Mabuse

I never bought the DVD because they f'ed up the subtitles on the funny subtitle scene. Has it been handled correctly for the Blu?

manicsounds

you can see what they did here

lamphorn

What was wrong with the subtitles on the DVD?

Drexl

They added "thinking" to them. Here's an explanation: http://peelslowlynsee.wordpress.com/...g-dumbed-down/

Wow, they did NOT skimp on the bitrate for this one. Look how it hovers right up near the maximum at all times.

Solid Snake

i was looking that bitrate too. Goddamn.

MisterHowie

I just checked my copy of the Blu Ray. The subtitles are yellow and don't have the closed-captioning "[thinking]." They seem to pop up a smidgeon before the character actually speaks the lines being subtitled, which seems a tad odd to me, but I don't really remember if that is different from the theatrical presentation or not. At any rate, no irritating captioning.

whotony

The answer to the op is yes and no.
They removed the "thinking" but the captions appear too early so he joke is still a little messed up.

Mabuse

It's so anoying. The joke really doesn't work unless it's a printed in optical subtitle. The way subtitles used to look on 35mm. It's a strange situation. It's like a joke that can't be reproduced in our modern age.

Doctorossi

I don't see what about the joke necessitates optical titles. The joke is certainly aesthetically enhanced when the titles remind us of the "look" of subtitled movies we're familiar with, but that "look" is changing to the digital overlay appearance for those movies, just as it is with Annie Hall.

tylergfoster

Note that the subtitles you would turn on if you wanted subtitles are white, and the subtitles for the scene in question are yellow. I think that adds something to the effect. I admit, though, that I would prefer optical subtitles.

The author of that blog post apparently doesn't understand closed-captioning.

Ropes Pierre

Maybe i am missing something but i interpreted that [thinking] reference to be directed at deaf people, so they were aware that those lines were thought while the other lines were spoken out loud.

so i didn't think they were intended as "laugh here, idiot".

whotony

I don't think so, since he actors arent talking its pretty obvious that they are thInking those lines to themselves.

Mabuse

Yes it was intended for deaf people or rather it was writen like it was intended for deaf people. They formated it in the manner of Closed Captioning instead of doing it right and formating it like Subtitles, killing the joke in the process.

The Blu ray seems an improvement but I think it still fails because it looks so modern. It shouldn't be player generated, the subs should be printed onto the celluloid they telecined, and it certainlly should be white not yellow or green.

Doctorossi

Can you please explain what difference you think those aethetic distinctions would make? It doesn't look any more "modern" than the subtitles on any other Blu-ray.

Groucho

Mabuse is 100% right on all counts.

The DVD treatment of that scene is a travesty, and I hope the people responsible were all sacked.

Mabuse

It's an improvment from the DVD, but I think the problem is that given the "vintage" of the film modern subtitles clash with it. It makes it seem like something that shouldn't be there that the disc producers accidently put on or something. I just doesn't seem right. In my HT I am trying to replicate the experience of watching a film the way it would have appeared when first released. This disc does not present the film that way.

Doctorossi

Do you say that about subtitles on all Blu-rays of pre-1980 films?

If you're using the Blu-ray to do that, you're going about it all wrong. I don't think there's ever been a theatrical presentation of Annie Hall that's looked anything like the Blu-ray.

I still don't get how video, versus optical, titles "ruins" the joke.

Alan Smithee

Imagine the subtitled scene in "Goldmember" being redone with player-generated subtitles!

Drexl

I'm on the side that they shouldn't be generated. The way I see it, these subtitles are a real part of the film. When it comes to a foreign language film, the subtitles are not actually part of the film. In that case, I think generated is more respectable to the film because they are not being imprinted on it, and they stand out in a way that lets you know they are just translating it for you, and are definitely not on the actual film.

And of course, those who can understand the language wouldn't want them printed. Someday maybe I can get good enough with my French to watch a French film with subs turned off.

But that said, I don't think the joke is really "ruined" here. It's just not quite right.

bluetoast

Because with optical, the subtitles are on at the exact time that they were intended, as well as the font, since they're actually on the film itself.

With video, the subtitles don't exactly come on at the right time apparently (although time could have been taken to set it properly), and look different in tone than what was originally shown (and again this could have been done). Just seems like they weren't taking the comedy aspect into account.

Doctorossi

I am, too. I think it would be a definite aesthetic improvement.

Exactly.

Doctorossi

That would be mistiming ruining the joke and that can be an unfortunate product of either methodology.

Solid Snake

Yeah. If it was integrated into the film then....let it be in the film.

Groucho

By coincidence, this was on MGM HD last night and I happened to stumble on it right before the subtitles scene. In that broadcast they used electronic subtitles in yellow (no "[thinking]"). It worked, but it wasn't quite as good as burned in would have been.

Numanoid

Amazon has pulled this blu-ray as a result of user complaints. Is it because of this subtitling issue, or is there something else up with the release that I'm not aware of?