I also use subtitles when watching DVDs, but alternate between English and German titles and audio. Up until a few years ago, I couldn't watch any film that was even slightly scary - but then I discovered subtitles! Even with the sound still on, a typed threat of "suspenseful music" followed by a "piercing scream" and "muffled footsteps" became watchable and, quite frankly, rather funny. And who knows - for all of us one day as advancing years take their toll, they will doubtless become even more indispensable.Īdd your comments on this story, using the form below. Mostly, though, subtitles tend to enhance one's viewing experience. Comic timing is something subtitlers have yet to be able to replicate - with the result that punchlines tend to appear before they are actually spoken and the whole thing is ruined. Occasionally, though, the subtitle can be more a hindrance than a help, even to the most ardent fan. Now and again, one even detects a certain recklessness in the subtitle suite, as when, during one of those celebrity-packed Christmas adverts (yes, ads get subtitled too) Marks & Spencer used to make, a line popped up declaring: "I love you Rupert" just as Rupert Everett hoved into camera. Errors are common, and entirely understandable, but that doesn't stop them eliciting a slight grin - like the subtitler who recently referred to Andrew Lloyd Wober. The vast majority of subtitling is pre-recorded, but when watching the news with subtitles one can't help but respect the craft of the live subtitler, as they struggle to keep up with galloping newsreaders. (How long before viewers will be able to click on the title to download the song?) cut the sound and let the subtitles do the work.Īnd where videos were useless, DVDs only feed one's subtitle addiction.ĭiligent subtitlers - and there seem to be plenty of them out there - even go so far as to include the name of a song that is being played in the background, and the artist performing it. Tucking into a bag of crisps while slobbing on the sofa? Subtitles ensure not a word is missed as the sound gets drowned out by the head-echo of crunching. Their value extends to a rich variety of TV-watching scenarios. The problem with subtitles is once discovered they can be incredibly hard to let go of. Why change a classic design? Subtitles from 1982 Research by Ofcom, the media regulator, has found that of the 7.5 million people who use TV subtitles, six million have no hearing impairment at all.įor those who have discovered the joy of subtitles, the idea of keeping up with the countless plot twists inflicted on 24's Jack Bauer, or Christopher Eccleston's rapid-fire ramblings as Doctor Who, would be nigh-on impossible without the aid of 888 - the Ceefax/Teletext page where subtitles live. Which might explain the current vogue for subtitles. Not so in the ears of the viewers, however. But no matter, in the eyes of the director - the more authentic the better. Key plot developments might turn on a muffled comment, or a piece of dialect indecipherable to outsiders. Cameras rolled, jumped and jostled to intensify the on-screen drama and microphones struggled to keep up. Then along came a trend that might best be described as TV Verité. it was just how TV was.Īction tended to be a tad stilted and characters' lines were delivered with Rada-like clarity, often in Received Pronunciation. Years ago a TV drama, be it Minder, Juliet Bravo or Day of the Triffids, exuded a certain staginess. Perhaps we should blame NYPD Blue or ER or whichever TV series it was that first pioneered the shaky, handheld camera technique. TV subtitles may be primarily for deaf people or those who are hard of hearing, but research has revealed they are used by six million people who have no hearing impairment.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |