harosa

Sorry to burst your bubble but that is all that Ong Bak boils down to, cool fights and stunts. And I never claimed that I could see an unsubtitled movie and get all it is about, I said I saw THIS movie unsubtitled and got what it was about.

litza

Sorry to burst YOUR bubble, but how would you even know that Ong Bak is just cool fights and stunts when you couldn't understand a word that was spoken? Or maybe that's all you want out of a movie? Things that blow up really good? Which is pretty much the standard Hollywood action blockbuster mentality that you seem to be so down against.

Maybe you care to comment on the character based humor that fills the movie and is based in the exchange of dialogue?

As I think you have made it pretty clear, you have little interest in the actual movie or film experience, rather you just are happy to be the first person on the block to be able to see it.

What is ironic about this statement is that while you are so down on the "hype machine" in the US, you have no problem following the Internet hype machine--in this case Ong Bak. You didn't find a "fresh movie", you haven't experienced Ong Bak. What you did was read some reviews that said a new Thai movie has some cool ass kicking in it, and you fell for that hype machine and bought it. Never mind the fact that half the movie you can't understand, you want to argue that understanding only half of a movie is good enough.

This discussion reminds me of a similiar discussion last year revolving around the movie IRREVERSABLE. Like Ong Bak, there were a number of people who were so desperate to be the first on their block to see this movie that they were dropping $40$50 to buy an subtitled French dvds of this movie. Like Ong Bak, all sorts of rumors were spread that there was no way this movie would ever be released in the US, or released uncut. Like Ong Bak, there were claims that this movie could be understood and viewed without knowing French. What this really meant was that there was a very powerful and graphic rape sequence in the movie. Yeah, you didn't need to know French to understand that portion of the movie. But you lost all context of that sequence without understanding the rest of the movie. Much like you lose all context of the action and fight sequences in Ong Bak without the context of story and character.

So my final thought on the matter is to all the people who are not desperately trying to be cool and fashionable, the people who rather SEE a movie the way it was meant to be seen. RE: Ong Bak. Wait. Wait until you can see it and UNDERSTAND it. I watched the movie with a Thai friend. She was laughing and enjoying the movie immensely, and not just the empty headed fight sequences.

bobertkay99

Dude, litza, get off yer high horse, its just a kung-fu flick.

harosa

THANK YOU, bobert. And Litza, whenever you do get around to seeing the movie, please tell me the deep spiritual meaning when Boonting jumps out of the fire and knees the guy in the head or when he does a running slide under the truck, thank you.

litza

Ah ha, no wonder you don't care about subtitles, obviously you can't read and/or understand English. If you could, you have read that I already saw the movie.

Remember, education is not a bad thing.

harosa

Excuse me, the haranging coming from both you and Excentris blurred into one, either way, whenever you do get around to seeing it with subtitles, get back at me with the subtle nuances of flaming kicks to the head and arm breaks, or you can have your Thai friend enlighten us.

JIF

I caught ONG BAK with English subtitles at the Toronto International Film Festival. It is definitely worth buying. The principle actor did a phenomenal job; but, if he's considering a career in Hollywood (ala Jet Li and Chow Yun Fat), he's got to work on that high-pitched voice of his.

harosa

Now you tell me JIF, if the movie didnt have subtitles, would it have made you feel like you were missing out on the total experiences the filmmakers wanted you to have? Or do you believe , like I do, that the movie is just a martial arts showcase, a phenomanal one though it is.

litza

Maybe you can answer me this grasshopper, its a basic concept that you seem to refuse to accept:

If the filmmakers didn't want you to understand the dialogue, why did they bother to put any in?

If the filmmakers only wanted you to take away from their movie a collection of cool fight sequences, why did they craft an entire movie and story around the 10-15 minutes of thai boxing? Why had music, sound effects, or sound for that matter?

In fact, why even bother watching the movie? Wouldn't it make more sense just to fast forward to all the good parts? Kinda like a porn movie?

Some people read "Celebrity Skin" with the belief that the only "good parts" of a movie are when the actress shows her breasts. Different strokes for different folks, obviously your level of appreciation for a film rests solely on the level of ass-kicking on display.

harosa

My arguement was never that the rest of the movie beyond the fights was needless, I only stated that I , and I can only speak for myself, tremendously enjoyed the movie, even without subtitles and recommended it for any fans of fighting movies if they could get beyond the fact that there are no subtitles. You seemed to have taken some affront to that and got on some soap box that Im sure the majority of people here dont agree with. And yes, for THIS specific movie, and this is the only foreign movie I have ever got without subtitles (and trust me I have hundreds), my level of appreciation for it rests solely on the level of ass-kicking on display. As for "Celebrity Skin", dont pass your fetishes on to me.

litza

Really now? How do you define "needless"? According to you, the movie is NOTHING but action. Everything else is...well, it sure looks like to you you think its "needless".

Part of the problem with having a truly intelligent discussion with you is that you keep changing your position.

"Now you tell me JIF, if the movie didnt have subtitles, would it have made you feel like you were missing out on the total experiences the filmmakers wanted you to have? "

Or:

"Or do you believe , like I do, that the movie is just a martial arts showcase, a phenomanal one though it is."

Or:

"Sorry to burst your bubble but that is all that Ong Bak boils down to, cool fights and stunts."


Before you try to argue a point, I think it might serve you better to try and decide on what your point actually is?

harosa

My position has never changed, my question to JIF was a joke to try and see if he would prove your point, I was being sarcastic as is obvious by my next line that you yourself quoted. My second and third quotes in your post say the same thing so how has my opinion flip flopped? As for your "needless" comment, you're putting words in my mouth, I clearly say that I dont consider the rest of the movie needless beyond the fights but it didnt bother me not to have the subs, despite of what you "think" I say or mean.

litza

Oh little grasshopper, I would suggest you learned to master clear communication in English before tackling something has complicated as sarcasm.

John Spartan

Read any half-detailed plot summary before watching the film and you shouldn't have any problem understanding 90% of this movie. There are other forms of communication than verbal, you know. Not to mention that this certainly isn't a film where people sit around discussing complex philosophy. It shows, it doesn't tell. It's comprised of simple emotions, simple motivations (does anybody not understand why Ting steps in when the afro white bruiser starts beating up the waitress?), stereotypical character design (the bad guys look "bad", the loudmouth hustler buddy, the tatoo'd henchman), and great action. It's the same way that American action films are the biggest export worldwide. Everyone understands them.

Furious

By this logic we should just take the action film genre and revert back to the days of silent cinema since words are not necessary.

harosa

Well, I've been put in my place, I'm sorry Litza that my arguements for seeing this movie was so strong that it made you throw aside your strong beliefs on the proper way to see a foreign film.

litza

Oh this is great, now we have people suggesting that we should read some liner notes before you see this movie and then you will understand MOST (not all) of it.

Hey, I've got a great experiment you can try. Next time you go to a movie, go with friend. Keep your eyes closed during the entire movie, but have your friend explain to you what is going on. Between your friend's explaination and the soundtrack, you should be able to get a good idea of what the movie is like.

Then, you can come here and post and say that you've seen such-and-such movie.

eXcentris

Yes, I'm starting a petition to ban dialogue in all movies now.

litza

Wait a cotton pickin' minute! You have misunderstood Harosa. He doesn't have a problem with dialogue, he has a problem with all the anal retentive people who think you need to understand the dialogue to enjoy a movie.


On a serious note, I noticed that not a single person addressed your concerns regarding other aspects of the movie. Now, I wonder what these same folks will do if they discover that 30 seconds from one of their precious fight scenes are cut out? Or that the aspect ratio of the movie is compromised? Or that the print used is scratched or the color is faded? You can still "get" the cool fights and stunts.

harosa

The only anal retentive person I have a problem with is you Litza, who cant seem to differentiate between my recommendation for ONE movie without subs and foreign movies in general. I never came out saying subtitles are unnecessary in foreign films, I did so only for Ong Bak, you took that on some whole other tangent and ran with it. And as for the movie being cut or the picture being compromised, the only people who have seen the movie have done so at either actual screenings or on official DVDs, as I did, so we saw the whole movie, your subtitle arguement besides the point.

John Spartan

Hey, I've got a great experiment you can try. Next time your friend says that he's "tired" of something, eg, "I'm tired of eating chinese food", why don't you start foaming at the mouth, run around like a chicken with its head cut off and accuse him of being a liar because he's not actually physically "tired". Between your friend's explanation that it's a turn of phrase and your anti-psychotic medication arriving, you should be able to realize that YOU'RE TAKING THINGS TOO ****ING LITERALLY.

Moreover, your "closed eyes" analogy is inappropriate and clearly you didn't bother to completely read the message before your knee jerked and hit keyboard. If you had, you would've noticed that I said reading the summary will work *in combination with* the NON-VERBAL COMMUNICATION seen throughout the movie. You know, things you have to see with your eyes.

I did not imply in any way that the summary alone would be enough. What it does is just clarify things a bit. Eg, Watching the film, you know the artifact is important to the village and it was stolen, but the summary tells you exactly what it is. Now, does it REALLY matter to this film? Nope. But it makes it a little bit clearer. Ditto with Ting's relationship with the hustler. It's clear they have some kind of prior relationship and that the hustler has changed from what Ting knows of him. However, reading a summary that explains he used to be from the village just adds a little bit more to it. But it's not necessary to appreciate the dynamic. Understand?

The TOO LITERAL bit goes for you, too. Did I say it was better or preferable? Nope. But that didn't stop you two from being pompous jerks about it. Obviously, not every action movie can be done that way. However, many can indeed be largely enjoyed (also note that largely does not == entirely) without understanding the dialogue.

litza

To John Spartan and Harosa:

First of all, may I make a simple request? Can you try to engage in something close to a civil discussion without resorting to name-calling and swearing? I do not think there is any reason for the name-calling just because someone disagrees with you?


Now to the question that has been asked many times, and never answered. The entire point of this thread.

Would you settle for a movie that was re-edited? A pan and scan version? Or altered in some other way? That's the real question and point that I, and others, have made here. Its not if you can sort-of understand what is going on, it’s a question of seeing the movie the way the filmmakers intended it to be seen. Obviously, from Mr. Spartan's point of view, you have to do a whole heck of a lot of work to even get 90% of the movie without the benefit of subtitles. The question to him is then; would he care if the movie was released missing 15 minutes? The story is still there, but maybe some sub-plot or character development is gone. Who should care about that when the essence is still there, right?

Or, another easy question. If there was a two versions of this movie on the market. A subtitled one for $15, and an unsubtitled one for $12, would you tell people to save their money and buy the unsubtitled one? If you really don't need subtitles, why not save the money?

You see, no one is trying to take away your God given right to see a movie with subtitles. The issues stem from Harosa's claim that he saw the movie without subtitles, and you really don't need subtitles to view this movie. Which, to anyone who has even the slightest bit of respect for the creative arts, would strike them as offensive. No less offensive than Ted Turner deciding to color those boring black and white movies. Yeah, you can still understand them (the colorized movies) but you are not getting the film experience that the filmmakers intended. Then again, maybe you don't care about things like that?

Different strokes for different folks, some people will buy a digitally restored Criterion disc, while others think that watching a 16mm dupe on a public domain label is the same thing.

harosa

My problem with you Litza is that you're generalizing everyone because of this one instance. Is one really being disrespectful to all foreign cinema because this one time someone just appreciates the artistry of the fighting in the movie,and that doesnt require subtitles. My recommendation was solely based on that fact, I didnt come in waving a flag saying you dont need subtitles in foreign movies, just sit still and watch the pretty pictures and enjoy only that. I felt that, for this one foreign movie, the lack of subtitles was not a hindrance to ME because the movie is basically to ME a fighting style and stunt showcase wrapped in the plot of a hundred kung fu films. Your arguement on whether to buy a subtitled or unsubtitled version of a movie is just a pompous question to continue an arguement on which only you are on one side of. No one is taking your opposing view on the issue of subtitles, we all know you need them to properly view foreign movies, I didnt read anyone saying otherwise with the exception of my recommendation to do so with Ong Bak.

litza

Let's try to not only stay on track, but be honest about the history of this tread, shall we? Actually, it was you who were making the grand sweeping generalizations, way before I even posted on this topic. Let me quote an earlier post you made:

"my arguement is that this type of movie has no grand exposition in it.

I do disagree with you about people whining about the state of a foreign movie if its altered in any way, anyone getting an unsubtitled copy of the film and whining about it is a fool"

From the start, you came in claiming that EVERYONE could and should enjoy this movie without subtitles, and they were fools if they weren't. Now you want to claim all hurt feelings because someone is questioning your personal desires to watch this movie without knowing what is being said.

If you originally stated "hey, I don't know about anyone else, but to me, it was just a mindless action film, and that's all I wanted to see, so I could enjoy it without subtitles" that would be one thing, but to give a review/comment that stated universally that this movie could be enjoyed just as much with subtitles as without was just wrong. There are plenty of us that like to know what is going on in a movie and not just whoop it up at the sight of a really good kick to the head, and your comments that we shouldn't "whine" less we be "fools" was quite offensive. So, keeping it real, if anyone came in waving the flag, it would you.

KKnight

Good grief...

Gosh, as much as I agree with your opinion on the subtitle issue, your are so caught up with being "Right" that you want to show the world that it's the only way. People have their own perferences and chioces in turns of how they want to watch a movie. There is no "Right" or "Wrong" here. It's an entertainment. harosa offered the opinion and you can choose to debate about it but does it have to get so personal...

Just take a look at this and tell me that it's no personal: