Paxton wrote:I'm willing to give Stewball the benefit of the doubt on this one for two reasons. 1. He seems legitimately interested in performances, and I certainly lose some scope on the power of a performance when I don't understand the language. I couldn't tell you if Tony Leung's delivery of certain lines in In The Mood For Love would make it even better (as is it's tier 10 in my book) because I don't even know how to read his inflection aside from screaming equals angry. 2. He did show love for Inglourious Basterds in which language is almost a main character.
Looking back on that film, Stewball, (you're review praised Waltz's performance of which the majority is not English) did you think you were missing intricacies in his performance? If it was enough there's a whole world of film you're shying away from that has a lot to offer. Like Incubus (1966) with William Shatner filmed in Esperanto.
Okay, maybe not Incubus.
Good question about Waltz, and I'd have to watch it again to be sure, but I feel certain that it comes down to, as I've implied, the given situation. How the subs are presented (placement, size, length, time on screen), the pace of the dialogue or mostly monologue in this instance if I remember correctly, and I almost knew what he was going to say most of the time before he said it. BTW, reading speed that Shogun brought up could, figure into it. If I'm supposed to absorb a a 2 line sub in 2 seconds, followed by several more similar to that in quick succession, I guess I am slow--sobeit, and a certain fatigue sets in in any case, even for fast readers I suspect. But then what am I supposed to do about it, say yeah, subtitles are great?
(And I know for a fact that there are some situations where nobody can keep up and give the action more than a snapshot glance.)