan Ford in Croatian, and that is how it should stay, at least for me.

I think the same thing happens with, for example, The Simpsons dubbed in Spain or America. It is not the question who's better. I am sure both dubbings are excellent. but, you just get used to one way, and then everything different sounds just... odd.


----------



## Daddyo

I remember watching all my beloved cartoons in Spanish, as a child. I didn't have the chance to watch them in their original glory until I was a grown-up already. So when I finally saw the original version, I was disappointed.
It was just not right! It wasn't funny, anymore!
Just in case you're wondering of my age range, I'm talking about Looney Tunes and Hannah-Barbera's extravaganzas, not about SpongeBob Squarepants.


----------



## ampurdan

natasha2000 said:


> The "star" which gets the prize was one movie whose translation was entirely "invented", meaning, nothing was translated, but the completely new dialogs were invented ...


 
That's when translation abandons its slavish stage and becomes pure art!    I'm dying to play in it.


Generally, I prefer OSV to dubbed because once you get used to OSV, you realize that dubbing tends to dull it all. I've also noticed it when seeing French, Italian and German dubbed versions (not because of the words, which I did not understand completely, but because of the clear studio diction). I also like OSV because it offers the chance to get used to hear foreign languages and, if you're studying them, to learn them better. That's why I found it inconvinient that in Spain there are so few cinema theaters offering OSV.

On the other hand, it's true that dubbed versions, specially when you haven't mastered the film's original language, avoid the loss of information, specially in humour films where there are quick language puns that have been successfully translated (also in cartoons, of course).


----------



## natasha2000

ampurdan said:


> On the other hand, it's true that dubbed versions, specially when you haven't mastered the film's original language, avoid the loss of information, specially in humour films where there are quick language puns that have been successfully translated (also in cartoons, of course).


 
I respectfully disagree here. Humor can be translated in written, too. I remember great translations of "Only fools and horses" or "Alo Alo" we had in Serbia. And hearing the original sound in "Alo alo" only made me laugh more. I heard that you also had "Alo alo" in Spain, and I also heard that Catalan dubbing was better than Spanish one, but I simply cannot imagine "Alo alo" dubbed. For me, removing the original sound is a blasphemy... 

I was wondering why you, Spaniards say here that you lose info with subtitles. I think this might be due to articles and prepositions. In Spanish, there are articles and prepositions which only ocuppy space, and space is the most valuable thing when doing subtitles. On the other hand, Serbian doesn't have articles, and the Spanish construction preposition + noun or vice versa is frequently resolved in Serbian by cases. So, each article occupies 4 spaces, and if in one sentence there are 3 articles, it is 12 lost spaces already, and one subtitle can have between 30-35 spaces, not more. 

Spanish: Voy con el autobús. 19 spaces
Serbian: Idem autobusom. 15 spaces.

So, maybe in Spanish, or any other language that has articles or doesn't have cases, subtitles really have influence on the info that is given to spectators...


----------



## Namakemono

Cereth said:


> mm It is funny because I really dislike Dubs from Spain, they never make laugh....Simpsons on Spain-spanish no way!! I prefer dubs from Mexico or at least from Chile


You have to keep in mind that even if we speak the same language, we have a different sense of humour. To me, Mexican dubbings sound exaggerated, and that takes all the fun of the Simpsons. The Spanish VA have never failed to make me laugh in many years.
Although, I agree with what you said about Japanese dubbings. Their actors always give their best, no matter how bad the script is.


----------



## ireney

Namakemono said:


> In books, the speech of characters is also changed in translations (they are more likely to speak better), so dubbings are not to be blamed exclusively.



Only if the translator translates in a language where there are no different speech patterns or he/she is not a really good translator 

Nemo by the way was one of the few cartoon movies I enjoyed seeing in both Greek and English although the surfing turtles' speech pattern lacked a certain something. 

That does not go about series I watched as a kid. It's a different thing altogether that I cannot think of Smurfs, or Strumfs as we call them in anything other than Greek, even though I now know we've taken great liberties in translating some names. Good or bad translation, dubbing vs subtitles has nothing to do with childhood memories really.

By the way, I am sure all those actors (note: not all actors) who have gone through exruciating lessons to learn how to speak "properly", those who have slaved over mastering a different accent, those actors who had to re-do a scene because the director wasn't happy about the exact way they said something although their body language was perfect would not be happy to hear that their pains were all for nothing.

An actor would have to concentrate either on body language or "oration" ?


----------



## Namakemono

ireney said:


> Only if the translator translates in a language where there are no different speech patterns or he/she is not a really good translator


 
Spanish is different. In English translations and dubbings, you can normally find dumb characters who speak redneck slang and bad guys with a sexy southern British accent. In Spanish translations and dubbings, you can't just have characters speak with a lisp, Andalusian accent, etc. (unless it's Kung Fu Hustle  ). So you have to find other ways of creating an idiolect. 
In Japanese, there are so many resources for translating idiolects that when you read a line you can almost immediately know which character said it.


----------



## ampurdan

Natasha, I think the space is the lesser problem in this case (after all, you can always rephrase it to "voy en autobús"  ), the bigger one is speed: What makes a situation funny is a combination of what's said, how it is said, the background and faces. 

If you have to focus your attention on the text, you'll lose time to pay attention to other things. This has no real importance in slow, thoughtful and also mainly action movies, but it arises as a problem any time there is a great deal of dialog, plus puns and gestures on stage. If you are familiar with the language and dialect spoken in the movie and you don’t need to read to catch on to the whole situation, you’ll enjoy it like hell, but the avarage spectator only gets a sense of frustration. 

I felt that way precisely the first time that I saw “Snatch, Pigs & diamonds”, because of the thick accent (not exclusively Brad Pitt’s imposted Gipsy one), although by that time I was already used to see movies in OSV.

Add to that the Spaniards’ acquired aversion syndrome to OSVs and you’ll understand why is so difficult to turn the tables for commercial movie firms, even though OSVs would be more profitable for them. 
 
Little by little, though, things seem to change… People seem to get bored of great commercial movies. In fact, the sector is going through a little crisis. Many begin to turn to author and alternative films, the breeding ground of OSV...


----------



## natasha2000

ampurdan said:


> Natasha, I think the space is the lesser problem in this case (after all, you can always rephrase it to "voy en autobús"  ), the bigger one is speed: What makes a situation funny is a combination of what's said, how it is said, the background and faces.
> 
> If you have to focus your attention on the text, you'll lose time to pay attention to other things. This has no real importance in slow, thoughtful and also mainly action movies, but it arises as a problem any time there is a great deal of dialog, plus puns and gestures on stage. If you are familiar with the language and dialect spoken in the movie and you don’t need to read to catch on to the whole situation, you’ll enjoy it like hell, but the avarage spectator only gets a sense of frustration.


 
It is understandable this what you say, considering that you as a Spaniard, experienced both ways. But I have never thought about this, because I learnt from my childhood to read subtitles. I guess we shouldn't try to persuade each other that "my way is better", because this is something very personal, and depends on each person...

I, personally, find it very annoying to see lips moving in one way and hearing something different...

De gustibus....


----------



## badgrammar

natasha2000 said:


> It is understandable this what you say, considering that you as a Spaniard, experienced both ways. But I have never thought about this, because I learnt from my childhood to read subtitles. I guess we shouldn't try to persuade each other that "my way is better", because this is something very personal, and depends on each person...
> 
> I, personally, find it very annoying to see lips moving in one way and hearing something different...
> 
> De gustibus....



I have to say, I have friends and family who prefer dubbed movies and tv, and I certainly don't hold it against them...


----------



## ampurdan

natasha2000 said:


> De gustibus....


 
...non est disputandum, right, but I still think, like most of you, that, as a concept, OSV is the ideal way to see a movie whose language one hasn't mastered... Then comes the real world.


----------



## sniffrat

I recently watched an interview with 2 famous Argentinian footballers who had just signed for an English team and their voices were dubbed into English. How annoying! As a student of Spanish I wanted to hear an authentic Argentinian accent in all its glory, but instead I was given a dull, emotion-less British accent "voice-over". A person's FACE is an important aspect of his/her character, so why not his/her VOICE?.....


----------



## almostfreebird

When Omar (Philppe) Troussier coached Japanese National team, he used a French translator, Florent Dabadie who is a proffessional linguist. Troussie wanted him to convey everything what he said to players. He spoke Japanese amazingly well as if he was a Japanese, he became popular because of not only his language skill but his way of translating(interpreting) with a lot of gesture and emotion excitedly as if he was the coach. That kind of annoyed me a little.
I wonder whether that relates to original topic.


----------



## jess oh seven

when i lived in Spain i loathed the fact that all the foreign tv and films were dubbed - whether they were originally English-speaking or not. i would only go see foreign films in the cinema for the comedy value of dubbing!! you lose so much of the film through dubbing, it's incredible. 

i recently stayed a while in Portugal and everything is subtitled - it's fantastic!

i'm thinking of writing my dissertation on this topic in relation to Spain... i may come and ask for some of your opinions and such so stay tuned...


----------



## Namakemono

jess oh seven said:


> when i lived in Spain i loathed the fact that all the foreign tv and films were dubbed - whether they were originally English-speaking or not. i would only go see foreign films in the cinema for the comedy value of dubbing!! you lose so much of the film through dubbing, it's incredible.


As I tried to say earlier, ask Spaniards. You'll see that unless they're studying English they're not missing out on much. And if they do, they'd rather listen to someone speaking like them that someone with a different intonation. This way, they enjoy movies more.


----------



## jess oh seven

Namakemono said:


> As I tried to say earlier, ask Spaniards. You'll see that unless they're studying English they're not missing out on much. And if they do, they'd rather listen to someone speaking like them that someone with a different intonation. This way, they enjoy movies more.


it's hard to fathom though.
i don't know. i love watching films in other languages... i like seeing how people of other nationalities express themselves and all the little idiosyncracies in their language... i suppose not everyone's interested in that though.


----------



## fenixpollo

Namakemono said:


> As I tried to say earlier, ask Spaniards. You'll see that unless they're studying English they're not missing out on much. And if they do, they'd rather listen to someone speaking like them that someone with a different intonation. This way, they enjoy movies more.


 This is true of the majority of Mexicans and of Americans, in my opinion.


----------



## Namakemono

It's compatible. I enjoy subtitles as much as I enjoy dubbings. I like subtitles for the same reason you said, but dubbings have something that makes them more interesting. You can see the work of someone who asks themselves: what would these characters say if they were Spaniards? It's the form of translation in which the translator and the audience are more connected.


----------



## papagainho

Yo prefiero dobladas, porque así no tengo que concentrarme en leer los subtítulos y puedo disfrutar plenamente de la película. Por otra parte cuando entiendes (aunque sea poco) la lengua de origen, con los subtítulos disfrutas más, pero si no comprendes nada el idioma, no sé cuales son los matices que ganas con los subtítulos... Cuando veo dibujos japoneses en Portugal doblados, tengo que leer todo el tiempo, con lo cual me pierdo la mitad de las imagenes (eso también es importante, los matices que ganas en el lenguaje, los pierdes en la pantalla, porque se reduce el espacio) y no veo ningún matiz especial que me motive... Sin embargo cuando son doblados en español, llego a creerme que fueron dibujados en España, por personas que comprenden la cultura... No sé si me explico.


----------



## pickypuck

I prefer dubbing too... in Spain, because in France I preferred OSV but just because I couldn't get all the words of the characters  About comedy series, well... when they are dubbed they are adapted to the local humour. Here, a very popular series in the 90's was Fresh Prince (El príncipe de Bel Air). I really doubt that now a teenager understands all the jokes they said there... questions about "who is Roldán?" would certainly arise.

¡Olé!


----------



## natasha2000

I really do not understand why you think that translation in subtitles would be less adapted than dubbed? The text is more or less the same - only with subtitles you have to read, and with dubbing you listen the same translation in your own language. Comedy and jokes are adapted to local humor, too. If a character is speaking using the slang, I will also use the slang in Serbian to translate it. I am really puzzled with your commentaries here. I don't know what kind of translation have subtitles in Spain, but I surely know that in Serbia, translation is usually excellently done. The only difference is that it is put in subtitles.

The only reason I can understand why someone would prefer dubbed version to original version is this one:


> Yo prefiero dobladas, porque así no tengo que concentrarme en leer los subtítulos y puedo disfrutar plenamente de la película.


 
This is the only logical and justified reason to my understanding. Nothing more.


----------



## heidita

natasha2000 said:


> I really do not understand why you think that translation in subtitles would be less adapted than dubbed? The text is more or less the same - only with subtitles you have to read, and with dubbing you listen the same translation in your own language. Comedy and jokes are adapted to local humor, too. If a character is speaking using the slang, I will also use the slang in Serbian to translate it. I am really puzzled with your commentaries here. I don't know what kind of translation have subtitles in Spain, but I surely know that in Serbia, translation is usually excellently done. The only difference is that it is put in subtitles.
> 
> 
> 
> This is the only logical and justified reason to my understanding. Nothing more.


 
As almost always I agree with Natasha completely. 
If a dubbing is well done there is nothing to hold against it. I prefer to watch films in their original version, as long as I understand it. But , of course, I am privileged to understand several languages. So it is easy. I think with subtitles a great part of the movie gets lost while you are reading.


----------



## Namakemono

It's probably Spain's problem. We are taught to use few slang and cuss words in order to make the texts more comprehensible.


----------



## natasha2000

heidita said:


> I think with subtitles a great part of the movie gets lost while you are reading.


 
Not if you are used to do it since your earliest childhood.


----------



## BlueWolf

natasha2000 said:


> Not if you are used to do it since your earliest childhood.



Yeah, but with dubbing you don't need to be used to!


----------



## natasha2000

BlueWolf said:


> Yeah, but with dubbing you don't need to be used to!


 
What is your point?
This is is the matter of personal preferences, and not what is better. I could now say "yes, but you loose the original voice of actors, blah, blah..." And we can go around and around in this neverending circulus viciosus, and you will never persuade me that dubbing is better, nor I can persuade you that subtitles are better...


----------



## karuna

natasha2000 said:


> Not if you are used to do it since your earliest childhood.



Almost all movies I watched in my childhood were subtitled and it was ok then but now I often cannot catch up with the speed these subtitles are appearing and disappearing on the screen. Am I becoming too old for movies already? 

Subtitles are great if you want to learn foreign language but reading them versus dubbing is the same as reading song lyrics versus hearing the song performed. Spoken intonation gives a lot more information like emotions than just written text. For example, Japanese actor says something like *ā *with specific intonation and the subtitle says *No way. *To me it seems the equivalent to the Latvian word _nehe_ but nobody would put such word in writing because the meaning in only apparent when you pronounce it with specific intonation. I guess every language has similar cases when it comes to written language.

Dubbing is hard to do well because you have to sync lip movement therefore I prefer good subtitles instead of bad dubbing. Also subtitling enables us to see foreign movies sooner because it involves less work than dubbing.


----------



## natasha2000

karuna said:


> Almost all movies I watched in my childhood were subtitled and it was ok then but now I often cannot catch up with the speed these subtitles are appearing and disappearing on the screen. Am I becoming too old for movies already?


No, it's just that translator did not do his job well. I already explained how translation in subtitles should be done, and what are advantages and disadvantages of it.



> Subtitles are great if you want to learn foreign language but reading them versus dubbing is the same as reading song lyrics versus hearing the song performed.


Dear Karuna, as  I already said, it is something very personal and this might be like this for you, but for me, certainly it is not. For me, it is instead of listening the original song, you have to listen adaptations. It's like Fragile by Sting and Fragile by that black rapper. It has nothing to do with the original. This is how I see it, I certainly do not expect from you to see it in the same way. So, please, when you say something like this, you should say also: "For me..." or "From my point of view" or "As far as I am concerned..."



> Spoken intonation gives a lot more information like emotions than just written text. For example, Japanese actor says something like *ā *with specific intonation and the subtitle says *No way. *To me it seems the equivalent to the Latvian word _nehe_ but nobody would put such word in writing because the meaning in only apparent when you pronounce it with specific intonation. I guess every language has similar cases when it comes to written language.


I prefer to listen Japanese original even though I do not understand anything, and see "No way" written.



> Dubbing is hard to do well because you have to sync lip movement therefore I prefer good subtitles instead of bad dubbing. Also subtitling enables us to see foreign movies sooner because it involves less work than dubbing.


 
I agree with you on this one.


----------



## BlueWolf

natasha2000 said:


> What is your point?
> This is is the matter of personal preferences, and not what is better. I could now say "yes, but you loose the original voice of actors, blah, blah..." And we can go around and around in this neverending circulus viciosus, and you will never persuade me that dubbing is better, nor I can persuade you that subtitles are better...



I can say only one thing from my personal experience. A relative of mine is dyslexic, an other one is half blind. None of them could follow any film if in Italy films weren't dubbed. Should I desire to deprive them of this possibily only so that could I hear "the original actors' voice"?


----------



## natasha2000

BlueWolf said:


> I can say only one thing from my personal experience. A relative of mine is dyslexic, an other one is half blind. None of them could follow any film if in Italy films weren't dubbed. Should I desire to deprive them of this possibily only so that could I hear "the original actors' voice"?


 
Of course that for your cousins dubbings are excellent solution. I am sorry to hear that, but we are here talking about people who don't suffer from any impairment. And I surely do not expect, nor even have the right to tell you what you should do or not. As I already said, it is a matter of personal prefference. You like hot chicken, I like cold chicken. You like dubbings, I like subtitles. And that's it. nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## BlueWolf

natasha2000 said:


> Of course that for your cousins dubbings are excellent solution. I am sorry to hear that, but we are here talking about people who don't suffer from any impairment. And I surely do not expect, nor even have the right to tell you what you should do or not. As I already said, it is a matter of personal prefference. You like hot chicken, I like cold chicken. You like dubbings, I like subtitles. And that's it. nothing more, nothing less.



Of course I respect your preferences, my only objection was that I don't find fair to use subtitles in national television, because it excludes portions of people. Of course I don't ignore that there are deaves too, but here films are sometimes subtitled in a page of MediaVideo. If this system was more diffused, it would make everyone happy.


----------



## natasha2000

BlueWolf said:


> Of course I respect your preferences, my only objection was that I don't find fair to use subtitles in national television, because it excludes portions of people. Of course I don't ignore that there are deaves too, but here films are sometimes subtitled in a page of MediaVideo. If this system was more diffused, it would make everyone happy.


 
Well, BlueWolf, this is a whole new subject for a whole new discussion. It is sad, but I have to admit that very often we forget about people who have some kind of impairment and are not able to enjoy the seventh art as we do...


----------



## invictaspirit

Which would people prefer: the Sistine Chapel or my excellent and entertaining description of the Sistine Chapel?  Or a really good copy of the Sistine Chapel?

I think it's the same with films.  A dubbed movie is not the original movie.


----------



## Outsider

Wow, this thread has grown! Although I said earlier that I prefer subtitles to dubbing, I'm here to balance that contribution. In favour of dubbing, it has the advantage of allowing people to keep in touch with their language. Years ago, when there was very little Portuguese fiction on TV, and almost all you saw was foreign, I think we got to a point where people felt awkward speaking their own language. At least with dubbing that doesn't happen.


----------



## karuna

natasha2000 said:


> Dear Karuna, as  I already said, it is something very personal and this might be like this for you, but for me, certainly it is not. For me, it is instead of listening the original song, you have to listen adaptations. It's like Fragile by Sting and Fragile by that black rapper. It has nothing to do with the original. This is how I see it, I certainly do not expect from you to see it in the same way. So, please, when you say something like this, you should say also: "For me..." or "From my point of view" or "As far as I am concerned..."


 
Dear Natasha, forgive me, if I said something wrong. I didn't mean to say something against you personally. I am not a very cultured person, unfortunately, but I will try to take your advice how to start the sentence whenever possible.

Naturally everybody has his/her own tastes and preferences. If I were entrusted with a task to release a foreign movie in my country then I would be faced with this question: to dub it or subtitle it. Even considering the audience, type of the movie, cultural differences etc., I don't expect there to be one final answer. However, I enjoyed this discussion with you and others.


----------



## Namakemono

invictaspirit said:


> Which would people prefer: the Sistine Chapel or my excellent and entertaining description of the Sistine Chapel? Or a really good copy of the Sistine Chapel?
> 
> I think it's the same with films. A dubbed movie is not the original movie.


 
Then a translated book is even _less_ original, since it's just letters and there are no actors or music involved. This proves that you don't lose so much when you watch dubbings. I'd say that sometimes, dubbing is better because you feel what the original audience feels. With subtitles you know the what, but you don't know the how (unless you speak the language). The intonation of Japanese male actors in love scenes, for example, puts many Spanish viewers off.


----------



## natasha2000

karuna said:


> Dear Natasha, forgive me, if I said something wrong. I didn't mean to say something against you personally. I am not a very cultured person, unfortunately, but I will try to take your advice how to start the sentence whenever possible.


No, Karuna, no, you really didn't tell anything against me, if I sounded patronizing it wasn't my intention... Surely you did not say anything wrong. Its just this issue that is so personal, and we should go very carefully when saying something. I, myself realized it along with this thread.


----------



## invictaspirit

Namakemono

Someone told me once that Japanese women squeak like dolphins when having orgasms in Japanese films. I suppose that might be somewhat off-putting for the uninitiated.  

I agree with your translated novel analogy. But then every translated novel I read gets me thinking about the original and if I am able to, I read the original too. While _Don Quixote _is a breath-takingly excellent work of art in English, it still isn't totally the work of art Cervantes produced, simply an excellent approximation of it.


----------



## papagainho

Well, I am spanish and i can tell you that i would need a dictionary to understand what Cervantes wrote.

Anyway, that is not the point, I know


----------



## almostfreebird

I'm not a great reader at all, but thanks to reduced-size edition(Japanese) for children I could read a lot of world classic novels like The count of Monte Cristo, Heidi, Crime and punishment, Tom sawyer, The moon and Six pence, etc. when I was a child. If it had not been for those abbreviated versions, I would have lost the chance to get to know great classics. Like somebody said, they're not the original but still excellent in its own way if it's done well and the same thing can be said of movies I think.


----------



## heidita

almostfreebird said:


> I'm not a great reader at all, but thanks to reduced-size edition(Japanese) for children I could read a lot of world classic novels like The count of Monte Cristo, *Heidi,* Crime and punishment, Tom sawyer,


 

Oh, that's me! I'm glad you know the story of my life now!


----------



## ireney

Books and their translation has nothing to do with dubbing or subtitles of movies.

And let's not go into what people who have one or the other kind of impairment would prefer because, while dubbing works better for dyslexic or partly blind people, subtitles work better for people with hearing impairement.


----------



## BlueWolf

ireney said:


> And let's not go into what people who have one or the other kind of impairment would prefer because, while dubbing works better for dyslexic or partly blind people, subtitles work better for people with hearing impairement.



Except for the fact that it's your personal opinion, however can't a person with impairment express opinions, because (s)he's not "normal"? The topic wasn't "Say what you prefer between dubbing and subtitles, unless you have some impairment". I said who would prefer dubbing and why. That's all. It doesn't take out anything from you.


----------



## almostfreebird

Heidi is popular among kids because, not long ago, there were a long TV series of Heidi(animation). The feeling or nuance you get from the animation must be different than you get from the original, but kids were impressed and enjoying the Anime, eventually finding who Heidi is.
I didn't realize Heidita is from Heidi.


----------



## lampiao

I prefer the original version with subtitles. As it's been said before, it looks kind of strange when the actor's lips don't match the words. 
One other reason for prefering subtitles is double meaning words/sentences. 
For eg., in the film Spaceballs, when they were meaning to jam the big ship's radar, and then they threw a huge pot of real jam... How could that be dubbed?
These kind of double meaning humour is usually completely lost when dubbing. Subtitles don't put both meanings either, but at least if a person can understand the original language, then he/she will get the joke.


----------



## Namakemono

lampiao said:


> These kind of double meaning humour is usually completely lost when dubbing.


 
That's why I say translators who do dubbings have to be sharp. Remember the phallic space ship from Austin Powers II & III? The joke was so well adapted that I thought the movie was Spanish. Also, the translation and dubbing of the Dutch guy in "Gold Member" is pure comedy gold.


----------



## jess oh seven

pickypuck said:


> I prefer dubbing too... in Spain, because in France I preferred OSV but just because I couldn't get all the words of the characters  About comedy series, well... when they are dubbed they are adapted to the local humour. Here, a very popular series in the 90's was Fresh Prince (El príncipe de Bel Air). I really doubt that now a teenager understands all the jokes they said there... questions about "who is Roldán?" would certainly arise.
> 
> ¡Olé!


but even with subtitles they still change the jokes so that they fit with the culture that they're aimed at. i've watched countless subtitled foreign films and laughed/cried/screamed when i was 'meant' to! jokes and humour may not always translate word for word, but in almost every case there is an equivalent and it most certainly can be put into text. when i was living in Spain i made a choice to try and only see Spanish-language films in the cinema. while i was there, the film "Un long dimanche de fiançailles" was out, and since I'd liked Amelie so much i really wanted to see it.... but i REFUSED to watch it dubbed! the quality would've been horrendous! (can you imagine watching a dubbed version of Amelie? how much of its "magic" must be lost??!) i'd have been much happier watching the original version with Spanish subtitles. i did see a couple of English-language films that had been dubbed into Spanish and had a great time laughing my ass off at the sheer cheesiness and ridiculousness of the dubbing.

the "actors" who perform the dubbing are awful also! it sounds so fakey and over the top! it really takes SO much away from a film or even a tv programme.

i think it's a question of laziness, to be honest. people complain about how annoying it is to have to read subtitles, but if you have a high level of competence in your language (or whatever language the subtitles are in), you shouldn't have to read them word for word, deliberating over them. you don't miss any of the visual aspects of the film either. it's not a hard thing to do.

they even have to dub the sound effects etc, and it sounds horrendously phony.

imagine making a film, or starring in a film, and having put in a lot of time, work, and effort to achieve something that you're happy with and that puts across your desired effect... then some outside force strips away a huge portion of your work and replaces it with something of a truly awful standard (ie. dubbing).

personally i think dubbing should only be limited to children's films and television, and for those who are deaf or hard of hearing... i cannot begin to express how much i absolutely LOATHE it.


----------



## ireney

BlueWolf said:


> Except for the fact that it's your personal opinion, however can't a person with impairment express opinions, because (s)he's not "normal"? The topic wasn't "Say what you prefer between dubbing and subtitles, unless you have some impairment". I said who would prefer dubbing and why. That's all. It doesn't take out anything from you.



bluewolf did you misunderstand on purpose what I said? It's not my personal opinion that people with hearing impendiment would "prefer" subtitles over dubbing since they have a problem with hearing.

I would never ever use this as an argument though. Apart from anything else the use of the  meaning of preferement of one over the other pre-supposes that there is an actual choice. If you believe that saying that a person with either hearing or seein ipediment really has a choice if he or she wants to actually watch a movie then you have to explain that to me.
In addition to that, saying that "I prefer subtitles because I know a deaf person" is actually using my acquaintance's problem to back something that I prefer.

It's almost the same as saying "I prefer books (there! I spoke about books myself) translated from Chinese to English because I don't speak Chinese". It's not a matter of preference. It's just that I don't have any choice.

I prefer subtitles for reasons I have already mention. Subtitles happen to be what that deaf person I know is happy with since she wouldn't be able to watch a dubbed movie. I don't prefer them for that reason. I am not callous enough to forget about the opposite (people who need dubbing).

Is that clear now?


----------



## natasha2000

jess oh seven said:


> but even with subtitles they still change the jokes so that they fit with the culture that they're aimed at. i've watched countless subtitled foreign films and laughed/cried/screamed when i was 'meant' to! jokes and humour may not always translate word for word, but in almost every case there is an equivalent and it most certainly can be put into text. when i was living in Spain i made a choice to try and only see Spanish-language films in the cinema. while i was there, the film "Un long dimanche de fiançailles" was out, and since I'd liked Amelie so much i really wanted to see it.... but i REFUSED to watch it dubbed! the quality would've been horrendous! (can you imagine watching a dubbed version of Amelie? how much of its "magic" must be lost??!) i'd have been much happier watching the original version with Spanish subtitles. i did see a couple of English-language films that had been dubbed into Spanish and had a great time laughing my ass off at the sheer cheesiness and ridiculousness of the dubbing.
> 
> the "actors" who perform the dubbing are awful also! it sounds so fakey and over the top! it really takes SO much away from a film or even a tv programme.
> 
> i think it's a question of laziness, to be honest. people complain about how annoying it is to have to read subtitles, but if you have a high level of competence in your language (or whatever language the subtitles are in), you shouldn't have to read them word for word, deliberating over them. you don't miss any of the visual aspects of the film either. it's not a hard thing to do.
> 
> they even have to dub the sound effects etc, and it sounds horrendously phony.
> 
> imagine making a film, or starring in a film, and having put in a lot of time, work, and effort to achieve something that you're happy with and that puts across your desired effect... then some outside force strips away a huge portion of your work and replaces it with something of a truly awful standard (ie. dubbing).
> 
> personally i think dubbing should only be limited to children's films and television, and for those who are deaf or hard of hearing... i cannot begin to express how much i absolutely LOATHE it.


 
I support you not a 100% but 1000%!!!! I sign every word you put in this post. 

I would like to add that I hate dubbing of children because they are rarely done by children but by women who change their voices and every time I see dubbed movie in Spanish I HATE children's characters only because of their so fake and so artificial voices.. And when they start to cry... Or women screaming or crying... Gosh, that is too much. It makes me nervous or it makes me laugh instead of being sorry for the character they play.

I, too would limit dubbings only to cartoons. Not even children's movies with real actors.


----------



## jess oh seven

^ 
i'm glad to have found another like-minded soul who feels as strongly about this issue as i do! 

and yeeeess!!! i'd forgotten about the children's voices! i just cannot tolerate them! it makes a mockery of the work that was actually put into producing the programme/film!


----------



## Namakemono

jess oh seven said:


> the "actors" who perform the dubbing are awful also! it sounds so fakey and over the top! it really takes SO much away from a film or even a tv programme.


 
Mexicans say the contrary about Spanish voice actors. Also keep in mind that people in Spain are not as used to hear foreign languages as in other countries, so the original will sound over-the-top to them and it won't produce the same effect in them as in the original audience. In your words, it won't put across the desired effect.



> imagine making a film, or starring in a film, and having put in a lot of time, work, and effort to achieve something that you're happy with and that puts across your desired effect... then some outside force strips away a huge portion of your work and replaces it with something of a truly awful standard (ie. dubbing).


 
I don't know what kind of dubbing you've been exposed to, but even in movies with a good cast of actors, 50% either sound like they're just saying lines they had previously memorized or mumble. Good dubbings solve this problem.


----------



## Cracker Jack

Namakemono said:


> Mexicans say the contrary about Spanish voice actors. Also keep in mind that people in Spain are not as used to hear foreign languages as in other countries, so the original will sound over-the-top to them and it won't produce the same effect in them as in the original audience. In your words, it won't put across the desired effect.
> 
> I don't know what kind of dubbing you've been exposed to, but even in movies with a good cast of actors, 50% either sound like they're just saying lines they had previously memorized or mumble. Good dubbings solve this problem.


 
I have been watching movies in original version and I was shocked to know that dubbing exists.  Where dubbing is done for kiddie shows is justifiable because kids don't have attention span to allow them to read and watch at the same time.  But for grown-ups, it is no excuse.  It is like saying that their attention span is just as short.

Most people who are not used to watching original version quickly point out loss of visual details as disadvantage.  But I should say that for those of us who watch the real movie, not dubbed ones, we still get the gist without complaining of loss of visual details.  Another justification of ''dubbophiles'' is that they watch to be entertained and not to read.  Well, reading subtitles is as entertaining as watching it.  We are just being true to ourselves.

And no matter how these defenders of dubbed movies purport, a dubbed version is many-fold inferior to original one.  Dubbers could never justify the depth of acting, the vocal inflection and the emotion depicted by the original actors.  ''Dubbophile'' may never get to hear the authentic voice of the actors delineating their roles.


----------



## tvdxer

I prefer movies subtitled if in a different language than English, including Spanish (where my oral comprehension skills aren't that hot).  I DO NOT care for dubbing!  They detract from the movie in my opinion.

I would say most Americans prefer dubbing, because they do not like to read while they watch movies / TV.  On the other hand, if it's an American who will voluntarily watch a foreign movie, than maybe they will have the same opinion here as me.


----------



## Namakemono

Cracker Jack said:


> Another justification of ''dubbophiles'' is that they watch to be entertained and not to read.


Does the original audience watch a movie to be entertained and not to read? Yes.



> And no matter how these defenders of dubbed movies purport, a dubbed version is many-fold inferior to original one. Dubbers could never justify the depth of acting, the vocal inflection and the emotion depicted by the original actors.


And this is a fact because...?
The original actors are normally chosen for their physical aspect and their physic interpretations. Voice actors are chosen only for their voices. You would think they can act better than the original actors. Especially mediocre actors and secondary actors.
When I started watching subtitled movies, I was shocked to see how passionless many of my favourite actors were when it came to voice acting.


----------



## natasha2000

Namakemono said:


> The original actors are normally chosen for their physical aspect and their physic interpretations.


 
This is NOT true. Robert de Niro is just one example of acting with his voice. This statement has no sense. Then Almodovar or any other Spanish director also choses his actors only because of their physics???? 



> When I started watching subtitled movies, I was shocked to see how passionless many of my favourite actors were when it came to voice acting


I can believe this, because you got used to exaggerations of dubbing actors.

On the other hand, I don't find Penelope Cruz, all Bardem family or Torrente or any other Spanish actor/actress with as good diction as those dubbing actors. If diction is so important to you, Spanish people, why then all Spanish movies are not dubbed, too? Santiago Segura is eveything but a good voice, for example, and all those old ladies from Almodovar's movies that do mothers of the main characters, they are almost intelligible. Why don't you dub them if you are so keen on easy understanding?


----------



## Namakemono

natasha2000 said:


> On the other hand, I don't find Penelope Cruz, all Bardem family or Torrente or any other Spanish actor/actress with so good diction as those dubbing actors. If diction is so important to you, Spanish people, why then all Spanish movies are not dubbed, too? Santiago Segura is eveything but a good voice, for example, and all those old ladies from Almodovar's movies that do mothers of the main characters, they are almost intelligible. Why don't you dub them if you are so keen on easy understanding?


 
This is proof that actors are not necessarily chosen for their good diction and voice. If you visit Spanish movie forums, you'll see that there are lots of complaints about our actors' poor diction, but I don't think it's so bad that requires dubbing.


----------



## natasha2000

Namakemono said:


> This is proof that actors are not necessarily chosen for their good diction and voice. If you visit Spanish movie forums, you'll see that there are lots of complaints about our actors' poor diction, but I don't think it's so bad that requires dubbing.


 
But this is ridiculous! Can you imagine Torrente speaking like Matias Prats? Or Emilio from "Aquí no hay quien viva", speaking with a pure Castilian accent from Burgos? I really don't see your point.
If diction were so important to Spanish movie industrym, then the very same Spanish movies would be dubbed.
So, poor diction of actors cannot be reason of preferring dubbing. This argument is simply... ridiculous.

The only argument, I repeat, that seems logical, and accpetable (even though I do not think the same) is personal preference and what one is used to hear. I understand that after having watched for 20-30 years only dubbed versions, the real voices would look strange, odd, even unnatural. But poor diction.... C'mon!


----------



## Namakemono

Poor diction was just _part_ of my point, and it's not ridiculous. When I watch a movie, I want to know what the characters are saying. But you can use slang and still pronounce full words. My main pro-dubbing argument in Spain is that people are not used to hearing foreign languages and therefore find subtitled movies boring and strange. Fortunately, more and more people (like me) are turning to subtitles. While I prefer subtitles, I see nothing wrong with dubs.


----------



## fenixpollo

Namakemono said:


> My main pro-dubbing argument in Spain is that people are not used to hearing foreign languages and therefore find subtitled movies boring and strange.


So, your main argument in favor of dubbing is "everybody's doing it"?  Just because the majority of the people prefer it, that means it's a good thing?


----------



## Namakemono

I didn't say that the reason is that most people do it. I _*explained*_ the reason why most people do it. There's a difference.
Read the rest of the message. As young people have more access to culture, they start prefering subtitles, and I find that wonderful. I explained the (many) reasons why most Spaniards prefer dubbing, and that I understand them and agree with them.


----------



## ampurdan

I keep thinking the main reason subtitling is not more extended in dubbing countries, is the dificulty to read and watch the movie at the same time in a place where a minority is used to do so. If a movie were distributed in one of these countries only in a OS version, it would be doomed to failure.

Most of Spaniards don't see an important advantage in hearing the actors' real voice and they don't notice the dubbing, so they can get themselves into the movie without troubles. So, the "annoyance" would not compensate them in the short term. 

Having said that, I would like to plead a little for dubbing's cause. It's a lesser art, but it's an art after all. And I keep thinking that many stupid "just for laughs" movies would have a better reception being dubbed than having subtitles, even in a OSV culture, providing that the original language was not perfectly understood.


----------



## pickypuck

ampurdan said:


> Most of Spaniards don't see an important advantage in hearing the actors' real voice and they don't notice the dubbing, so they can get themselves into the movie without troubles. So, the "annoyance" would not compensate them in the short term.


 
Yes, and in addition, I can't stand background noise.

¡Olé!


----------



## natasha2000

pickypuck said:


> Yes, and in addition, I can't stand background noise.
> 
> ¡Olé!


 
What background noise?


----------



## pickypuck

natasha2000 said:


> What background noise?


 
There is a kind of noise in the environment or something like that. I can't explain it better. Maybe you don't notice because you see original version.


----------



## JGreco

Well I have several spanish and Br.Portuguese channels on my tv and it depends on wether anything is dubbed or not. A lot of  Spanish channels will simply have subtitles on the bottom just incase someone didn't understand the portuguese spoken. I also notice it depends on where the program is from in brasil on whether it is subtitled in the spanish programs. Where the accent is softer like programs from Brasilia, Sao Paulo, or the South are not generally subtitled on Spanish channels (with the exception of the major channels such as Univision and Telemundo ... a lot of their viewers are from Mexico where they always dub programming) but most of the other channels won't dub or subtitle. Programming and telenovelas from Rio de Janeiro are always subtitled because Carioca and Fluminense pronunciation can be hard for a speaker of Latin American Castellano to understand.


----------



## papagainho

Se trata de gustos sobre cosas. Cada uno tiene el suyo, y evidentemente, cuando se trata de una película ( o lo que sea ) en un idioma que no conocemos (o conocemos poco) tendremos que recurrir a una traducción, que se nos mostrará mediante doblaje o subtitulado. Siempre perderemos algo, y así es donde entra el gusto personal y la costumbre de cada persona, sobre perder matices de una manera u otra. Cada una tiene sus ventajas y sus inconvenientes. No hay más, creo...
Un saludo


----------



## Cracker Jack

Namakemono said:


> Does the original audience watch a movie to be entertained and not to read? Yes.


 
We who watch movies in original version, hardly feel that we are reading the subtitles.  We are enjoying doing both things at the same time.  It's a skill that we develop as we go along without complaining of loss of visual details.  You who are fond of subtitles will just have to get used to it and once you do, you can agree with us that it is better.

I remembered a professor of mine in Spanish class telling us after we had a heated discussion about this topic, that when she was in France, she saw Mar Adentro in French version.  She said it was disgusting and she preferred the original version in Spanish.  Let me ask you, how would you feel watching award-winning Spanish films dubbed in a language in which you are proficient?

It is a matter of cinematic(???)/cinematographic maturity that enables one to be able to stand the rigors of reading and watching at the same time.  For us it is not onerous unlike you.  We enjoy and derive pleasure without resorting to artificial, fake dubbing means.



Namakemono said:


> And this is a fact because...?
> The original actors are normally chosen for their physical aspect and their physic interpretations. Voice actors are chosen only for their voices. You would think they can act better than the original actors. Especially mediocre actors and secondary actors.
> When I started watching subtitled movies, I was shocked to see how passionless many of my favourite actors were when it came to voice acting.


 
They may not be glamorous to be able to act naturally.  A number of actors who are multi-awarded are not really good-looking.  I can name a few: Tom Hanks, Nicholas Cage, Tommy Lee Jones, Hillary Swank, Sissy Spacek, Frances McDormand, etc.  But to complement oyur observation, there are indeed ham actors who are just have got looks but not talents.  Spain is no exception.  There is Guillermo Toledo, for one and his partner in Crimen Ferpecto.


----------



## Cracker Jack

Oh, and if I may hasten to add.  The dubbing industry may well have gone to the dogs.  Aside from Natasha's observation about dubbing childrens'voices, there is one disgusting feature to dubbing.

Even porno films are being dubbed.  Now can you beat that?  To the tune of ¡¡¡_sí, sí,... hay Dios mio que cuerpo...que polla... que culo__!!!_ and host of many inane phrase.  I just wonder what dubbing artists are doing at the studio while doing their stuff. Well, granting that they are professional, they may keep their clothes on. But this is just way too far.

Would you agree that it is wise to dub even porn films?


----------



## natasha2000

Cracker Jack said:


> Oh, and if I may hasten to add. The dubbing industry may well have gone to the dogs. Aside from Natasha's observation about dubbing childrens'voices, there is one disgusting feature to dubbing.
> 
> Even porno films are being dubbed. Now can you beat that? To the tune of ¡¡¡_sí, sí,... hay Dios mio que cuerpo...que polla... que culo__!!!_ and host of many inane phrase. I just wonder what dubbing artists are doing at the studio while doing their stuff. Well, granting that they are professional, they may keep their clothes on. But this is just way too far.
> 
> Would you agree that it is wise to dub even porn films?


 
Hhaha... I have always wondered how on Earth is done this... It must be ridiculous, having the dubbing mommy/daddy type actor/actress  in that booth, with headphones and a micro, alone, saying all the variety of "guarradas"....


----------



## Namakemono

Cracker Jack said:


> We who watch movies in original version, hardly feel that we are reading the subtitles. We are enjoying doing both things at the same time. It's a skill that we develop as we go along without complaining of loss of visual details. You who are fond of subtitles will just have to get used to it and once you do, you can agree with us that it is better.


 
You didn't adress my point at all, but anyway. Also, as I said one hundred times, subtitles are not "better" for the Spanish audience. Most people grew up watching dubs and find the original dialogue boring and emotionless.



> Let me ask you, how would you feel watching award-winning Spanish films dubbed in a language in which you are proficient?


It would depend on the country and the audience. I wouldn't mind them dubbing them if they do right (i.e.: read lines with the same passion as the original actors, but with the tone of the other language). Also, do you dubbing-haters read translated books at all? Do you know that book translations are more lossy than dubbings? In dubbings, most of the original material is kept intact. You still see Sergio Leone's close-ups, Sam Raimi's zoom-ins, Kubrick's characters looking at the camera... The actors simply speak another language.



> It is a matter of cinematographic maturity that enables one to be able to stand the rigors of reading and watching at the same time.


Let's see... Most worldwide famous movies are produced in the US in English. American film critics have to read nothing to watch them. I guess they're immature? 



> For us it is not onerous unlike you.


What.



> We enjoy and derive pleasure without resorting to artificial, fake dubbing means.


You're pretty much saying most Spaniards are immature movie watchers. I hate this holier-than-thou attitude.


----------



## Cracker Jack

Namakemono said:


> You didn't adress my point at all, but anyway. Also, as I said one hundred times, subtitles are not "better" for the Spanish audience. Most people grew up watching dubs and find the original dialogue boring and emotionless.


 
I have addressed your point squarely by saying that for us reading and watching is a skill and that we hardly find it difficult to do.  Well, I understand that you the dubbers and translators got you wont to dubbing.  But the government has done it's share.  I don't know in other autonomous regions, but in Catalonia, an option is available using the remote control to watch TV programs in original version.  But it proves unavailing because even learners of English do not do it.  Have you ever tried doing it?  When I watched Spanish movies like those of Amenábar with English subtitles, I never found them boring.  It was a challenge that is surmountable.




Namakemono said:


> It would depend on the country and the audience. I wouldn't mind them dubbing them if they do right (i.e.: read lines with the same passion as the original actors, but with the tone of the other language). Also, do you dubbing-haters read translated books at all? Do you know that book translations are more lossy than dubbings? In dubbings, most of the original material is kept intact. You still see Sergio Leone's close-ups, Sam Raimi's zoom-ins, Kubrick's characters looking at the camera... The actors simply speak another language.


 
This response of yours is understandable because you advocate dubbing and so it would be ok for you.  However, in international festival screening dubbing is not allowed.  Films are shown in original versions with subtitles. Even in Spain this is done like in festivals in San Sebastian.  I have read translated books like those of Tolstoi, Feodorov, Arabian Nights, Iliad and Odyssey because I do not speak and understand Russian, Arabian and Greek, respectively.  I beg to disagree that with dubbing the movie is intact.  Time and again in this forum, I have mentioned that there is detachment of cultural reference.  What would you say to a film with setting in Italy wherein the character orders pasta but in Spanish version it is changed to pasta?  What about another one wherein the setting is in London but in the dubbed version one character says that the other one has gone shopping in El Corte Inglés.  This makes it ridiculous.  It is an insult to the intelligence of Spanish masses for they know that there is no El Corte Inglés in London. 




Namakemono said:


> Let's see... Most worldwide famous movies are produced in the US in English. American film critics have to read nothing to watch them. I guess they're immature?


 
Bear in mind that the Academy screens films for foreign language category and they do it without using the outrageous practice of dubbing.  And in screening others like Antonia's Line, Kolya, Mar Adentro, City of God, etc, they never resorted to the contemptuous dubbing.  Otherwise, they would have to incur expenses to scout for voice talents.  Fortunately enough with sanity intact, American film critics are not used to dubbing. It is unthinkable.


----------



## Cracker Jack

Namakemono said:


> You're pretty much saying most Spaniards are immature movie watchers. I hate this holier-than-thou attitude.


 
I hate to tell you this. The truth hurts but when it comes to attitude towards cinema, yes a large number are still immature. *Maturity entails patience and willingness and capacity to face unpleasant situation and ability to surmount it. *This is tantamount to persons complaining of difficulty in reading subtitles. But why are Mexicans and South Americans able to do it? Does it mean that they are better than the Spaniards. The reason is that they are used to it and tehy favor ov than dubbing.

*Maturity is the state of persevering in favor of long-term gain*. This refers to those who are studying English and yet pass the chance of doing so by being unable to persist in purpose by being resigned to the fact that they watched to be entertained and not to read. But by reading, it is not only understanding in original language that they gain things. They also increase vocabulary and are able to hear the correct pronunciation.

*Maturity is dependability in one's stand and never making excuses and alibis and having good intentions that remain as such and never materialize*. This boils down again to the fact that saying that reading subtitles is still an alibi. From cultural background, the Spanish have been made accustomed to dubbing for at least 36 years. But it has been almost 31 years since this was broken. However, one cannot simply say that ''we were used to it before and so we want it to remain that way.'' I also understand that it is not achieved overnight. Will power is needed. Whole lots of willpower is needed, not just jars but a cántaros.


----------



## natasha2000

Namakemono said:


> Also, do you dubbing-haters read translated books at all?


 
You comparison is stupid, sorry. There is no logic. Both dubbings and subtitles are TRANSLATIONS and not originals, as far as the semantic point of view. One reaches for one of those because he doesn't know the original language. The same happens with the book. So, if I know English, I would see the movie in VOS, and without subtitles. OK? The same with tha book. If I know English, I would read in original language. But if I cannot understand French, I would look for the movie with subtitles, not dubbed, becasue although I do not understand the word of French, I want TO HEAR it. The same with the book. I will look for the only way that makes me possible to read the book of a French author - translation.

Why do I choose subtitles and not dubbings? Because the voice can express also beyond the pure semantic meaning. If a character screams, if the character cries, sighs, cofs, chokes, fucks, dies, kills, I want to hear the sounds that como out of the original actor, not some dubbing actor that is comfortably seated in a booth, because he can never be so true as the real one. Why? Simply. Because the sounds of the real actor come out of something that he does in the scene, not seateted with headphones on his ears.

Stop comparing the book translations with dubbings and subtitles. It really has nothing to do one with another.


----------



## Namakemono

> Why do I choose subtitles and not dubbings? Because the voice can express also beyond the pure semantic meaning. If a character screams, if the character cries, sighs, cofs, chokes, fucks, dies, kills, I want to hear the sounds that como out of the original actor, not some dubbing actor that is comfortably seated in a booth, because he can never be so true as the real one. Why? Simply. Because the sounds of the real actor come out of something that he does in the scene, not seateted with headphones on his ears.


 
Have you watched _The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly_? Did you know that even the original version is dubbed? In fact, there's a character who didn't say any of his lines, he counted to ten in Italian. The actors were in a comfortable booth, reading their lines. And yet it's regarded as one of the best films of all time. Did the movie feel fake and emotionless to any of you?


> Stop comparing the book translations with dubbings and subtitles. It really has nothing to do one with another.


Of course they don't. That's why I used it as an example. Whereas the elements of a movie are plot, physical acting, voice acting, scenarios, time, music, camera shots, etc.; in books there are less elements, and the language style (which has to be entirely replaced) takes precedence over all of them. In movies, the voice acting is not even the most important element. This proves that you really don't miss that much.



> Have you ever tried doing it?


Do what? Watch subtitled movies on TV or watch subtitled movies at all? If so, I do the latter all the time. Lately, I don't even need subtitles for most English movies.


> This refers to those who are studying English and yet pass the chance of doing so by being unable to persist in purpose by being resigned to the fact that they watched to be entertained and not to read.


Sad fact: relatively few Spaniards learn English. Also, the original audience (that for which the movie is conceived) watches the movie to be entertained and not to read.


> But why are Mexicans and South Americans able to do it? Does it mean that they are better than the Spaniards.


I dunno. You were the one who brought that up. Also, I will quote you to answer: I also understand that it is not achieved overnight.


> What would you say to a film with setting in Italy wherein the character orders pasta but in Spanish version it is changed to pasta? What about another one wherein the setting is in London but in the dubbed version one character says that the other one has gone shopping in El Corte Inglés. This makes it ridiculous. It is an insult to the intelligence of Spanish masses for they know that there is no El Corte Inglés in London.


I don't understand the first example (pasta is the same in Naples and in Seville), but the second example is wrong. In my life, I have watched hundreds of dubs and I have only found an example that kind of change: the TV series "Sabrina". The translator for _Austin Powers: Goldmember _did something similar: a Dutch character spoke like Van Gaal. What if the original movie makes fun of a Dutch man no Spaniard has ever heard about? The movie will completely lose its effect. I bet the director would want the movie to be dubbed.


----------



## Cracker Jack

The statement should have stated that the character orders pasta but in the Spanish version the order was changed to paella.  What do you make out of this?  Why do they need to do it? Would the Spanish audience be slighted if somebody orders pasta instead of paella? 

The reasoning that you employ about moviegoers going to moviehouses to enjoy and not to read comes in handy.  That is because they don't have the skill of doing both things at the same time, a skill with which dubbophobics are endowed.  The latest critically acclaimed musical that I saw was Chicago.  It is a musical and I was expecting that the songs would be dubbed.  Thank God, sanity prevailed.  Instead, the song was played in the original version and subtitled.  Otherwise, it would have been apalling.  From your reasoning - that moviegoers do not want to read, they just probably closed their eyes and waited until Catherine Zeta Jones or Renee Zellwegger finished their numbers.

Incidentally, the dubber for Catherine Zeta Jones has a very familiar voice.  She also does the dubbing for advertisements and some characters for American TV series.  And her voice is annoying because she quivers.  She quivers when she's happy; she quivers when she's sad and she quivers for other reasons.

English is the foreign language most sought after in Spain.  And contrary to your statement, not few but many are learning it.  Language schools is a battle ground for the English Department.  In Spain there are many people who are hell bent in learning English.  A system of language education subsidized by the Spanish government, the Escuela Oficial de Idiomas is an arena for English learner hopefuls where the queue always gets longer than you can even imagine.  But when the results of the lottery for slots are released, you can see many distraught, dejected faces.  English language teaching in case you are not aware is a very lucrative enterprise.  Many companies and private individuals even hire tutors for private classes. But even Spaniards admit that their phonetics is wanting.  "_Sabemos que quieren decir las palabras inglesas, pero las malpronunciamos_.'' 

The fact that phonetics is poor is partly due to these horrendous dubbings.  It deprives the students of foreign languages the opportunity of learning the correct pronunciation.  To top it all, media personnel make the matters even worse with their syllabication type of pronunciation of foreign words.  Well, if there is a legislation that states that the pronunciation of foreign words in advertisements and dubbed TV programs, should be done according to Spanish phonetics; then I really pity the learners who are deprived of knowledge of the correct pronunciation.


----------



## natasha2000

Yesterday I saw an episode of an American series on TV. I cannot recall the name, but it is not important. The thing is that there are also some characters that come from Argentina, and they speak in Spanish. It could be seen by the way of moving their lips. Now, when those characters were speaking among themselves, they suddenly acquired Argentinian accent. IT WAS AWFUL!  It was so obvious that the voices belonged to some Spanish Spanish people who unsuccesfully tried to imitate that beautiful accent from Argentinian people. The ommission of S was exagerrated and artificial, the typical Argentinian pronunciation of Y and LL was too low, almos inexisted, so characteristic melody of Argentinian sentence forced... They looked more like some people with speech disorders than real Argentinians. I just felt how my hair was going up out of horror I was listening at that moment...

The way Argentinians speak is wonderful. If you close your eyes and just listen to the soft melody of whatever they would speak to you, you are in a real danger to fall in love with that person even if he would be telling you just the recipe for a stew or the weather prognosis. This magic of an accent was not present yesterday. Instead, it sounded like a scratched record... Horrendous!


----------



## pickypuck

The supposed "mispronounciation" of foreign words happens in every language, independently of the fact that their cinemas offer dubbed films or not. I'm really grateful that somebody cares so much about how I can improve my level of English, but I prefer to decide myself. 

If one is so against dubbing, it's kind of masochistic to see dubbed series.


----------



## zebedee

Cracker Jack said:


> The statement should have stated that the character orders pasta but in the Spanish version the order was changed to paella.  What do you make out of this?  Why do they need to do it? Would the Spanish audience be slighted if somebody orders pasta instead of paella?



I think the example of pasta/paella comes from the Woody Allen film _Sleeper. _I mentioned it in another thread:


			
				me in another thread said:
			
		

> An example of taking this too far, however, is the Spanish dubbing of Woody Allen's "Sleeper" where Woody Allen, waking up and finding himself in the future, has this dialogue with Diane Keaton:
> 
> _Diane_: Sex is different today, you see. We don't have any problems. Everyone is frigid.
> _Woody_: Oh, that's incredible. Are the men impotent too?
> _Diane_:Yeah, most of them. Except the ones whose ancestors are Italian.
> _Woody_: Right. I knew there was something in that pasta.
> 
> The 1970's Spanish dubbed version has _'Italian' _replaced by _'Spanish'_ and _'pasta'_ by _'paella'_...! That, to me, is taking an unnecessary liberty with the translation.


As Namakemono wrote, this is a classic example of Franco regime dubbing. Of course the joke would have been understood perfectly with the original references to Italian men and pasta but what a fine opportunity for the fascist regime to plug Spanish virility!

Here's that thread where we talked about subtitles vs dubbing.
And here 's another one that starts in Spanish then continues in English on the same topic.
And here's another one on the same topic.


In Hitchcock's _The 39 Steps _the hero spends most of the film handcuffed to the heroine running away from the police. There's a scene where the handcuffed couple dry off from the rain in a country hotel. The heroine has to take off her wet stockings to let them dry and of course our hero has no choice but to let his handcuffed hand run down her leg as she rolls her stockings down. 

Hitchcock plays this scene with both actors in complete silence as the sexual tension mounts - this was 1935 after all! - and we almost hold our breath in the silence.

But if you watch the Spanish dubbed version the dubbing actors fill that loaded silence with little embarrassed "Oh excuse me!", "Oh, terribly sorry!" that don't exist in the original version and all that sexual tension dissipates. I've always wondered why this was done, whether it's a subtle form of censureship or the dubbing actors were paid per word and had found an excellent opportunity to bump their paycheck up!

Anyway, hope you enjoy reading the other threads I've linked to.

cheers,
zeb


----------



## Namakemono

> The reasoning that you employ about moviegoers going to moviehouses to enjoy and not to read comes in handy. That is because they don't have the skill of doing both things at the same time, a skill with which dubbophobics are endowed.


I have no idea what you mean. I said the original audience (people in the US, in the case of "Chicago") go to the movies to be entertained and not to read. That's exactly what dubbophiles and dubbophobes do. Also, as I said many times, _*reading is not the only reason why subtitles are not frequent in Spain.*_



> Incidentally, the dubber for Catherine Zeta Jones has a very familiar voice. She also does the dubbing for advertisements and some characters for American TV series. And her voice is annoying because she quivers. She quivers when she's happy; she quivers when she's sad and she quivers for other reasons.


Great. Now I could give you a list of American actors who can't pronounce a single full word without barking.


> And contrary to your statement, not few but many are learning it.


I said _relatively_ few. Fewer than in Scandinavia and Eastern Europe.


> The fact that phonetics is poor is partly due to these horrendous dubbings. It deprives the students of foreign languages the opportunity of learning the correct pronunciation.


Not trying to be arrogant, but my English pronounciation is very good, and I've never been to an English-speaking country. I started watching subtitled movies recently. I simply payed attention in English class. If the education system was better, nobody would have any problem pronouncing.

I would also like to add an interesting example to the topic of translation. Most Japanese video games come to Spain with English voice acting and subtitles in many languages. Although I would have preferred the original Japanese voice acting, the American dubs are not bad at all. I can learn both subtitling and dubbing "techniques" from them.


----------



## almostfreebird

I, for one, prefer subtitles. In fact I rarely(almost never) see dubbed movies, TV programs. But I pay my respects for his(namakemono) enthusiasm for the dubbing, besides I'm a big fan of Malcolm Mcdowell(especially "if...").


----------



## Namakemono

I wouldn't say I'm enthusiastic about it (in fact, I prefer subtitles), but as a form of translation I find it very interesting. It's one of those things you either love or hate.


----------



## amikama

As a deaf, I (obviously?) prefer subtitles to dubbing. Fortunately, where I live almost all foreign TV programs and movies are subtitled (the only dubbed programs and movies are those aimed for children). Sometimes the subtitles are even bilingual (Hebrew-Russian or Hebrew-Arabic), what enables me to learn some basic words in Russian or Arabic


----------



## natasha2000

amikama said:


> Sometimes the subtitles are even bilingual (Hebrew-Russian or Hebrew-Arabic), what enables me to learn some basic words in Russian or Arabic


 
This is really interesting. I have never seen this! One question. How much space those bilingual subtitles occupy? How are they arranged? It is had to believe it is possible to put subtitles in two languages, putting them in only one language is a really quite a job, let alone in two!


----------



## amikama

natasha2000 said:


> This is really interesting. I have never seen this! One question. How much space those bilingual subtitles occupy? How are they arranged? It is had to believe it is possible to put subtitles in two languages, putting them in only one language is a really quite a job, let alone in two!


Subtitles (monolingual or bilingual) are always two-lined. In case of bilingual subtitles, each line is in one language (e.g. Hebrew at top, Russian at bottom). Bilingual subtitles are of course problematic due to the very limited room left for the translated information. 

I'm going to try to attach a picture I've just taken from my television to show you how Hebrew-Russian subtitles look like. (I'm afraid the picture is somewhat blueish, but I hope the subtitles are clear.)


----------



## natasha2000

Thank you, Amikama. Very interesting... Don't worry about the picture, it is perfect. I can clearly see the Hebrew and Russian in the same title.
Well I must admit I wouldn't like to be in those translators' shoes... The space is VERY limited... I guess then subtitles must go faster than usual?


----------



## Cracker Jack

zebedee said:


> I think the example of pasta/paella comes from the Woody Allen film _Sleeper. _I mentioned it in another thread:
> 
> As Namakemono wrote, this is a classic example of Franco regime dubbing. Of course the joke would have been understood perfectly with the original references to Italian men and pasta but what a fine opportunity for the fascist regime to plug Spanish virility!


 
Thanks a lot zebedee.  Yes you were the one who quoted it. I saw the film just the same and witnessed the ''culinary'' preference from pasta to paella.  They just removed the cultural reference.  



			
				Namakemono said:
			
		

> Not trying to be arrogant, but my English pronounciation is very good, and I've never been to an English-speaking country. I started watching subtitled movies recently. I simply payed attention in English class. If the education system was better, nobody would have any problem pronouncing.


 
Good for you, you are learning the ropes.  Problem is, part of the education is the mass media and the way movies and TV programs are handled influences in great part the education of the masses.  In my case, I have never been to any-Anglophone country in my entire life and I learned English phonetics from TV and the movies.  I am fortunate that my country does not resort to dubbing.  The only exceptions are kiddie shows and culebrones because kids watch them too.



			
				Namakemono said:
			
		

> Now I could give you a list of American actors who can't pronounce a single full word without barking.


 
Who cares if they bark or purr?  We still understand them because we are used to watching the original version with subtitles.  Besides, Americans do not dub and so their material is original not like dubbed ones that is visually authentic but audibly resounding fake. That includes the rest of the world who do not indulge in dubbing. 

Since I have watched original and dubbed versions (not that I am beginning to like dubbed versions, I still abhor them, I look at them as inferior, pathetic versions.)  I have noticed that the voices of Friends characters Rachel, Monica and Phoebe, who are either in their late 20s or 30s in the dubbed version sound like those of Spanish women in their late 50s or even 60s.  And it sounds awkward that when these characters flirt and do their girly thing, they sound 2 decades older than their chronological and bone age.  And it is very awkward hearing almost nearly elderly women (according to their voices) in micro-minis and plunging neck-lines) strutting thier stuffs. It's like these gorgeous women are having vocal progeria.  They lose their vocal appeal and become complete turn-offs instead of being gorgeous. 

Also, in the dubbed version of Will and Grace, Jack is supposed to be gay and a screaming fag type at times.  However in the dubbed version his voice is full and resonating.  There is no indication that he is gay.  The voice is that of a panty-dropping macho man.  When he screams the dubbed version also screams but in an awkward fashion.  The voice of Karen is also a big draw.  Her shrill almost ear-piercing pitch will make one roll l-o-l without even understanding what she is saying.  Her voice would make you almost laugh.  However in the dubbed version, her voice is a bit raucous and the voice behind it tries to be shrill but fails miserably.  This is heightened when while holding her wine glass says ''Honey.''  In the dubbed version, it is not funny.  This is one thing that is lost in dubbed versions.


----------



## Namakemono

Cracker Jack,
In your posts you simply spew despective comments from your high horse and don't even try to understand the Spaniards. You have said many times in a holier-than-thou tone that you despise dubbing. We are aware already. Now try to understand why dubbing is more successful in Spain, Italy, and Germany. Spaniards don't think dubbing is fake. When I watch a movie dubbed in Italian it does sound fake because _Italian is not my mother tongue_. Spaniards prefer those elder actresses to the original ones. They don't care if they quiver, sound older, or don't match their face. They still like it because it feels closer to them and it will stay like this for at least another fifteen years.


----------



## Cracker Jack

Hey, don't worry Mr. Fancy Pants.  I am just trying to point out some of the disadvantages that I perceive about the dubbings from the point of view of someone who is very much used to the original version.  And I understand why the Spaniards prefer dubbing from a historical perspective.  They have been used to it.  I just wish that little by little, they would be able to learn how to watch the original version for the original one is always the better way.  However, since most of them especially the elderly do not speak and understand English, they may not probably learn it.  But for the youngsters, I hope that they would eventually outgrow this.

If I had my way,  I would to see Spanish audience appreciate the original version.  However, it would spell the doom of the translators and dubbers.  And to think that the cohesiveness of the dubbers society is very strong, it will be an uphill battle.  What is needed is something like operant conditioning.  It has to be done little by little or gradually.


----------



## whattheflock

I think we can thank the big interest nowdays in Hong Kong cinema for helping a little bit to change the public's preference of dubbing over subtitling. After watching all those Kung Fu movies back in the seventies where the actor would be mouthing words for fifteen seconds straight and then the dubbing would just say "Damn you!", I was even grateful when those movies started appearing with subtitles instead, because they could more closely resemble the intent of the filmmakers.


----------



## Namakemono

Cracker Jack said:


> And I understand why the Spaniards prefer dubbing from a historical perspective. They have been used to it. I just wish that little by little, they would be able to learn how to watch the original version for the original one is always the better way.


 
That's what's happening, but as I said, it will take at least fifteen years. I would still approve of dubbing for some comedies though.


----------



## pickypuck

At least fifteen years? But do you really think that it will ever happen?  

Telling that one has to learn how to watch a original version sounds pretentious.


----------



## jess oh seven

Namakemono said:


> Mexicans say the contrary about Spanish voice actors. Also keep in mind that people in Spain are not as used to hear foreign languages as in other countries, so the original will sound over-the-top to them and it won't produce the same effect in them as in the original audience. In your words, it won't put across the desired effect.


well the reason that they are not used to hearing foreign voices is because they've all been basically censored and buried by awful dubbing! maybe it's time for a change! broader horizons! 

it's not as if the Spanish are any different that any other audience... how come i still laugh at French/German/Italian/Danish etcetc films when i'm meant to? am i more apt at understanding intonation/delivery than the average Spaniard? i think not!




> I don't know what kind of dubbing you've been exposed to, but even in movies with a good cast of actors, 50% either sound like they're just saying lines they had previously memorized or mumble. Good dubbings solve this problem.


maybe the original only sounds like that to you because you are used to the depthless, "monotone" (for lack of a better word) quality of dubbed voices and soundtracks.


----------



## Namakemono

jess oh seven said:


> well the reason that they are not used to hearing foreign voices is because they've all been basically censored and buried by awful dubbing!


 
And they were censored by whom? I talked about him a couple of times already. If you went back in time, would you dare to ask him not to impose dubbed movies?



> maybe the original only sounds like that to you because you are used to the depthless, "monotone" (for lack of a better word) quality of dubbed voices and soundtracks.


I think you completely misunderstood my message. I said the _originals _sounded monotone to me at first. Spanish voice actors normally change their tone more (I know Mexicans will reply that we speak in monotones, but for us, it doesn't sound monotone at all).


----------



## jess oh seven

Namakemono said:


> And they were censored by whom? I talked about him a couple of times already. If you went back in time, would you dare to ask him not to impose dubbed movies?


yes i am perfectly aware of that, but it needn't be the be-all and end-all of cinema.


----------



## Cracker Jack

pickypuck said:


> At least fifteen years? But do you really think that it will ever happen?
> 
> Telling that one has to learn how to watch a original version sounds pretentious.


 
I hope that the time element would be set fast forward to see how it would turn out to be.  I am really keeping my fingers crossed that the Spaniards would be able to watch films in original version not just in English, but in other languages as well. This wish of mine holds true for French, German and Italian folks as well.

But it remains to be seen. In Spain, less than 10% of cinemas to date screen VOSE (versión original subtitulada en español) films.  As I have mentioned some threads back, what is needed is operant conditioning.  It has to be done little by little.  The ''15-year plan'' (FYP) would work well if the first 5 minutes of every films would be shown subtitles for one year.  The time would be progressively increased annually until such time that for 75 minutes, almost the entire film is VOSE.

But that would spell the doom of dubbers.  Woe to the vanquished, but hurray to the moviegoing public!!! This FYP is wishful thinking.  However, one thing positive is that the musicals are not dubbed. If the movies were to succeed in this FYP, then probably the television would follow suit.


----------



## pickypuck

I'm afraid you will get a paralysis of your fingers  
I understand that you like original version but I really don't do your insistence of changing the liking of Spanish people for dubbed films... unless you are an original version cinema businessman and you want to open new markets


----------



## Cracker Jack

Very funny pp.  Well you are right.  In fact, I even said it would be wishful thinking. Probably it would take more than a generation to effect such a change.  But the youngster, college students are beginning to get keen on watching VOSE.  However, their attitude is volatile. They are eager at first. Later, upon hearing  a few lines and reading subtitles, they get ''tired'' and give up easily.  I would say this is encouraging because probably those in the _cole _would have more sustained interest in due time.

Oh and just to assure you, I am not a businessman of such caliber.  Spain is a poor market choice.  I would have gone bankrupt even before it gets started. LOL.


----------



## 1234plet

Thank you for all replies. I suppose I know got a whole lot smarter than before.  You learn each day, right?


----------



## mplsray

Cracker Jack said:


> But that would spell the doom of dubbers. Woe to the vanquished, but hurray to the moviegoing public!!! This FYP is wishful thinking. However, one thing positive is that the musicals are not dubbed. If the movies were to succeed in this FYP, then probably the television would follow suit.


 

For my part, when the original film was done in a language which I do not know, I prefer seeing a dubbed version of the film. And I admire the French tendency to dub not just the dialogue, but also the songs in musicals!


----------



## Maja

To me, the most important thing about subtitles is learning a language!!! There are many people in my country who never been abroad for various reasons and listening English (mainly) and Spanish on television all day, every day is priceless!!! 
I really doubt that I would know as much if  the movies were synchronized!!! (I am talking about pre - cable/ satellite era.)


----------



## Balthazar

I think it's important that who is watching something,  she/he has to understand.

In my point of view I study english for that reason I need a environment appropriate.


----------



## natasha2000

I thought this article would be interesting for this discussion....

http://www.literarytranslation.com/workshops/almodovar/


----------



## MarX

1234plet said:


> Hi,
> 
> Sometimes I have looked at some German channels and I have noticed that they often exchange the original language in the movie (with real people also) with German voices. And I know Germany isn't the only ones who do that.
> 
> Do you prefer to watch a movie in your own native language?
> I couldn't imagine what it would be like to see a movie and the hear Tom Cruise or Angelina Jolie talk Danish. I would find that very weird. I prefer subtitles.
> 
> What do you prefer?
> 
> Thank you.


Hello!

To answer the original question, I prefer subtitles.

Gruss,


MarK


----------



## Hakro

This year I've been watching the Formula 1 races from a German TV channel. I can understand a good part of the German commentary, and listening to it has been a good practice for me. But when the German reporter interviews some non-German person in English, it's interpreted quasi simultaneously in German, without damping the original speaking. Result: For me it's impossible to understand neither the German nor the English, as I hear two foreign languages at the same time.

In this case (play-by-play broadcast, stand-upper, or whatever it's called) subtitles are impossible, of course, but I prefer our system: After the interview in English the reporter interpretes it shortly in Finnish; so those who understand English can easily listen to the original speaking, and those who don't can get the most important points of the interview.

I wonder how well a native German or English speaker can understand an interview where these two languages are spoken overlapped. Is here anybody who has watched this or similar TV programs?


----------



## Outsider

That is sometimes done in Portuguese television, especially in interviews of foreigners and in documentaries. Usually the sound of the original voice is lowered a bit. But I guess it must still be confusing when both languages are foreign to the viewer. I had never thought of that before!


----------



## Nanon

I like subtitles, because I like to hear the original voices and the sound of languages. Although dubbing is good in France, at least for films. Some TV series are also well dubbed. At least, an effort is done, because the French audience got used to a rather high standard.
Overvoicing is used for news or documentaries.
A habit that I find slightly irritating - also in news and docs - is that subtitles are used when people speak French with an accent or are considered difficult to understand. I think this is subjective -- how can you define that a person is difficult to understand and his / her speech needs to be subtitled? In most cases I could understand these people perfectly.
I dislike overvoicing in films -- the way they do in Russian TV for example. You hear the original voice _and _the translation read by a couple of actors, with a rather neutral intonation. But as I said before, I got too much used to high standards...


----------



## stanley

In Germany every single movie, no matter where it comes from is dubbed. I've only seen a move which had subtitles once. Seriously, everything is dubbed. I'm jealous on people in Denmark and other countries, who are only able to watch the movies in the original language because they can improve their knowledge of the English language a lot.


----------



## KaRiNe_Fr

stanley said:


> [...]I'm jealous on people in Denmark and other countries, who are only able to watch the movies in the original language because they can improve their knowledge of the English language a lot.


So, in Germany only movies from a country speaking English are dubbed?
How about French movies for instance?


----------



## Adge

divina said:


> You know, it's funny, because although I prefer subtitles with any Spanish movie or TV program, I don't care if they're in Spanish or English. If they're in English, I can practice my listening skills by listening to what is being said in Spanish, and if they're Spanish, I get to see how the words flow together (word order) and stuff. Sometimes I can take sentences from the Spanish subtitles and use them in the "real world" for example in one movie I was watching on TV, I remember somebody saying "Debo irme," meaning "I have to go" in English. So from that I learned to add the "me" at the end. Stuff like that.


 
Watching novelas with the Spanish subtitles helped me so much too, because you notice little things like that.

I know in Mexico everything but kids' movies is subtitled, and I always thought it was funny in the movies because I wouldn't be reading the subtitles and everyone would laugh before me at a joke, because they invariably read the punchline before I heard it. =)


----------



## stanley

KaRiNe_Fr said:


> So, in Germany only movies from a country speaking English is dubbed?
> How about French movies for instance?


You are right, but most of the movies that come out are from the US anyways, and I guess many people would have a hard time even guessing what the French speakers are saying. But English is quite easy so most of them would especially improve their English.


----------



## Outsider

Nanon said:


> A habit that I find slightly irritating - also in news and docs - is that subtitles are used when people speak French with an accent or are considered difficult to understand. I think this is subjective -- how can you define that a person is difficult to understand and his / her speech needs to be subtitled? In most cases I could understand these people perfectly.


I agree, the same happens in Portugal. They will subtitle someone with an unusual accent or a Galician, while I've seen them _not_ subtitle a Spanish speaker on a few occasions! I think it shows a very narrow-minded, Portugal-is-Lisbon, accents-are-wrong-speech kind of mentality.



stanley said:


> In Germany every single movie, no matter where it comes from is dubbed. I've only seen a move which had subtitles once. Seriously, everything is dubbed. I'm jealous on people in Denmark and other countries, who are only able to watch the movies in the original language because they can improve their knowledge of the English language a lot.


In spite of that, Germans often speak good English...


----------



## Sprache

Dubbing sounds terrible. I will take the original language with English subtitles any day. It won't hurt to read a bit.


----------



## Sepia

KaRiNe_Fr said:


> So, in Germany only movies from a country speaking English are dubbed?
> How about French movies for instance?



Yes, French movies are dubbed too - only few exceptions. Only those where one wuould expect a very small or very cineastic audience are not. 

Or if you are lucky you can sometimes chose between original and dubbed - providing your TV-set has stereo. 

I can only recommend everybody to get a satellite receiver so you can watch foreign stations. Even some of the films that run on ARTE can only be received in the dubbed version on cable nets although they sometimes have the options original or dubbed on the sattellite.


Personally I prefer any film with original sound track and subtitles - but I must admit, in France, Italy, Spain and Germany they make some good dubbed versions.


----------



## ToñoTorreón

I prefer to see the movie in the original language, with subtitles (if it's in a language other than English or Spanish). 

Sometimes, though, I'll be watching a Spanish (or Argentinean or Chilean) film and wish there were English subtitles.


----------



## Mate

ToñoTorreón said:


> I prefer to see the movie in the original language, with subtitles (if it's in a language other than English or Spanish).
> 
> Sometimes, though, I'll be watching a Spanish (or Argentinean or Chilean) film and wish there were English subtitles.


I fully agree. The original language is always better. 

And sometimes when I watch a Spanish movie I wish it had subtitles too. Especially when the actors talk too fast.


----------



## Sepia

Mateamargo said:


> I fully agree. The original language is always better.
> 
> And sometimes when I watch a Spanish movie I wish it had subtitles too. Especially when the actors talk too fast.




Talking about original language - I used to be a fan of the so-called Italo-Westerns. Even today I am not too sure which language was the original, if any at all. The films were often Spanish-Italian co-productions or German italian or all three, the actors were often Italian, American, German, all together in the same film and the sound tracks were made afterwards in the studio. 

I saw most of them in English with subtitles. But how do we know which is the original?

---

Once Godard was asked which he preferred - dubbed or original + subtitles. His answer? Neither. He would prefer a written resume of the film, read that first and then see the film in the original version without subtitles.

I could go for that too. Twice in my life I have watched a whole film in a language I did not understand - and I had no written resume. Those films made a stronger impression on me than most other films. In both cases it was clear to me what was going on - good structure in the story, body language, intonation etc. sometimes tell the most important part of the story. I think they made such an impression on me because I was not distracted from the main essence of the film, by words.


----------



## San

1234plet said:


> Do you prefer to watch a movie in your own native language?



Definitively. I see little point in listening to a language I can't understand. And regarding subtitles,  when I want to read I get a book. I even turn them off when I watch movies in English, which is the language I am learning.



> I couldn't imagine what it would be like to see a movie and the hear Tom Cruise or Angelina Jolie talk Danish. I would find that very weird. I prefer subtitles.


You get used to it, believe me, the same happened to me the first time a heard Tom Cruise talking in English. 

I think that being Spaniard, or German gives you more choice, for example when you get a DVD, or watch digital TV or go to the cinema.


----------



## MarX

San said:


> Definitively. I see little point in listening to a language I can't understand. And regarding subtitles, when I want to read I get a book. I even turn them off when I watch movies in English, which is the language I am learning.
> 
> You get used to it, believe me, the same happened to me the first time a heard Tom Cruise talking in English.
> 
> I think that being Spaniard, or German gives you more choice, for example when you get a DVD, or watch digital TV or go to the cinema.


From my experience, it is easier to learn a foreign language through a film with subtitles. For example, for learning German I found it helpful to watch a German film with subtitles, or a foreign movie with German subtitles.

As for getting used to dubbing, I've been living in Germany for almost five years and I can't really say I've gotten used to dubbing. I'd just say, there's not much choice when it comes to TV or cinema (of course with DVD it's a different story).
I still prefer subtitles and still find it weird seeing the whole foreign actors speaking in German.
From my German friends who spent some time in a place where dubbing is not the norm, most of them said if they had the choice, they would prefer subtitles.

I do admit, though, that most of the dubbers in Germany do a great job.

Grüsse,


MarK


----------



## psychodelika star

When I was in Colombia, I used to watch movies in my lenguage, like, Tom Cruise speaking Spanish, and that was normal for me. But now, that I am living here in the USA, I watch them in the original lenguage and with subtitles and when I go to watch Colombian channels and they are showing a movie, they chage the lenguage, it looks VERY weird...and I cannot even watch it...=D


----------



## San

MarX said:


> From my experience, it is easier to learn a foreign language through a film with subtitles. For example, for learning German I found it helpful to watch a German film with subtitles, or a foreign movie with German subtitles.



The problem with subtitles, at least for me, is that I can't seem to stop reading and very often the eye is quicker than the ear, so I miss the experience of understanding what it's said by myself.



> As for getting used to dubbing, I've been living in Germany for almost five years and I can't really say I've gotten used to dubbing.


Well, perhaps it's because you are not German.  I can tell you that millions of people in my country are used to dubbed movies, even considering that the  cinematic language is not natural most of the time.



> From my German friends who spent some time in a place where dubbing is not the norm, most of them said if they had the choice, they would prefer subtitles.


Well, mybe Germany is different, what I see here is that whenever people have a choice, they are bound to pick the dubbed version. You've got to be a bit of an eccentric to watch movies with subtitles.


----------



## lizzeymac

I like subtitles, probably because I grew up with subtitles rather than dubbing.   I also believe that the actors voices are an integral part of the film.  I have seen a few dubbed movies that were very well done, the voice actors were excellent, and the text was faithful to the original.  I found that the voice actors interpretation of the scenes were different from the original but there were  cultural differences between the original actors (American) and the voice actors (German and French), so that isn't surprising.

txdexers assertion that dubbing of foreign films and TV is common where he lives (Southwest?)  is a distinct contrast to New York City (Northeast).   I don't remember any foreign movies being shown in NYC that were dubbed into English in the past 25 years or more, except for some of the movies for children. Subtitles are the norm.
Our local public TV stations show many foreign news shows and they are usually subtitled in English.   Foreign language entertainment TV shows are not usually subtitled on public TV, except Japanese and Chinese shows, which are subtitled in Japanese and Chinese, not English.

Nakamonos citing  'The Good, The Bad and the Ugly' as an example of dubbing excellence is a bit misleading.  It was not dubbed as a matter of choice but because of budget considerations.  Most of the  principal actors spoke English, the secondary actors and background players were dubbed into English.  Many of the outdoor scenes, including the original English dialog, had to be re-recorded later in a studio because of the poor quality of the the sound recording and intrusive background noise. The budget was to small and the schedule to tight to allow them to reshoot an entire scene if there was a sound problem in an otherwise acceptable shot.   This is true of many movies made at that time with limited budgets and short schedules.  
It is a great movie, but I think most people can hear the dubbing.  That "dubbed" sound is a quality of the genre of spaghetti westerns, as it is in Kung Fu movies, though it is not as pronounced.


----------



## MarX

San said:


> Well, mybe Germany is different, what I see here is that whenever people have a choice, they are bound to pick the dubbed version. You've got to be a bit of an eccentric to watch movies with subtitles.


Germany is definitely different from Spain.
I heard and read that when a Spaniard tries to speak English with a native speaker accent (like Australian, American, British accent), s/he may be made fun of or get weird looks from most other Spaniards because they think s/he's acting a bit snobbish. That's not the case in Germany.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## San

MarX said:


> Germany is definitely different from Spain.
> I heard and read that when a Spaniard tries to speak English with a native speaker accent (like Australian, American, British accent), s/he may be made fun of or get weird looks from most other Spaniards because they think s/he's acting a bit snobbish. That's not the case in Germany.
> Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.



Maybe, but people also make fun of the way Fernando Alonso speaks English, so perhaps it would be more worth doing a  research intended to discover what stuff some people in Spain don't make fun of.


----------



## MarX

San said:


> Maybe, but people also make fun of the way Fernando Alonso speaks English, so perhaps it would be more worth doing a research intended to discover what stuff some people in Spain don't make fun of.


Like the dubbing? 

I'm not making fun of the dubbing. 

Everybody has her/his own preference. 
Fact is that Spaniards generally have a relatively bad knowledge of English (or a foreign language, for that matter), and if they try to speak English, it's pretty hard to understand them. I heard this said by Spaniards themselves. Dubbing has something to do with this, and it is starkly noticeable if one compares the situation in Spain to the one in Portugal or Greece.
But I can understand. Spaniards generally don't see the need of learning a foreign language. Everybody goes back to their pueblo or Madrid. 

And don't misunderstand me. I love Spanish and am learning it.
But the situation in Spain is a well known fact and I won't take it amiss. 

Grüsse


----------



## San

MarX said:


> Like the dubbing?
> 
> I'm not making fun of the dubbing.
> 
> Everybody has her/his own preference.
> Fact is that Spaniards generally have a relatively bad knowledge of English (or a foreign language, for that matter), and if they try to speak English, it's pretty hard to understand them. I heard this said by Spaniards themselves. Dubbing has something to do with this, and it is starkly noticeable if one compares the situation in Spain to the one in Portugal or Greece.
> But I can understand. Spaniards generally don't see the need of learning a foreign language. Everybody goes back to their pueblo or Madrid.
> 
> And don't misunderstand me. I love Spanish and am learning it.
> But the situation in Spain is a well known fact and I won't take it amiss.
> 
> Grüsse



You're right, we are not doing very well at foreign languages. Dubbing has pros and cons, like everything else, but let's face it, for most people cinema is about entertainment, not about learning languages. It's amazing how many Spaniards, despite being English learners or having studied English in some point of their lives, they show no interest for the English cultural productions in its original versions. For them Esglish is just a school or extracurricular subject, something they need for work, holidays and nothing much further. Maybe it's hard to believe in a site like this, but people have other occupations.


----------



## MarX

San said:


> You're right, we are not doing very well at foreign languages. Dubbing has pros and cons, like everything else, but let's face it, for most people cinema is about entertainment, not about learning languages. It's amazing how many Spaniards, despite being English learners or having studied English in some point of their lives, they show no interest for the English cultural productions in its original versions. For them Esglish is just a school or extracurricular subject, something they need for work, holidays and nothing much further. Maybe it's hard to believe in a site like this, but people have other occupations.


You're absolutely right.


----------



## HesterPrynne

Most of the people here prefer subtitles rather than dubbing, I think because most of the people who visit WordReference are language lovers (and it could also help that we usually understand more than one language). However, this is not the case in real life, at least in Spain, where dubbing is so frequent (and, even if I prefer the original language, I must recognize that dubbing in this country is high quality). In Madrid, where I live, there are a lot of movie theatres but only a few offer movies in  their original language. I also think Spanish people often speak very bad English because every single movie or tv show is dubbed... Original language (any language) should be encouraged!


----------



## MarX

HesterPrynne said:


> Most of the people here prefer subtitles rather than dubbing, I think because most of the people who visit WordReference are language lovers (and it could also help that we usually understand more than one language). However, this is not the case in real life, at least in Spain, where dubbing is so frequent (and, even if I prefer the original language, I must recognize that dubbing in this country is high quality). In Madrid, where I live, there are a lot of movie theatres but only a few offer movies in their original language. I also think Spanish people often speak very bad English because every single movie or tv show is dubbed... Original language (any language) should be encouraged!


As I said, in Germany the dubbing generally also has a high quality. And most of the people who have no intention whatsoever to move out of the country probably won't see the need of subtitles. I also wrote that most of the Germans I know who have been abroad (in a country where dubbing is not the norm), and some others who have never been abroad, prefer subtitles. They realize how much substance the actors contain gets lost in dubbing. This includes among others their voice, their accent. That no matter how good the dubbing is, it's still worth more watching the original voice and language. As for getting used to reading subtitles, some even got used to it after like a couple of minutes. And I can assure you that the great majority of my German friends are no language freaks or linguistic geniuses. Most of them couldn't care less about language.


----------



## Encolpius

In both the Czech Republic and Hungary almost 99,9% of international movies is dubbed. Since dubbing has a very long tradition here I think they make it at a very professional level (choosing the proper voice, making a perfect translation). I always feel sorry for translators who need to coordinate the voice and mouth movements. It's the hardest type of translation. 
Since I loved languages always I prefered subtitles. But there is still one exception I want to watch in my native language, it's comedies.
And I can't imagine how one can watch e.g. Zeffirellis Romeo & Juliet with subtitels.


----------



## bb008

Hola

Casi todas las películas extranjeras en Venezuela le colocan los subtítulos, a menos que sea una película infantil, y en ese caso es identificada en los carteles "hablada en español".


----------



## chics

I prefer dubbed films, and I think it's for most of Spanish people, not only in American films but in others from Japan, Germany, China, etc. In general, we hate to have to read (and it's worst in operas and theatre, where usually you have to choose between seing soething or reading), and only people to expect to learn or to practice a little bit of a language (and some cinephiles...) like to watch films in original version, providing _it's in one of the languages he's learning_.

I don't think that it's the main cause of any low or high level of talking in a language, to practice prononctiation we have to talk, and to learn we have to study. Hearing some sentences and reading them during an hour evry week can help, but not at all more that practising by talking with people, chatting, collaborating in forums, writting, reading, doing exercises, asking, searching, demanding for corrections, etc.

When I went to France, quite a lot of people asked me :_ if I watch films in Spanish, will I learn it?_ the answer is no.


In bilingual regions of Spain, we are very interested in watching dubbed films in our other languages : Euskera, Catalan and Galician, but it's rare to find them because of globalitation, as Spanish is spoken by more people, few companies want to invest the same money in dubbing in a language spoked by fewer people. 

Is it the same in your country/society? If you life in a country where its language it's not used by hundreds of milions of people, isn't it that you haven't really a choice and that you've looked for advantages? If your languge is Spanish, Arabe, Chinese... isn't it that you have a complex of inferiority about your language or your culture in front of the American one?


----------



## Hakro

chics said:


> When I went to France, quite a lot of people asked me :_ if I watch films in Spanish, will I learn it?_ the answer is no.


Sorry, Chics, I have to disagree. Most of the young generation Finns speak English more or less fluently, and one of the main reasons is that films and TV-shows are not dubbed in Finland.

Of course just watching TV is not enough to learn a foreign language, but it helps a lot to learn the right pronunciation.


----------



## Encolpius

Hakro said:


> Sorry, Chics, I have to disagree. Most of the young generation Finns speak English more or less fluently, and one of the main reasons is that films and TV-shows are not dubbed in Finland.
> 
> Of course just watching TV is not enough to learn a foreign language, but it helps a lot to learn the right pronunciation.


 
I need to agree with Hakro. Not long ago I saw a Eurobarometer report regarding foreign languages and very good level of English was in Scandinavia and Netherlands where, I think, films are subtitled. Of course it is all worth mainly in childood.


----------



## MOC

Only thing dubbed in Portugal are cartoons for kids (I even remember watching some subtitled as a kid. I don't know if they still do). Even those who are directed towards a wider audience (not just kids) are presented with the original voices and subtitled, like the Simpsons to give a popular example.

I'd say most people in Portugal prefer the original versions. I for one, can't even understand how someone can evaluate if an actor is good or bad if they're just hearing the person who does his dubbed voice but that's just a matter of personal opinion.

I believe the portuguese, in general, like it that way, and it's not because they are language lovers (as I read a few posts before) but because it feels fake to them when it's dubbed. Obviously there are exceptions, but I've talked about this subject with several portuguese people from several different backgrounds, and the vast majority felt that way.

Knowing the original language, beats both dubbing and subtitles, though. There are always those things you just can't translate.


----------



## Zsanna

Encolpius said:


> Since I loved languages always I prefered subtitles.


If you knew how difficult they are to produce at times!  (Dubbing is not the only one...) But to come to the point:
I also loved languages but I have to admit that I was happier to watch dubbed films until I got to university and felt I had to grab every opportunity to hear/practise English.

I think it is much more comfortable to watch a dubbed film (at least for a first time) but once you don't have to concentrate on "the story" (for a second time or because it's not the story that's important), you may have the chance to begin to enjoy the original version with its own advantages.



Encolpius said:


> But there is still one exception I want to watch in my native language, it's comedies.


Now that's funny because I would have thought that it was exactly in the category that one should enjoy in the original. (However it is true that due to excellent translations, Hungarian versions provided good fun as well. Sometimes they were even better than the original.)

But then I think it all comes down to our level of knowledge of a language. You really have to master a language well (+ know its culture, habits, etc.) to be able to appreciate its humour. (And when you are at that level, you won't want the translated version anymore.) 
However, not everybody can be at that level, so dubbing will always come handy.
Meanwhile you hardly have to worry about the meaning of particular words if you watch an opera, you just have to have some culture in music to enjoy it and that's all.

I do think there are certain films that are better to be dubbed (roughly those in which the _meaning_ is important) meanwhile there are others better left with subtitles - totally independently of the benefit you may make out of watching films with their original sound track. That is another aspect to be handled independently.


----------



## MOC

Zsanna said:


> but once you don't have to concentrate on "the story" (for a second time or because it's not the story that's important).


 
Sorry, I didn't understand this bit. You mean, with subtitles you wouldn't concentrate on the story?


----------



## Zsanna

Not quite... rather: while reading subtitles, you _cannot _concentrate on the story as much as when you just have to follow the film (= story+actions+gestures, etc.) with your eyes. 
But if you see a film for a second time (so you know the story+ ... and don't have to pay attention to every detail so closely), it's easier to enjoy the original sound, language, etc.


----------



## sokol

Hakro said:


> Of course just watching TV is not enough to learn a foreign language, but it helps a lot to learn the right pronunciation.


That is my opinion too.

Of course you don't learn a language from watching subtitled films only, but recently I saw what it means to see subtitled films: as I did learn some Spanish I noticed that I hardly understood anything at all before and that now I get quite something of the original language when watching a subtitled Spanish film (even though I still need the subtitling to being able to follow the story).
You get more used to hearing the language, you get some idioms (and remember them!), and you certainly improve your pronunciation if you watch them regularly - pronunciation mainly is acquired through _hearing _(and practice; but first you will have to listen).

In Austria almost all films are dubbed - the dubbing industry of course is dominated by Germany where the big studios are situated, and most films shown in TV are dubbed.
In cinemas the big ones usually show dubbed films while in each bigger city there's at least one cinema theater showing (almost exclusively) subtitled films (the only ones not subtitled being German films, in those ones) - and in Vienna there are several.
I prefer them subtitled, even if the original language is one of which I don't understand a word (like for example Kasakh).
Of course some genres are less worse when dubbed (this certainly is true for action and horror), but usually something gets lost in the process (this of course especially is true for comedies, as already mentioned).

Well, it may be that in some cases the dubbed version is better than the original: I know of no such example for German dubbed versions, but theoretically a good dubbing could make a bad original version somewhat acceptable.


----------



## Cracker Jack

Zsanna said:


> Not quite... rather: while reading subtitles, you _cannot _concentrate on the story as much as when you just have to follow the film (= story+actions+gestures, etc.) with your eyes.
> But if you see a film for a second time (so you know the story+ ... and don't have to pay attention to every detail so closely), it's easier to enjoy the original sound, language, etc.


 
Hello Zsanna.  To read and watch film at the same time is one skill that a language learner needs to develop.  Some argue that while reading subtitles, visual details are lost.  To me however, it doesn't affect me.  I don't think that reading while watching makes you lose track of the storyline.  In fact, it makes you even understand it better because you are really following through.


----------



## Encolpius

Cracker Jack said:


> Hello Zsanna. To read and watch film at the same time is one skill that a language learner needs to develop. Some argue that while reading subtitles, visual details are lost. To me however, it doesn't affect me. I don't think that reading while watching makes you lose track of the storyline. In fact, it makes you even understand it better because you are really following through.


 
I think it all depends on who you are. Some people can concentrate on many different things at the same time, some can't. I can't.


----------



## sokol

Cracker Jack said:


> Hello Zsanna.  To read and watch film at the same time is one skill that a language learner needs to develop.  Some argue that while reading subtitles, visual details are lost.  To me however, it doesn't affect me.  I don't think that reading while watching makes you lose track of the storyline.  In fact, it makes you even understand it better because you are really following through.


If you manage to read (subtitles) and look (at the moving pictures) and hear (the original language) at the same time I agree with you: your attention is on the film altogether, you follow the storyline closer.

This is one of the things of watching subtitled films I enjoy - of course only in cases when I understand the original language else hearing would only give atmosphere and nothing more.

I too know people claiming, like Encolpius, that they can't watch and hear and read at the same time or that this is too exhausting for them, that they couldn't enjoy the film anymore and that going to the cinema would not be relaxing for them with subtitled films.
In that case of course only two possibilities remain: to either trying to learn to hear and watch and read at the same time, or to only watch dubbed films (or native tongue films).


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

This was a good thread in its time, but it was opened when the cultural discussions forum could contain personal opinions without actually having any cultural perspective.

Since this thread is now continuing along the lines of personal opinion only, it is now closed.  The film version will include subtitles instead of being dubbed.

Thanks for your participation!


----------

