It would appear that the Criterion Collection DVD I rented has subtitles by two writers. If someone has watched the film with both could someone please tell my which ones they liked better and why. Thanks.
shareI was going to post the same thing. I have only watched it with one of them, I will try the other one out when I watch it again.
http://www.ymdb.com/user_top20_view.asp?usersid=25273
[deleted]
The first translation uses a bit more flowery language and metaphor, whilr the second in more literal.
sharedo what i did, Read the notes on subtitling in the booklet. And pick dependent on your opinun of what they say.
---
It is as inhuman to be totaly good as it is to be totaly evil- Anthony Burgess
I'm guessing (having read the booklet) that Hoaglund is more flowery and Richie is more literal?
shareActually no. Several years later, I realise, but a few months ago, I happened upon the chants that were used in the film (character map, aural transcription, and Google works wonders!). Turns out that Hoaglund is the more literal of the two translators. I ran the two chants through Google Translate, and the translations of these were more closer to Hoaglund's than they were to Richie. I'd say, use Hoaglund's subtitles -- they're much more closer to the mark.
shareI watched the Richie translation and wasn't completely satisfied with it. Some people on this board have posted samples of the Hoaglund translation and it seems truer to the mark. Gonna rewatch the movie with the Hoaglund subtitles.
share