[ SECRET POST #6533 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6533 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Young Souls]



__________________________________________________



03.
[Ducktales/Disney]



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 33 secrets from Secret Submission Post #934.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

06. https://i.imgur.com/Crg8ho9.png

[feotakahari]

I suppose the question is whether the people making the remake understand the original dynamics well enough to “translate” them.

[(Anonymous)]

Heh this is timely because I was just thinking about The Vanishing. I love the American remake, it hits all the right notes for me. But the original was so boring. I watched with a few friends and had to explain some things to them because in the 80s and 90s the cultural divide between America and the rest of the world was huge.

[(Anonymous)]

The reason a lot of people rightfully dislike US remakes of foreign movies is because they tend to get dumbed down for the average murrican audience. Or at the very least some culturally important dynamics get changed so American "get them" better. And that tends to annoy people from those cultures because a lot of Americans do act like tge remakes "improved" the original when they reall didn't.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed. Setting often plays a role in storytelling and changing it and other elements to improve the narrative for your audience just makes sense. But the quality of that change is vital; don’t leave holes or just transplant characters and events to a new locale.

[thewakokid]

This secret has me DANGEROUSLY close to expressing my opinion of localizers.

Anyway, I think sometimes it's ok to leave certain concepts untranslated. Some times it's ok if a part of the audience doesn't totally get it.

And failing that, translators notes have never NOT been interesting to me.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

of course it's fine to leave things untranslated, but that's irrelevant if the goal is in fact reach, or if the point is to engage a new audience in new ideas that not understanding frustrates.

and there have been too many director-writers who complain about audience misinterpretation for reach not to be a goal of some at least.

[(Anonymous)]

IME no matter where the original source material comes from, the history of humans' desire for tribalism/comparison will always have bad actors coming out to complain about another culture bastardizing their art/culture.
Which isn't a lie, but it's not what is going on all of the time.

But let's not pretend cultural exchanges are not a thing and can/do come from a place of respect.
In broader strokes, I think we'd do better to encourage each other to see different interpretations of the same stories. They all can't be good but that could be for so many reasons.
Localized slang, societal norms, artists' different tastes, money, etc.

I enjoyed Bollywood's "Barfi!" And while the story was original, the presentation of the film in the beginning took heavy inspiration (IMO) from "Amelie" and "The Royal Tenenbaums". I liked it quite a bit and I wish more movie watchers would stop being so comparative for a bit and just appreciate that amazing filmmakers are creating amazing shit by being inspired by each other.

I do appreciate when creators openly talk about where their inspirations came from with their projects.

Nothing is original and that's a good thing. What we don't want are plagiarized and homogeneous content.

It also cracks me up that other cultures have made their own knockoff versions/reinterpretations of American films/shows, and they have not all been "better". LOL Interesting, at the very least.

[(Anonymous)]

All I'm hearing is Klaus saying "WHAAAAAT? You don't know the story of why schnauzers and eagles are natural enemies?"

also did you mean localizing or translating? You can't translate a silent scene shot moodily at dusk but you can localize it.

[thewakokid]

No, you can't localize it either.

Not as in "it's impossible" but like... you just can't. Not allowed. No ethical localization.

[(Anonymous)]

>No ethical localization.

Please explain.

[thewakokid]

I don't care for localizers.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

localization is a form of translation and i would argue occurred so often in ancient translations that making the two terms distinct is modern.

of course you can translate a scene. reproducing the scene using modern technology for instance is translation. but i mean translation, for film, because i think localization requires a certain deliberate action toward a general audience's perspective, and i don't think all film translations that are more intelligible to a different audience are intentionally doing that.

[(Anonymous)]

Ages ago I watched Logan Lucky, which is a pretty fun Steven Soderbergh heist film. I'm not American. Throughout the film there was so much ambient military hype that I was sure was going to be a payoff. I think there was a scene at a nascar event where there was a parade and some very sincere "god bless the troops". Anyway, there was no payoff, because it wasn't something I needed to focus on - it was just accurate detail that felt extremely jarring to me. I assume most Americans wouldn't have blinked at what stood out to me.
Perfect understanding is impossible, even when there isn't a language barrier.

[(Anonymous)]

Somehow this is a problem that only Americans have while the rest of the world is perfectly able to watch foreign movies without needing them to be catered to their specific understanding.