 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Problem in crediting nationality vs. ethnicity. posted by TAFKA Steve on April 12, 2001 at 19:17:40:
yes your distinctions are correct and worthy.
However, I was talking about "Asian cinema" as a whole, bringing in mutiple, but unique genres
Action- nobody does HK action like HK, and if anybody does it's cause their copying them or learning from their techniques, or hiring them. Thank god too we are finally brining over HK action stars to d othe moves too, because basically we (non-Asian cinema) can;t handle it. Watch Mel Gibson & DAnny Glover theoretically kick Jet Li;s ass in the end of Lethal Weapon 4. Jet gets kicked in the balls and falls down more gracefully than Gibson or Glover can even throw a clean punch. Funny story- I heard early preview audiences saw a differnt fight sequence (where the Lethal Weapon boys more soundly drub Jet without shooting, stabbing, and tag teaming him as much. They rejected it, it was too ridiculous. Final version slows Jet down by impaling him... even so watch it a coupla times, I still don;t think these guys could kick his ass in real life if he was impaled- and they certainly can;t act it.Chinese Fairy tale epics - Chinese Ghost sory - remember that movie? what was that 5 years ago it came out, maybe 8?- every bit as good as Crouching Tiger (albeit with a lesser budget OK), very similar idea, would have wowed us here 8 years ago.
Comedies will take longer, because of the cultural language barriers, but will happen hopefully soon. I forget the guy, buy there is some physical comedy from some really popular guy (Steven Chang???) I forget, but it;s killer. However a lot of the puns dont make english sense, and their traditional "funny guy" roles are totally different than ours. WE don;t quite get teh "always hungry guy" for example.
Personally Zhang Yimou is my favotire director, and I believe the most creative intelligent and thorough film maker in the world - so thanks for giving him a shout! Find another film with as creative, emblamatic, powerful, and consistent use of color as his epics (specifically his older ones). Find one that uses color without it being cartoony color (like in Batman, etc.). I can;t think of many. Most I can are foreign themselves (Kieslowski with his color trilogy, Almodovar but thats a bit cartoony).
Raise the Red Lantern comes out and everyone pee's themselves here with good reason- it;s great. However, he was turning out things as good or better for 6 years before most of the US knew he existed, or anything about Asian film other than kung fu & subtitles.
Don;t forget our buddy Chen Kaige, who went to film school with Zhang, and worked on their first picture together. Zhang was his cinematographer on The Blue Kite (I think thats the name, maybe it was Yellow Kite...), then went off to do his own stuff, while Chen struggled a bit and moved to the US and is making more stuff here now.
Anyway- I getcha, but the sad fact is that before peope can be hit with the specific distinctions of the genres, nationalities, and differnt film schools of these unique countries, they first have to at least understand that there is Asian cinema, it has merit, etc.
Then they can get more involved,and more learned and specific hopefully.I have hoped for more Asian film recognition in general for 6 years. My personal favorite films are Zhang, HK action, you dig?
Boy am I psyched that finally it is here!But am I a bit annoyed though by awe stuck idiots telling me how amazingly revolutionary this film was. It;s popularity was revolutionary. For many americans it was revolutionary. PErhaps the technology used to eliminate wire traces, etc. are revoluationary.
Thats all Cool.But I wish a bit more interest would be generated in the great movies that have been made there in the past 15 years. That was revolutionary!
The saving grace is perhaps not that it will bring more of the past 15 years to light for most, but that perhaps we will not miss out on the great works of the next 15 just because we have to read subtitles.dg
Follow Ups:
x
Chen Kaige--boy, I loved his "Farewell My Concubine." My favorite Zhang Yimou film is probably "Ju-Dou" (definitely redder than "Red").Agree about "Crouching Tiger": the state-of-the-art in crane- and wire-assisted human flying technology, but not groundbreaking otherwise.
You're right about the Asian cinema awareness problem. I know two American actors, one a voting member of AMPAS, who both thought Ang Li was Korean. I think the average American movie-goer is more interested in seeing "actors/stars" in films rather than "directors'/auteurs'" visions, so more Asian actors are going to have to break into American cinema/television (and not just for the "Cirque du Soleil" effects of Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung). Where's Maggie Cheung (arguably the finest Asian actress) when we really need her?
Read a Q&A article featuring Roger Ebert in a U.S. Air flight magazine. "Dear Roger, I'd like to go see more foreign films, but my friends won't go to films in which they have to read subtitles. What can I do? Roger answers: I think you need smarter friends."
Gong Li takes my prize for best Chinese actress.What did you mean by this:
--the "Cirque du Soleil" effects of Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung
just curious because that reference puts certain thoughts in my mind (ie. I read it as a possible trivialization of essentially the modern day Buster Keaton)But that's cause Cirque gives me a gag reflex from it;s freakiness.
Regardless- movies are made for money, and future films should NEVER forget that their entrance into our market was ushered by their more "commercial" bretheren.
The subtitle thing - let me explain my thoughts
Some movies are "thinking movies" - these to varying degrees require you to figure things out, etc. By this I mean all those movies that put me to sleep because they were too boring to watch straight through, but every film education requires you to watch (Fellini, Bergman). Subtitles are another ingredient. (Usual Suspects is a modern film that seems to be a good example for me, as most people saw & liked this one)
Now, two things - 1. the cinematic content is as important as the written dialogue - we can agree on that, yes? Otherwise the book would be the same as the movie. So, if the movie adds this "visual" cinematic element, subtitles will only serve to draw attention away from that. Subtitles can eliminate all traces of the actors skill by drawing visual attention away from facila expressions, etc.
Finally the artificial "focus" on the bottom of the frame from subtitles can damage the frame composition big time IMO.
2. The dialogue is important, so what use is it to hear what a translator thought could fit under the frame, and seemed to be right?
I have no specific idea of the accuracy of sub-titling, because I am not fluent in anything else. But I can tell you that I was more than once "deep in analysis" of some damn foreign film, and only have a friend laugh his ass of reading the choice of wording they used for subtitles. Eventually, from one of those experiences I started writing about what I could see (color is my big thing personally), rather than what I could interpret from the dialogue, etc.Try pressing the "Info" butting on your sat- I personally think subtitles can be that accurate/innacurate. Sometimes it sums up the idea/content just right, sometimes the 3 line blurb doesn't really catpure the whole idea, and sometimes really does not make sense at all.
MAybe Chinese Restaurant fortune cookies could be an analogy.Category 2: "voyeuristic films" - a generalization, but bascially your action films, comedy, formualic tear jerker. Commercial Cinema for the most part (though all films are actually a balance between this and thinking films).
These films require even more visual attention, as they are eye-candy to varyuing degrees. There's more than that, but I think we can be on the same page without saying more on this- right?
So subtitles, REALLY draw away from the action, which really kills these thingsThe first time I saw Crouching Tiger at home I CHOSE TO WATCH THE DUBBED version. I tried it with subtitles for about 15 minutes and started falling asleep.
With all the subtitles I initally lost an apprecaition for the scope and beuaty of the locaitons and scenery.
With all the action, i Had no time for reading subtitles- you really miss a TON of stuff - especially when they are just yelling out the names of their moves!I was able to go back later to "read the film" when I was familiar with it and more inclined. When I watch the DVD, I still choose dubbed now. I already know the text now, so my watching is not to re-think the process, but to gratify myself- and dubbing makes it gratifying.
When I try to get people to watch it I always show it dubbed. For many of the reasons above-- I want them to like this movie, and will remove any impediments to this.
Anyway- for the Subtitle purist (and Mr. Ebert himself) -
1. find out if the sub titles are an exact match for the dialogue.
If so, you are over one hurdle (I think very few are accurate) but still with the limitations that your attention is drwan from the physical action, and this is problematic.IF the titles are not exactly the dialogue, then:
DUBBING is superior.I am sure Mr. EBert (and the like) are happy in their little world of "intelligent" people who see all the right movies,
to be honest, Very very very very few people are watching these foreign films on the whole. Especially my generation. OF my friends almost none have seen many foreign films, I woudl say their film experience is similar to what we prescribe to the "average american".
If intelligent 20-somethings from MIT don;t watch these movies, should we dismiss them or their intelligence, or realize that America, like the cinema itself, is a visually saturated world. We are products of an enviroment that is image based, not thought or concept or even word IMO.
PErsonally, I think seeing new films can braoden people';s perspective on everything. Especially true for foreign films. I try to get my friedns to watch them for this reason, but I know better than to give them subtitles until they are really into something....Mr. Ebert's attitude will lead to an ever diminishing group of film elitists, who have nothing to do but make obscure little references back & forth to their other buddies, while laughing at those of us who are less "smart". (Dare I touch a nerve by suggesting a comparison to the people in High Fidelity?)
Honestly, when I was in school, and someone else was paying my bills, I watch lots of these "thinking" movies. Most of them bored me to tears, even as I recognized their cinematic value.
I have no desire to re-visit Fellini, or force my friends to.Now that I work all day to pay for my food (and of course, the HT), I don;t want to "think" about a movie when I come home, I want to escape into & enjoy a movie. (Favorite current movies: Varisty Blues, STarship Troopers) How can I blame the public for any other attitude- especially if they see movies as "entertainment".
dg
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
