Thursday, February 7, 2008

"Raise the Red Lantern"

Two subtitled films in one week? Klassy! Or maybe just an attempt to save those dying neurons? Actually, I would watch more foreign movies, but--much like my problems with fiction read in translation--I always mistrust the subtitles a bit, and wonder what I'm missing by not being able to understand all the dialogue.

In RtRL, this really isn't so much of an issue, because it can be appreciated just on a visual level alone. Gorgeous cinematography, and a gorgeous young Gong Li, who doesn't even have that much dialogue anyway. So much of her acting is done just with the subtle expressions that flit across her face, with the set of her body. And some of the visual choices add understanding that transcends language--the fact that "the master" is never clearly shown, but instead is always shot from behind, or in a long shot, or behind the bed curtains, such that after a two hour movie the viewer still has no clear idea what he looks like, is brilliant. And, to me, emphasizes that all he is to these women is The Husband, that they are all jockeying for his favor, not because of who he is as an individual, but because getting his attention is the only way to move up in the hierarchy. He might just as well as be faceless.

Now, generally, I don't read the netflix viewer reviews until after I've watched the film myself, and then I see how much I disagree with everyone else's interpretations. Many of the reviews of RtRL frame it as a tragedy of what happens to women in a brutal patriarchal system. And, yeah, the master gets to choose which woman he's going to sleep with each night, gets to repudiate the one he feels has lied to him, and have killed the one who cheats. Yes, he's got that ultimate power. But what so many people seem to miss as their feminist Western principles are being outraged by that, is how in everyday life he is so controlled by these women and their whims and little schemes. Add that to the fact that he has to know that they've married him for his money and that (as noted above) they want his attentions just for the temporary status they bring and the possibility of permanent status if they lead to impregnation with a son. I see the film as saying that the whole system was broken and sad. (Is modern Western marriage for love any less broken and sad? 'Cause we all know how that so often works out, eh? But that's a post for another day.)

The other point I tend to disagree with in other people's reviews of RtRL is that the ending was a failure. (STOP! STOP reading if you don't want to be spoiled.) First of all, I haven't even seen that much Chinese cinema, but even I know they ain't big on the happy endings. So if you think that Gong Li is going to--I dunno, I can't even come up with a possible happy ending to this story, frankly. Secondly, a number of people seem to think that Gong Li's character is "strong" at the beginning of the movie and then becomes weak.

I have so many problems with this. For one, I don't think she's strong to begin with. She's petty and childish and bratty, which is understandable since she's a nineteen year old who's pissed off by having to leave university, but the fact that people see that behavior as strong is a sad indictment, I think. Secondly, what happens to her at the end is that she goes "mad." We'll leave aside the disturbing judgment that strong people couldn't/wouldn't have mental breakdowns, because that's definitely also a post for another day. But since in the film, she is directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of two other people due to, in one case, petty revenge, and in the other, a horrible drunken mistake, and that she is already being shunned for another mistake, I think some PTSD and severe depression is absolutely a logical and believable outcome.

Anyway! Interesting and beautiful film.

xoxo

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

From what I remember, I really agree with your interpretation of the relationships in RtRL, with the power of the women and his knowledge of their motivations. I'm sometimes amazed at how the general audience often sees things on such a surface level, that if it's not explicitly spelled out they don't get it at all... even in a case like this where what you saw seems to be completely obvious, not even subtextual, just not overtly stated.

If you're looking for more insightful movie reviews, you can always go to the movie section of the NYTimes web site and search on any movie they've ever reviewed (which is most) and related articles. RottenTomatoes also has links to good reviewers, but the older the film is, the fewer links there will be.

As for subtitles, they've gotten much better lately. Watch, say, an original subtitled print of a 1950's/60's Italian or French movie and you'll have sections of dialogue that literally can go on for minutes with only a couple words of subtitle. (I've long assumed those sections were dirty or otherwise thought potentially offensive). But if you see a re-issued print from the mid-90s on, or a newer DVD-most especially the Criterion DVD's--they'll usually have way more subtitles.

Of course, the emotional and connotational quality of the subtitles is still up to the skill of the translator (who hopefully have gotten better, too) but at least you don't feel like you're missing any words!

malevolent andrea said...

I think you and I discussed before when I was watching that glut of Asian horror films a while ago, my weird experience of viewing one that was dubbed into English while also having the captioning/ subtitles on, and having the dialogue be translated completely differently between the two. It doesn't add to my comfort level with believing that I'm getting the director or writer's original intent, that's for sure.

As for reviews, I actually just enjoy reading the reviews that don't IMO get it. It's so interesting to see how people can interpret things so differently. Often, I think, as in this case, because of their ingrained social or cultural or political opinions--people just don't like to look at things from a different POV.

Anonymous said...

"[P]eople just don't like to look at things from a different POV."

Actually, that's one of the reasons I like watching foreign films: They portray things in a different way with a different POV from a different culture, often with very different unstated cultural assumptions. Puts me into a whole different and surprising world, which I probably don't fully understand, but I sure like the surprise and unfamiliarity.

Not exactly like traveling to a foreign country, but still a little of the same feeling for a couple of hours. I'm always surprised that so many people don't like that.

One difference between dubbing/subtitling is that in dubbing they really do make something of an attempt to match the words to the lips, which can go towards very different words. Plus, I bet they have two completely different people doing the two translations. So perhaps the lip matching explains a bit of the non-match in English versions... or one of the translators just sucked. Yeah, I'd be wondering how much I lost, too.

(In the subtitles of The Diving Bell and the Butterfly his helpers would be spelling out French letter, while the subtitles would be showing the proper letters for the English words. Some real cognitive dissonance with that.)

I've often had the experience of watching foreign movies around Harvard Square and people will start laughing when there's no subtitle on the screen or the subtitles don't seem funny at all. I assume they're making a cultural reference or satirizing some figure I don't know or making some untranslateable wordplay/joke or something like that, but at those times I sure feel like I just don't get it.

On the other hand, the reviews of films where the people just don't get it--often not getting something that seems so obvious to me... I often just end up astounded more than anything else. :)

Anonymous said...

I was just thinking of an Israeli movie I saw not long ago where the word "b'seder" was variously translated in the subtitles to words such as: "OK", "yes", "please", "sure", "no problem", and so on.

There were even places where the dialogue was:

B'seder?

B'seder!

And the two utterances of the exact same word were translated into different English words.

Now I suspect those subtitles were really giving a fuller translation of the meaning of the Hebrew word (in English) as they were then being used in the film. But a literal translation would, I think, have used the exact same English word every time, since it was the exact same Hebrew word.

So which form of subtitling is more "accurate"?

Craig H said...

Josef von Sternberg said the measure of a film is best taken while viewing it upside down and backwards. His last picture was produced in Japan, and wrestles almost directly as a subtext the questions of translation vs subtitling vs immersing yourself without understanding at all. There's a pretty decent discussion of it here:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/saga_of_anatahan/articles/1135897/

In The Scarlet Empress he goes so far as to have a man bound, hung upside down, and used as the clapper in a very large bell.

They just don't make movies like they used to...

malevolent andrea said...

That's interesting. I hadn't ever heard of that film before.

malevolent andrea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.