381 La haine

[jbeall]

A point on the subtitles, this is a director-approved edition so he will have been aware of the changes. That said, I'm not totally on board with the them but, really, these are not sophisticated kids, they weren't trying to make any political statement with Le Pen, they were just trying to get a rise out of the skinheads, any name would do. And down with Le Pen has less snap than fuck Hitler, even if they're both pretty generic jeers.

Regardless of how sophisticated the characters are, the film itself is very sophisticated and Kassovitz chose to have them say "Le Pen" rather than "Hitler." Whatever their educational shortcomings, it's significant that they taunt skinheads by saying "Down with Le Pen." It's a consciously chosen signifier, and the subtitler ignored its relevance to the overall plot of the film.

Happily, Le Pen came in fourth yesterday, so he won't be in the second round of the presidential election this time. However, when he finished second in the 2002 election, there was quite a bit of protesting. Le Pen is a highly polarizing figure in France, no matter your level of education or economic status.

[Kinsayder]

A point on the subtitles, this is a director-approved edition so he will have been aware of the changes. [...] Criterion's always been very delicate with cultural minutia and if Kassovitz can live with it, so can I.

Does "director-approved" mean "down to the last detail"? The Criterion site only says "New, restored high-definition digital transfer, supervised by director Mathieu Kassovitz."

Even if Kassovitz checked the Criterion subs, he may not have picked up on the problems we're raising here, specifically the change in the dialogue's cultural emphasis from urban French to urban American. He was also involved in the Optimum release (he did the commentary track for it) and that one has quite different subs, with less of the "Yo yo bro" kind of stuff and specific cultural references intact.

[Doctor Sunshine]

Yes, I think director-approved means Kassovitz watched the movie--with the subtitles on even. Assuming he wasn't aware of this and piling it all on Criterion's, or a sole subtitler's, shoulders is a little presumptuous. Is it so hard to believe that someone as enthused about getting his film into the Criterion Collection as Kassovitz was would invest at least another hour an a half beyond the transfer and the commentary track? The film's full of American references, Kassovitz thrives on them. How can anyone here be sure he wasn't the one to introduce them (I'll also point out that Hitler isn't American) into the subtitles? Write to Criterion if it bothers you, I'm sure they'd be happy to provide some answers.

[Antoine Doinel]

Yes, I think director-approved means Kassovitz watched the movie--with the subtitles on even. Assuming he wasn't aware of this and piling it all on Criterion's, or a sole subtitler's, shoulders is a little presumptuous. Is it so hard to believe that someone as enthused about getting his film into the Criterion Collection as Kassovitz was would invest at least another hour an a half beyond the transfer and the commentary track? The film's full of American references, Kassovitz thrives on them. How can anyone here be sure he wasn't the one to introduce them (I'll also point out that Hitler isn't American) into the subtitles? Write to Criterion if it bothers you, I'm sure they'd be happy to provide some answers.

You seem to be making a lot of assertions about Kassovitz (I'm not really sure what you mean by he "thrives" on American references) but regardless of whether it's Criterion or Kassovitz himself or outside subtitler, the subtitle job does a disservice to the characters of the film and to the viewer. It immediately takes us out of the context of the film.

Yes, we know Hitler isn't American, but for most North Americans he is a pretty common go-to guy people on this side of the Atlantic if you want incite some racial fireworks.

And I have sent an email to Criterion but I haven't received a reply.

[Doctor Sunshine]

I'm offering a counter argument to the compromising-the-artist's-intentions sentiment. Count how many times, in the film and the supplements, he references the works of Scorsese and Lee and American Graffiti. The guy likes American stuff.

I'm not whole heartedly endorsing the changes but they allow a more immediate punch instead of the slightly distancing effect of cultural references one's not intimately familiar with. It's a valid compromise in keeping with the high energy, visceral spirit of the film. Scooby-Doo's known in France, Hitler's known in France. These references are not unimaginable. Should Vinz have immitated something from Breathless instead of Taxi Driver? (Oh wait...) What are we losing? Literalness. What are we gaining? Relatablity. And both on a minor level. And, extremely likely, with the blessings of the director. It's not like Weistein put this through the grinder, the dialog's still there. Anyway, it's not that anyone takes issue with the changes that made me jump in here, I just wanted to see the ire focused in the right direction.

[arsonfilms]

I'm with Doctor Sunshine on this one. Having re-watched the film in the past few days, I kept an eye out for translations that differed from what is literally presented onscreen, and I have to say that there are just as many liberties taken on any other disc that anyone else puts out. The difference is simply that the changes made to La Haine make the rferences relatable to a wider audience without making any relevant changes to the director's intent. I would venture to guess that even "Down with Le Pen" as an insult to a skinhead in France is a little shakey, even if it is what the character says. Down with Hitler is a change to the text, sure, but not only does it make a relatable point, it makes a point that applies more closely to the situation at hand.

I remember a few years ago the studio I was working for put out an obscure mid-70s Danish film on DVD that nobody in the office seemed to care much about, I wanted to make sure that this film got a respectable treatment since it was the first time it was being made available in the US. I opted for a more literal approach to the subtitles, working closely with both our subtitling company and a friend who had lived in Denmark, to make sure that I wasn't re-writing the film and that much of the natural meaning of the dialogue was preserved. Well, the subtitles got slammed by every reviewer that saw the disk, as they compained that too many of the Danish phrases as they were presented were distracting to the film. By not having Americanized subtitles that equated the intended meaning to something more accessable and relatable to the audience, I think that I probably substantially hurt the reception of the disk.

We see Americanized and "convenient" subtitles all the time, so why take issue with certain cultural touchstones that don't have the same impact to a foreign audience (namely Americans) without adaptation? The whole joke of the scene with Asterix relies on the assumption that the audience knows that the nickname is that of a popular cartoon character. Sure WE know who Asterix is, but how many of us outside of France have seen an Asterix and Obelisk comic? What about all of the thousands of people Criterion is hoping will buy this disk that has never even HEARD of these characters? Doesn't calling him Snoopy make the same point without disrupting the narrative with an unfamiliar reference?

I certainly understand the argument against changing the original content too much, and I agree with it for the most part, but this seems like such an arbitrary line. I was more irritated by what was left out of the wonderful presentation of Children of Paradise (for instance) than I was with the changes made to La Haine. At least with La Haine the changes are made with the intention of having a better understanding of the narrative, rather than simply omission through creative interpretation.

[Kinsayder]

At least with La Haine the changes are made with the intention of having a better understanding of the narrative, rather than simply omission through creative interpretation.

How does removing the cultural and political references in La Haine improve our understanding of the narrative? The social marginalisation of these characters, and the political exploitation of the situation by reptiles like Le Pen is what this film is about. Everyone hates Hitler, but these guys have a specific reason to hate Le Pen and the skinhead gang who are the logical extension of Le Pen's philosophy. You can't simply translate that to a Boyz N da Hood scenario without a major loss of meaning.

If these subs were for a US TV presentation, I don't think anyone would be surprised. We've come to expect more from Criterion, including a respect for their audience's openness and curiosity about other cultures. In their Japanese films, they don't change sake to whiskey, so why make these changes to La Haine unless it's a calculated move for commercial reasons: "If we dumb it down by 30%, we could get 50% more sales from casual (young) buyers who enjoy the violence but don't want to be troubled by any confusing non-American references."

[arsonfilms]

I've just realized that few (if any) of the people angry about the subtitles are American. Now first let me be clear that I in no way condone the actual dumbing down of something to make it more understandable, but please keep in mind that the US as a whole makes no effort to import other cultures or cultural references. Only a small handfull of cultural elites (if you will) would understand a reference like Asterix or Le Pen in the US, and I don't doubt for a minute that the change was Kassovitz (or Foster's?) idea since those changes were in place when I first saw the movie on VHS years ago.

You are absolutely right, David, Americanized subtitles are not appropriate for non-American markets (just as British or Australian subtitles are not appropriate for an American market), but then we start to get into that whole region/territory discussion I was so happy to be done with. Criterion is an American company selling to an American market, and without a cultural glossary at the begining of the film (like in Rialto's recent release of Mafioso), I stand by my opinion that the change is innoffensive, considering.

[Gregory]

I'm from the United States and this bothered me (although it wasn't enough to make me cancel my preorder). I just didn't comment on it before now.

I don't understand the claims that Asterix is highly obscure or is considered esoteric high-culture stuff in this country. I've seen well-worn copies of Asterix (and Tintin) books in the children's section at a lot of public libraries and used bookstores, including many in the Midwest, which is relatively barren culturally.
Le Pen is probably a different case, especially as people watch this DVD in 15 or 20 years and the man is dead, fewer people will probably get the reference. But explanations of this kind of thing are one thing the essays in the booklet are for. Now, of course, Le Pen is in the U.S. press from time to time, but if one stopped people on the street here and asked them who Le Pen is, most would not know. However, many also would not be able to give the names of their own senators and representatives in Congress, so it's not just that references too specific to another country are a barrier to understanding; it's part of a more general lack of knowledge and engagement. In my experience, at least, people here who sit down to watch a movie from another country don't necessarily expect to understand every reference, as long as the gist of the dialog and the plot are consistently clear.

[colinr0380]

I think the point needs to be made here that American produced subtitling is not necessarily used...

Yes, I remember the 'Subtitles by Titra Film, Paris' at the end of many a film (often the VHS and early DVD releases that used the theatrical prints with burnt-in subtitles).

[jbeall]

In light of this last post I think the point needs to be made here that American produced subtitling is not necessarily used, nor would it be acceptable to other parts of the English speaking world. Even when English titling is done by the home production company, or is done "on the ground" as it is for Australia TV for instance by the exemplary SBS titling agency, these people would never dream of dumbing down things like direct references to the politics and society of the movies' context.

I'm sorry if this sounds rude but - frankly - the sort of titling you're making excuses for is only something that an American company would even consider, for what it evidently presumes is a totally uneducated audience.

I wholeheartedly agree. The U.S. is all about appealing to the lowest common denominator (hell, just look at our President... the LCD would be a step up for him!), and the American subs of La Haine were done by an American company.

Like Gregory, I'm an American who was bothered by the subs, and also not bothered enough to cancel my order--indeed, I'm otherwise exceedingly pleased with this release. Nevertheless, I don't like being told, in effect, by the subtitlers that I'm too dumb to understand the film's cultural references!! Why the hell else would I be watching it in the first place?!?!?

I've written to criterion to register my disapproval. Frankly, if an audience unfamiliar with who Le Pen is doesn't get the reference, they can go back and listen to the commentary track.

[hammock]

Spot on Jbeall.

Try and imagine how a movie like "Rockers" would translate in their hands?

[soma]

I find it hard to believe that some consider Asterix so little known to be honest. Here in Australia, halfway around the world, we have the graphic novels in just about every Primary School library, and were encouraged to read them in our early reading days. Being an avid reader even at that age I think I churned through just about the entire collection, and even then, when I didn't understand a reference I ASKED a parent or teacher, or RESEARCHED with what simple methods were available to me (ie: very basic non-fiction section at the Primary School library) so that I may better understand the text in front of me - particularly in light of the references to ancient Rome. Actually I didn't even know what a wild boar was at that age, try finding one of those in Australia.

Likewise today, when I watch foreign films and don't understand a reference (provided I'm intrigued enough to learn more about said topic / reference) I hop straight on the internet after or even sometimes during the film, again so that I may better understand the text in front of me. I think that's the whole point of learning about other cultures, ways of thinking, ways of life, political movements, moments in history and historical figures, is it not?!

In saying all this, though, I admit the Asterix to Snoopy swap doesn't bother me too much, it seems a tad inconsequential given that the characters in La Haine could have justifiably been exposed to Snoopy in the same way they were to Asterix and Obelix. However, the other changes including the swap of Le Pen to Hitler and even more importantly the actual dialogue and manner in which the characters speak to one another is UNFORGIVABLE from a company I respect as much as Criterion. This is cultural and artistic butchery, plain and simple.

How fucking hard would it be to provide two subtitle tracks?!! Please.

[skuhn8]

How fucking hard would it be to provide two subtitle tracks?!! Please.

How would you label them? 'Subs for Dummies' and 'Subs for Smarties'?

[Tribe]

I find it hard to believe that some consider Asterix so little known to be honest.

Unless one is a comics connoisseur, Asterix is virtually unknown in the USA. That has nothing to do with the merits of the discussion in this thread regarding the subtitles. But believe it, Asterix is hardly a ubiquitous presence in the States.

The Asterix/Snoopy subtitling reminds me that in Cuarón's Y tu mamá también there were several references to Chanoc, who happens to be a Mexican comic book character as unknown in the USA as Asterix. Whoever did the subtitling for that film didn't see any need to "dumb it down." Earlier in the thread there was a note indicating that the subtitling work was probably outsourced to another company...I wonder how much thought was put into vetting the resulting subtitling.

Tribe

[soma]

How would you label them? 'Subs for Dummies' and 'Subs for Smarties'?

Congratulations on the facetious and non-productive comment of the day! Pick up your prize from the neon-lit counter next to the vending machine.

Unless one is a comics connoisseur, Asterix is virtually unknown in the USA. That has nothing to do with the merits of the discussion in this thread regarding the subtitles. But believe it, Asterix is hardly a ubiquitous presence in the States.

Fair enough, I obviously take your word for it - but that is surprising to me. Thanks for the update / other side of the coin. Interesting.

Although... not relevant when La Haine was made, but definitely relevant in 2007 when the Criterion DVD has been released, how then does the existence of reasonably well-known French films of the Asterix and Obelix adventures alter the argument? Considering the audience in question is already purchasing an English subtitled French film on DVD, the degree of seperation there is far slimmer than with the graphic novels / comic books say.

Although again I will add, this particular change is not one that greatly bothers me. Still, food for thought.

[skuhn8]

well, you certainly took that rather poorly. Just musing out loud. BTW, we agree more than disagree on this matter so why not chill a little.

[arsonfilms]

Just a few quick notes for those who don't live in the US, just for the sake of reference:

The references as they exist on the Criterion disc are identical to their presentation on the old US VHS. It isn't a matter of Criterion picking the wrong subtitlers, and even if it were, someone at Criterion has to watch the subtitles repeatedly and then approve them. Regardless of who made the decision and why, every official US release of this film has included references to Snoopy and Hitler. The only people who will even notice the change are those who are familiar with non-US releases (or of course those who speak French and are paying attention).

As to the notoriety of Asterix and Obelisk in the US in book or movie form, there is not currently anything in print in this country. The movies never made their way over here, and any comics or would have to be imported, presumably from the UK. On a personal note, I've probably done more traveling than 99.8% of my countrymen (something like 93% of us don't even have passports), I have as many French language films on DVD as English ones and I'm intimately familiar with the Tintin series, but I am only familiar with Asterix an Obeslisk as abstract references. I couldn't tell you what they looked like with a gun to my head, and hardly anyone else in the US could either.

[sevenarts]

As to the notoriety of Asterix and Obelisk in the US in book or movie form, there is not currently anything in print in this country. The movies never made their way over here, and any comics or would have to be imported, presumably from the UK.

That's not quite true, there were some American translations in book form in the 80s and early 90s, and some limited newspaper syndication. It never really caught on though, and by and large you're right that virtually nobody here has heard of the series. The only reason I have is because I'm a big comics fan, and I've seen a bit of it, but haven't actually read any of it yet (though I like other French bandes desinees quite a bit).

This subtitling issue seems very unfortunate though. And others are quite right that this could only happen in America, where the reigning assumption seems to be that not only are people largely uninformed and uneducated, but are wholly unable to deal with a reference that they don't immediately grasp. Even if I hadn't know who Asterix was ahead of time, would I really be so bothered by it? Wouldn't be too hard to look up, or at least to grasp the gist from context and move on. And anyway, this kind of situation is one perfect justification for booklet essays and special features -- to explain elements of context that may be obscure to those from other cultures or time periods remote from the film's conception. A booklet could contain a brief essay commenting on such obscure references, or even simply a quick glossary, and films requiring more in-depth explication could have a commentary or critical video short.

[soma]

well, you certainly took that rather poorly. Just musing out loud. BTW, we agree more than disagree on this matter so why not chill a little.

Fair enough, apologies then for firing with six cylinders, but tone and intent can be difficult to guage in forum discussion. To be honest there was little in your post for me to not see it as sardonic and dismissive though. Maybe I just need more sleep...

[Jean-Luc Garbo]

I'm giving Criterion benefit of the doubt because had they not changed Asterix to an American equivalent some bonehead would probably have written a paper about Asterix as some sort of key to the film because it was reference that they didn't immediately grasp. "What does this mean? Asterix? It must be symbolic of something."

[Antoine Doinel]

I'm giving Criterion benefit of the doubt because had they not changed Asterix to an American equivalent some bonehead would probably have written a paper about Asterix as some sort of key to the film because it was reference that they didn't immediately grasp. "What does this mean? Asterix? It must be symbolic of something."

So Criterion should get the benefit of the doubt because they are letting bonehead film writers appear less stupid?

[tryavna]

As to the notoriety of Asterix and Obelisk in the US in book or movie form, there is not currently anything in print in this country. The movies never made their way over here, and any comics or would have to be imported, presumably from the UK.

That's not quite true, there were some American translations in book form in the 80s and early 90s, and some limited newspaper syndication. It never really caught on though, and by and large you're right that virtually nobody here has heard of the series. The only reason I have is because I'm a big comics fan, and I've seen a bit of it, but haven't actually read any of it yet (though I like other French bandes desinees quite a bit).

It's also not quite true that the "movies never made their way over here," either. In fact, during the early days of the Disney Channel (back in the mid-1980s), they imported and showed several of the Asterix movies -- dubbed, of course. The two I remember seeing most frequently were Asterix and Cleopatra and Asterix in Britain, though I remember seeing one or two others as well.

For verification, see this article on the Disney Channel from Wikipedia, which states:

During its early years, The Disney Channel imported several foreign animated shows and films, including Asterix (from France), The Raccoons (from Canada), and Paddington Bear (from the United Kingdom), among others.

Now, it's probably true that they were never released theatrically over here.

[Tribe]

It's also not quite true tat the "movies never made their way over here," either. In fact, during the early days of the Disney Channel (back in the mid-1980s), they imported and showed several of the Asterix movies -- dubbed, of course. The two I remember seeing most frequently were Asterix and Cleopatra and Asterix in Britain, though I remember seeing one or two others as well.

You're probably right. But the point is that neither the series, nor the characters ever acquired any iconic significance in the USA so that any significant portion of the population would recognize them. Even Tintin, which I think is better known around the world than Asterix, is relatively unknown in the States.

Tribe

[Gregory]

Fair enough, I obviously take your word for it - but that is surprising to me. Thanks for the update / other side of the coin. Interesting.

Maybe you didn't see my post on the previous page, but when there are conflicting reports in the thread, it's often not reliable to just take one person's word as a given. Again, I've noticed multiple Asterix books in the children's section of a lot of public libraries. I'm not sure if juvenile readers would be considered "comics connoisseurs," but if these books didn't get checked out, in most cases they would be withdrawn.
I simply don't think the posts above are accurate that say that there is nothing in print in the US or that publishers' attempts to make it catch on in the 1980s and 90s failed. Checking Amazon.com right now I see that recently published books are available for every Asterix title I'm familiar with, and then some. Every single one of the ones I scanned through had been reviewed by multiple people. Also, there are between 50 and 75 used copies for sale of each title from Amazon sellers. There normally are not that many used copies around of books that are really obscure. If there is a glut of books that didn't sell, the price on Amazon is usually very low, whereas most of these used Asterix books are priced at about half of cover price (plus shipping).
I'm not arguing that Asterix is as well known here as in Europe, or anything like that. The point of this discussion, as far as I see it, is whether or not Asterix is so obscure in the US that the subtitler for La Haine was justified in substituting Snoopy. I've already stated my position, and have suggested that people who would sit down and watch a film like La Haine are generally part of a more cultured minority who either would already be familiar with these references or wouldn't mind having to look them up if they were interested enough to do so. I know a lot of people who probably would not be at all familiar with Asterix or Le Pen, but many of these same people would not be interested in watching La Haine, or even any film with subtitles. ("If I'm watching a movie, I want to just watch it, not sit there reading the whole time" is something I've heard from numerous people.)