Word!

Dubs are not part of the way the filmmaker originally shot the film. I would no more want to listen/watch a dub track than I would view an incorrect aspect ratio presentation.

How am I supposed to feel what the actors are emoting/conveying if I'm not hearing their voice?

I never have a problem when a dub is an option, as long as I can listen to the original language. And in my experience, most dubs just lack "something", and generally become distractions.

Yes, there are some better than others, but as a rule I say

Running Man, do you produce dubs or something? I can't see why you're getting so riled up about this. Francis didn't like the dub. You did. Your opinion doesn't invalidate his, nor does his invalidate yours.

No, I don't produce dubs.

It seems you haven't really read my reply Suprmallet.

I don't know what version of the movie you saw, but "The Host" that I saw had plenty of intentional camp in it. All of the over-the-top American scientists, military, and officials, for example. Did you miss the scene with the "doctor" with crossed-eyes who looked like he walked in from a Jerry Lewis movie? Or how about every single frame of film with the Gang-du character, who was, you know, one of the main leads.

Memories of Murder is a much better film than The Host. Much better. The two exist on completely different planes of filmmaking.

All of that to me falls under satire.

The mentally challenged son? There were scenes of humor with him, but none of that was camp.

Your opinion of Memories of Murder has nothing to do with that comment I made. I was talking about his use of comedy in the film, which is virtually identical in both films.

Let me make a similar statement that's not about dubs.

"I've never seen a piece of grass more green than the grass in my yard."

The whole statement is based around my experience. How can that be elitist? I'm just saying that I've never experienced a dub better than the original audio.

There are people out there who like to watch full-frame transfers too, but I'll never recommend a full-frame transfer, unless that's how it was meant to be.

I'm kind of impressed that there are 5 threads about HD DVDs and Blu-ray discs all in a row.

Anyway, Daniel's Blu-ray review is up for anyone who's interested.

I did read it, and in the end it still comes down to a difference in opinion.

Personally, I dislike dubs on live action films. Part of an actor's performance is the combination of their physicality with their voice. As someone mentioned earlier, dubs are as big of a change to the film as putting it in the wrong aspect ratio, or colorizing a black and white movie.

I feel differently about animation, where the physical aspect of the character is not directly tied to the specific actor doing the voice. And the art of dubbing in animation has come a long, long way. Dubs on anime like Neon Genesis Evangelion or Cowboy Bebop are as good, if not better than the original language tracks.

Don't say I didn't warn you all.

Well, sure but that's not the feeling I've gotten from any reviews of 'The Host' on this site which range from lukewarm to estatic with the lukewarm reviews hovering around the 'doesn't live up to the hype' viewpoint but still concedes it an entertaining pic. Heh, I doubt any reviewer would be presumptuous enough to dictate that this particular pic may not justify a second viewing at some point in their life. But I guess that goes back to the 'Skip it', 'Rent it' labels....let's face it, any filmgeek worth their salt will check out 'Ghost Rider' once, it's badness be damned, so a low rating is justified but a 'Skip it' would not necessarily be apt. Of course, I'm not a fan of ratings anyway, but it's the nature of the beast for film critics these days...how I hate to choose between 'stars' for my own reviews so I can imagine the also sometimes painful decisions at play here where your rating system is a bit more definitive.

Right. Just to be clear, I didn't mean "rent it" in a dismissive way so much as "rent it first".

You assume the two are mutually exclusive, which is not at all the case.

This from the guy who gave Purple Rain 4.5 stars.

I saw the film pretty early, right out of the gate, before the hype... well, to be fair, it had a lot of pre-hype due to the director and being an expected commercial winner in Korea, but you know what I mean.

I really liked it. The disparate tones, for me, worked quite well and it was precisely what I wanted, the kind of weird balance Asian films often boldly embrace. Most of reviews seem to want more of this, rather than that, and less of the other. I'm fine with the melodrama, the camp, humor, heavy allegory, all of it. I honestly don't think it would be as succesful if it focused its styles. Its meant to be a horn a plenty genre film.

As someone who watches a fair amount of dubs... the dubbing in The Host was pretty terrible. ;P

Francis Rizzo,
But if the grass on the other side is greener and you choose not to acknowledge it because you've told everyone yours is better, then yeah.

And that's proof of your elitism. That overused analogy is completely incorrect and grossly inaccurate.


Suprmallet,
No it does not. You did not read it right. You obviously glanced over it and stamped "dub lover" instead of actually grasping what my beef was with Rizzo's review.

The main reason I replied was because such a method of reviewing with a piss poor attitude on something is simply bad critiquing and on top of that to recommend a dub he thought was horrible for reasons all coming from him not getting the film.

I've ran into this horrible analogy more times than I care to count and enough times for me to puke.

Wrong aspect ratios and colorization are not the same thing as dubbing. None of those things offer a better experience. I have experienced dubs however that I did enjoy and some that I have enjoyed more than the original.

Now, how is that possible if it's supposed to be an evil act?

And I'm sorry to say, but with this it reveals that you are just another person who has come to this belief just from reading the garbage that internet elitists spew. This entire argument is almost verbatim with the same exact stuff I read from the same anti-dubbing elitists. It's even inconsistent to the very bone of the initial argument that "dubbing is against the director's original intent".

And for the record, some of the best English dubbing in a decade has come from live action films...not animation.


Josh Z,
Josh, the film is part satire. It is not a camp fest or tongue in cheek picture. If that were the case, that kind of handling would have been done with the actual scenes of the monster and it's attacks and not once does that happen.

You, along with many other reviewers, simply missed the point.

I am too, but I personally just don't think the movie did much of it particularly well.

Slumbering Fist,
Yeah, I like how I said there was no camp and some people just ignore it.

The film is part satire and just because there is some comedy does not mean the film is a parody of itself or some "goofy monster movie".

Krelyan,
Out of curiosity, what live action dubs do you think were well made?

It's very possible he just disagrees with you.

I hear ya, Dan. Listen, I don't want to rehash the finer points of the infamous Apocalyto thread. It's just not worth it. But in some form of preface, I only found the film to be adequate. But I imagine my original thoughts upon reading your review was about how the case was presented and the content grade, the former which I couldn't disagree with more. The opinions in and of themselves are well articulated and thoughtful.

The first bit is the case. Most films I generally take as unique stand-alone pieces. And although I'll never be a reviewer, I understand that one needs to base their comparative opinions on similar material. This is true in life in general, period. But I felt that too much reliance of the arguments was placed solely upon The Passion. Similar styles were implemented, but the stories were utterly distinct - one being an adventurous survival story, the other being a dramatic, personal (to some) semi-biographical account [included within the review a similar mini-biographical account of Mel Gibson not withstanding]. In any case, I just didn't agree with the basis point for the arguments.

The second bit is the rating. When I think about a film and it's meaning and value (as art, entertainment, study, whatever), I take into account a wide array of aspects. Now I've seen some seriously horrible films due to any number of factors but as a fan of films I can find one or more redemptive qualities more often than not. And as a result I may not vehemently advocate certain material to just anyone, but at the same time I could never do the opposite. There's always a market and I strongly feel that it's genuinely a disservice to rate a film a flat zero. Though a result such as this might actually have the reverse effect if one's not careful.

I'm not trying to defend The Host by any stretch. But when I saw your post, more specifically, where I thought it was going, the association came flooding back. I'm first and foremost a fan of films but these days my primary interests tend to come from Korea or Japan. A zero rating would never turn me away from a film, but couple this (or a plural form of this) with the fact that I may never get to see a film on the big screen before deciding on a DVD purchase (or import) - well, reviewers' ratings then become slightly more relevant .. especially when I try not have too much information presented in advance prior to seeing a film. It's a more risky proposition but the pay off is greater.

The comment wasn't completely unwarranted, but it shouldn't come without reason. Then again, I'm sure life in the public as a reviewer ain't all it's cracked up to be at times either ...

No hard feelings.

Yeah, I admit, the coffee had yet to set in before I made that one. So, I'll retract.

Running Man, I'm done discussing this with you. You're not engaging anyone in an actual debate, you're just naysaying any point that disagrees with you, and then calling them a name and describing how their words make you want to retch. When you're actually interested in discussing something without name calling, then I'll be more than happy to participate. Until then, we're quits.

There are definitely films out there that span genres and subjects and tones without a problem. But they're very rare, and usually feature much sharper writing than The Host does. I think the director bit off more than he could chew in this case. He was trying to make a monster movie comedy family epic political film. That's a lot for anyone, and considering how long stretches of the film just don't work, I think it was too much.

Absolutely no hard feelings. That post was more articulate and well-considered than 99% of the comments I got regarding Apocalypto and several other reviews I've written.

And I'm with ya on the Japanese films. I think right now the Japanese are at the forefront of a filmmaking revolution that has only seeped back here in the most short-sighted of ways (Saw and its ilk) which capture none of the subtleties and subtext that the Japanese imbue their movies with. It's no surprise that the best horror films of the last ten years have all come from Japan. Miike in particular has been able to captivate my imagination. I've purchased every DVD of his available in America, and then have imported quite a few more from out of the country. I've been lucky enough to see just a small sampling of his films on the big screen as well.

I haven't had as much luck with Korean cinema, which to me seems to ape Japanese cinema more than anything. Of course, the Vengeance trilogy is a major exception, and I definitely don't think The Host is mimicking Japanese styles at all, but I've seen a bunch of Tartan U.S. releases of Korean horror films that feel like I'm watching the b-grade Korean version of The Ring or Pulse, etc. I'm always on the lookout for new and unique films from any country in that part of the world, though.



Water under the bridge.

Adam Tyner,
Well, the comment he made was not in direct reply to mine. He was mentioning things that he liked in the film, one being "camp".

The film is not campy or some goofy monster film. It is a drama/monster movie that is also part social commentary and satire.

It's truly amazing how some people who are enjoying it here are for the wrong reasons and writing it off as some "crazy Asian film".

Suprmallet,
Spare me the high and mighty attitude. You didn't understand my message, used exact same reasons as everyone else who writes the same, and contridicted yourself in the same post. I called that out. Don't blame me for it.

This issue sickens me. It's amazing how reviewers on the net want to act as if they are all serious about their work yet when it comes to issues like commenting on dubs they become no better than some random fanatic in a comic book shop repeating the same hogwash that is found everywhere simply because it's said by other fanatics.

I call for better quality of critiquing and to hold the silly elitism and am only met by more elitism. I've given my reasons early in my reply to Rizzo as exactly why this is childish and none of those reasons are considered or directly replied to. They are simply ignored.

You people who fall into that category should be ashamed of yourselves.

Could it be that they're right and the one lone voice howling in the wind is wrong? It seems obvious from reading the comments in this thread that the film can be enjoyed in different ways. How can you say that someone is wrong for their opinon and that yours is the only correct one?

Or maybe, just maybe, that's their actual opinion. I review a lot of anime, and I always listen to both language tracks. Some dubs are great, some are really bad. Just because someone dislikes a dub doesn't mean they are elitist. Claiming that your opinion is the only one that's valid...well that is very elitist.

Gee..if that's your logic to looking at things then you must be totally out of wack with lots of other things.

The philosophy of "the majority is always right". Umm...ok.

I guess the Matrix did invent that style of action cause when that movie came out everyone in the West thought it was new and never done before, just because they didn't see much HK action. Despite the man behind it having a 20 + career in HK. But ya know, the people who knew better were in the minority so they were wrong and history could be reinvented.

Call it a very good perception, but I can tell when something is being campy and when something is a satire. Had the film been a camp goofy fest like reviews like Ian Jane think, then it would have been consistent throughout, even in the monster scenes. But they aren't, and that should tell you something that some of these people here are not understanding.

There are scenes of comedy because it is either coming out of the situation or it is black comedy. And other parts are a satire commenting on things like the Iraq war and America's occupation of foreign land. That is NOT campy or goofy just cause there is comedy. Like I said, the majority of people heard this was a Asian monster movie and came into it thinking it was some sort of 70s Godzilla camp fest and felt they were being justified with that sentiment with the scenes of comedy and satire, but totally misunderstood it.

Even the director himself has said that comedy is an important tool he uses in his repertoire of storytelling (listen to his commentary). The comedy in his previous film Memories of Murder is IDENTICAL to this movie, but you wouldn't call that film a camp fest nor a goofy mystery film. It was serious, and so was this movie.

But hey I don't know what I'm saying cause the majority doesn't agree with me.

Maybe we shouldn't even have forums or discussions. Just polls to see where the majority lies and then that'll be considered fact.

Or maybe...just maybe you're not understanding what I am writing.

They are not simply disliking a dub. They are flat out saying that ALL dubs are bad, none are ever good, and all will always be bashed for abstract motivations that don't really hold any water other than elitism.

You would have a point if the criticisms on dubs were fair, but they are not and they never are coming from the same groups of people reciting the same words over and over again you would think it's a mantra that they memorized beforehand.

That is bad critiquing and I am calling it out. If people like this are so immature that you can't get over silly notions that have been built in forums from elitists, then don't review them. You aren't do anyone any favors and it is disgusting.

Actually, I do, no offense, make it a habit of skipping over your posts- at least when I see you get into page after page of circular arguments with people.

I was meaning camp in a very broad, comical sense. Yeah, satirical works too. You seem to think labeling the comedy goofy or campy is some kind of slight and cause for diminishing its greater intent. Again, like I said, its got a lot going on and thats why I liked it. That includes what I thought were looser, goofy, comic moments and thoughtful political themes, etc, etc, etc.