Rabinovich sung

He worked in NG-Religions, on Newsru.com, in the journal "Company". Then he wrote about the film business in the newspaper Vedomosti. He talked with the sharks of the industry: the leaders of Disney, DreamWorks, Fox Filmed Entertainment, producer Jerry Brookheimer. Their ideas were so carried away by the journalist that Ivan moved to the other side of the barricades - he works in Ar Films Alexander Rodnyansky. Just a couple of days ago, a conversation about his beloved actors came to the author just a couple of days ago. "Vince won, probably one of the best comedic actors of our time," said one of my comrades. I could not disagree and joyfully picked up: “Yes, there is simply no such second voice in Hollywood now. And the manner of conversation? He can read the phone book in such a way that you will cry with laughter. ” The answer to me was a perplexed question: "And what about his voice?" The comrade, as it turned out, loves the "dumb" Vince Won, that is, duplicated. And the famous voice of the actor, who, in fact, made his superstar, never simply heard.

And so, I suppose, always. Most of our fellow citizens love famous Hollywood actors exclusively for appearance or literally for the word for the talent of acting. For facial expressions at best. But the voice is one of the main components of star charm. The best examples of the attitude of the entertainment industry to acting voices are, of course, animation. DreamWorks Animation and Blue Sky studios spend millions of dollars on the fees of actors, voicing their animation films. Eddie Murphy as the voice of a donkey from the cartoon "Shrek" - half of the commercial success of the film. The chief manufacturer of the cartoonwalls of the Pixar studio has a slightly different approach. Often in the Pixar pictures the voice is not the most stellar (with the exception of the “history of toys” with Tom Hanks), but at the same time they are selected no less talented than the cartoons themselves are drawn.

Vince Won in The Wedding Crash

Voice is an actor's business card. From superstars with the characteristic voices like Al Pacino, Jack Nicholson, Tom Hanks, George Clooney, Johnny Depp and to the whole galaxy of amazing British actors with characteristic voices: Bill Nayi, Alan Rickman and Jeremy Irons. Steve Busemi - the first second -plan actor, as he is jokingly called in Hollywood - owes his popularity not only of a characteristic appearance and considerable acting talent, but also to his absolutely inimitable voice. The voice of Julia Roberts or Scarlett Johansson will not confuse anyone else. Their unusual timbre is no less important for the status of a sex symbol than appearance. Last year, the British linguist Andrew Lynn from the University of Shafield, by order of Post Office Telecoms, was research on the topic whose voice seems to be ideal for listeners. In parallel with the survey, he tried to synthesize the perfect male voice based on the set of parameters. Alan Ricman and Jeremy Irons became the owners of both computer and votes ideal from the point of view. But the Russian viewers of their votes, most likely, have never heard and are unlikely to hear.

Jeremy Irons in the video Amnesty International "for the ban on the death penalty"

Simple experiment. Imagine the cartoon “Baby and Carlson”, in which instead of the voices of Livanov and Faina Ranevskaya, does an unemotional and faceless voice of the translator from “Channel One” sounds? Or again, in our beloved "Sherlock Holmes" there is no vote of Livanov? There is a face, and a voice is a stranger. In the "Diamond Hand" there is no Papanov, the "ordinary miracle" - Mironov.

Jorge Luis Borges. "About dubbing." 1979

“The combinatorial capabilities of art are not infinite, but often they scare ... Hollywood ... Thanks to the trick called dubbing, ... offers us monsters combining the famous features of Greets Garbo with the voice of Aldonsa Lorenso. How not to publish the amazement that we experience in the face of this depressing miracle, in front of these cunning phonetic-visual anomalies? ”

“They say that dubbing seems amazing or at least tolerant for those who do not know English. My knowledge of English is less completely than ignorance of Russian. But, despite this, I agree to reconsider the “Alexander Nevsky” only in the language in which he was shot, and I enthusiastically look at him for the ninth or tenth time, if he goes in the language of the original or in the language that I count for the original language. This last remark is significant: the general consciousness of the substitution, deception is worse than dubbing, worse than the substitution that dubbing in itself. ”

In Russian cinemas, dubbing quality control is still minimal. If you continue talking about animation, then for the Russian market the absolute leader of high -quality dubbing is The Walt Disney Company. For which, of course, they want to say special thanks. At least for the idea of calling Armen Dzhigarkhanyan to the voice acting of the cartoon "Up!" The best option, probably, does not exist in nature. It is worth, of course, to make a reservation that the legislation of all developed countries requires that children's films and animation go out in dubbing.

As a result, spectators of domestic cinemas find themselves in the position of the hero of the joke. "Fu, how terrible, it turns out, these The Beatles. Fake, burry!" - "Have you heard?" - "No, Rabinovich sung me."

"Harry wiped sweat from his forehead sleeve of a vest"

The second important component of the story about dubbing is the quality of the translation, an inexhaustible source of discussions in domestic blogs. The brightest example is the most popular post on Tatyana Tolstoy’s blog about the quality of translation of the 15th series of the fifth season of “Doctor of House” http://tanyant.livejournal.com/40447.html. The abundance of cheap labor (various students of language universities) led to the fact that in the mass of its translation the quality of translation either tends to zero or is equal to it. The other day, switching the channels, stumbled upon the “City Pigitus” heading on the “First” on the pilot series of the series “Salga Me”. Great, I must say, a series. True, it was not possible to enjoy. Somewhere in the 15th minute of viewing, the translator translated Ethics Committee ("Senate Ethics Committee") as the "Committee on Ethnic Affairs." It would seem that only one letter was mistaken, but what's the difference! Immediately half the plot is a cat under the tail. The heroes of the series investigated the accusation of the American senator that he uses the services of prostitutes. You must admit that it is one thing if in this case we are talking about a person heading the ethics committee, and quite another on ethnic issues.

Cinema for the masses

But all this, of course, is so far meaningless reasoning. The market dictates its rules. Three years ago, in Moscow there were three cinemas in which it was possible to watch the mainstream films in English without translation: “American Cinema House”, “October” (11th Hall) and “Under the Dome”. The first was closed, in the 11th Hall of October now duplicated films are shown, and in “Under the Dome” there is only a hundredth share of films released.

Vince Won and Ben Stiller persuade Peter Jackson to shoot the fourth series of the Lord of the Rings

Domestic viewers categorically do not want to watch a movie with subtitles. And they spat with saliva on what the whole civilized world does. Which is basically clear. People go to the cinema for a beautiful picture and crazy sound in quality, and not to read small subtitles. In this sense, the Russian spectator behaves just like an American viewer. In the States, non-American cinema is not popular primarily due to the fact that they demonstrate it in the original language with English subtitles.

Sociological studies (however, not in Russia, but in the USA and the countries of Latin America) show that on average from 80% of the audience prefers to watch duplicated rather than subtitted films. The same studies revealed a direct dependence between the preference to watch films with subtitles and higher social status and level of education. Accordingly, even with a significant difference in cost (dubbing costs about 7-8 times more than subtitles), distributors prefer to focus on the mass viewer itself.

Alan Rikman as a metatron, the voice of God in Kevin Smith's film "Dogma"

The fact that we practically have nowhere to watch films without dubbing is a symptom. The symptom of the inextricable market. After all, in fact, what distinguishes the developed market from developing? Among other (maybe more important parameters) - the degree of its orientation on the mass consumer. Business is developing from general to particular. First, the needs of the majority are satisfied, and then the market begins to segment, niche products oriented to more demand consumers appear. The peak of development is a moment when there is not a single, even the smallest group of consumers, to meet the needs of which at least a couple of companies does not work. On Russian television, this process is already in full swing. The channels are no longer trying to please everyone, but determine their own and only their target audience, with the sight to which a software grid is built. But the cinema industry has not yet reached. What again can be understood. The cost of rent in Moscow and in the regions is so high that the owners of cinemas are not ready to think about demanding consumers: you can’t earn so much money. The rate of profit will be completely different.

Bill Nayi, Philip Seymour-Hoffman and Rice Aifines in the trailer for The Boat That Rocked!

America's beloved female voice - DJ Sarah Vowel talks about the dubbing of the movie "Super Junior"

The author’s opinion may not coincide with the position of the editors of gzt.ru