Let me first state that I am not in general against synchronizing/dubbing, if it's well done. And in Germany (I agree with hcd on this) it is more often than not very well done. The people who do it are professionals, excellent actors, excellent directors. A lot of effort is put into the process. There is no comparison between this and the kind of crude voice-overs you get to hear, from time to time, in Russian or Spanish versions of films. I do prefer subtitled films most of the time, but it's just dogmatic to deny that subtitling has got its problems too. For one, it keeps your attention from where it belongs: with the picture. The pacing of films is aimed at viewers with an undivided attention, not ones who have to read the dialogue at the same time. Dubbing allows you to concentrate on the pictures 100%.
Still, concerning the translation of films (no matter if the translation results in subtitles or in dubbing) I am opposed to most of your points, hcd. I said that the general principle in translating is that you need a special reason if you want to deviate from the original. To which you remarked:
hcd wrote:Where did you get this from? Is this your personal point of view?
To which I answer: No, it is just the meaning of the word "translating". Most people would agree that to translate means: Replace a sentence from one language with a sentence from a different language that has (as closely as possible) the same content. It does
not mean: Replace a sentence from one language with a sentence from a different language that has a completely different content which the translator for some reason or other liked better.
hcd wrote:Or the movie "Das Boot". The US-dubbing is a desaster. No wonder that this film never won an oscar. Because of the x-rated original language they translated it to unrated English. That destroyed the most of the atmosphere of the film. (F.e. says one captain in the original German version the English sentence "I'm too drunk to fuck." The US-version goes like "I'm unable to go to town." or something imbecile like this.)
I just want to note in passing that this is exactly what I have been arguing about the German translation of Fucking Åmål...
But again, my point is more general, and it is not just a matter of taste. I do not deny that there may be examples where a very liberal translation policy which in fact results in an entirely rewritten script improves on the original. You cite a legendary example, "The Persuaders" / "Die Zwei". Now I could reply by citing some of the examples that come to my mind of German translations trying to be funnier than the original which completely killed films, the most prominent one possibly being Monty Python's "Holy Grail" (not to mention the pathetic attempt to dub the "Flying Circus").
(I have no idea about how the Spencer/Hill and PIerre Richard films sounded in their original language by the way, and how much liberties were taken with the German versions. But if you want to imply that the result is in any way successful (let alone funny), then I disagree. It would explain your support for the "Horizont einer knieenden Ameise"-joke however, because that is exactly the same kind of humour.
)
Instead I want to underline again that I don't want translators to mess around with works of art, even if once in a lifetime their messing around actually resulted in an improvement. I'll rather have the chance to judge the merit of the original, even if it's bad. It's a matter of principle, as I said. Where do you want to draw the line otherwise? Once you encourage Rainer-Brandt-style rewriting of original scripts, how could you keep some nobody-knows-his-name synchronizing director from saying something like, "Hey, we've got this Roberto Benigni thing called "Life Is Beautiful" here, but it isn't nearly funny enough, we need some more really cool jokes and one-liners in it, where are the guys who did all the Spencer/Hill movies in the seventies, weren't they Italians too? Let them spice this up a bit!" - "Hey, all this Bergman crap is terribly boring and characters don't speak at all for hours... let's "re-arrange the scenes from the beginning" and let the narrator tell some really funny Pierre Richard jokes..." - The very idea is sheer horror to me. Who are these people to judge whether a script needs improvement, and where, and how? When people translate novels by an accomplished writer and think that the end is weak (which it may be), are they expected (or even allowed) to write a new one for the German book market? And why should a film script deserve any less respect?
(And I really like the German voice of Elin. It's so much better than the original. Well, again, in my opinion.)
Contrary to the foregoing, this
is a matter of personal taste. I am fully and fiercely opposing your opinion, but there's no arguing about it!
hcd wrote:Btw, your nickname looks like a "link" to Immanuel Kant's "Kritik der reinen Vernunft" (Critique of Pure Reason) from 1871. Why is that?
From 1781 precisely (just a typo I guess). I just happen to like that book. And I hold a PhD in philosophy,
om du nu måste veta det.