• tigermountain@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    9 days ago

    What pisses me off about subtitles is when they start displaying lyrics to songs playing in the background.

    • Pyr@lemmy.caEnglish
      0·
      8 days ago

      I don’t mind it as long as they do something like italics and little music notes or either end

    • kip@piefed.zipEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      SDH subtitles (subtitles for the deaf & hard of hearing) describe all the relevant sounds in a scene including background song lyrics, there is likely to be another plain subtitle track if you don’t want that

      • JackbyDev@programming.devEnglish
        0·
        9 days ago

        Oh if only. I’ve seen two tracks on occasion on streaming services but it’s extremely rare. I think it was on Netflix or Prime and it’s been years since I’ve seen it. As someone who is not hard of hearing but just has a little trouble understanding sometimes it’s very useful to have the option that’s exclusively dialogue.

    • Ellvix@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      If the song lyrics are relevant to the scene, sure I could see them being there. Like those songs that are custom written to do a sort of 4th wall breaking live commentary on the characters. But a lot of songs? Not needed at all.

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    9 days ago

    That’s either “sign language doesn’t work with our speech-to-text algorithm and we’ll be throat fucked if we hire an actual person to do a job” or some massively pretentious statement about accessibility in media.

  • FluidBeef@quokk.au
    English
    0·
    9 days ago

    This film would never work for second screen viewers because the characters would have to nonstop be saying “I’m being really quiet” or “we can’t make any noise, even loud breathing, or the monster will get us”.

      • ohulancutash@feddit.ukEnglish
        0·
        10 days ago

        Its a bad thing, but it’s less bad than the thing it’s trying to solve. We should look forward to a scenario where DEI is obsolete.

          • ohulancutash@feddit.ukEnglish
            0·
            10 days ago

            Because it only makes sense because employers can’t be trusted to hire equitably. It is a thumb on the scales, and so is an injust act, but is currently necessary due to bad hiring practices.

            Hopefully we can grow out of this and employers will just hire the best people for the job, regardless of personal circumstance.

            • XeroxCool@lemmy.worldEnglish
              0·
              9 days ago

              You seem to think DEI is when employers have to meet a diversity quota, when in reality, it upholds laws stating employers can’t make any hiring decisions based on race or any other such demographic.

              • MaggiWuerze@feddit.orgEnglish
                0·
                9 days ago

                The D in DEI literally stands for diversity though. But you’re probably right and they are thinking of affirmative action

                • XeroxCool@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  0·
                  9 days ago

                  Diversity, Equality, Inclusion. The acts support diversity by barring exclusion on grounds of demographics and demanding equality by barring the use of demographic information as part of the hiring process. DEI does not define any minimum diversity metrics.

          • Warl0k3@lemmy.worldEnglish
            0·
            10 days ago

            Oh I sure do look forward to the well-reasoned and deeply nuanced explanation you’re certain to get in response to that question.

              • Warl0k3@lemmy.worldEnglish
                0·
                9 days ago

                It’s civil which was nice, but it’s also an argument that is (charitably) extremely poorly thought through. It’s just an appeal towards free-market regulation, which in an ideal world does work great but we have hundreds of years history (and the fact that I do not have a pet dragon) that establishes this is not an ideal world and it would not in fact work great.

                It’s a good, optimistic, hope-for-the-future thought yes - but they’re using that to justify badmouthing DEI policies which is both incredibly counterproductive and pretty suspect.

                • MaggiWuerze@feddit.orgEnglish
                  0·
                  9 days ago

                  They are not really though, they are still agreeing that it is necessary, just that they wish it wasn’t. Which the people DEI is supposed to support would probably agree to

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipEnglish
        0·
        9 days ago

        Compared to good writing?

        We aren’t helping anyone by shoehorning random diversity stuff into cheap ass media. Sure we might have 20 out of place same sex relationships but god forbid if they were to touch on difficult topics. The people at the top make wild choices and are then rewarded because is supports the executives ideas about “diversity.” In practice diversity is really just a marketing to make us forget about all the systemic problems in the world.

        • call_me_xale@lemmy.zipEnglish
          0·
          9 days ago

          Compared to good writing?

          I’m sorry, I missed the part where its a tradeoff.

          Also, what makes a same-sex relationship “out-of-place”? Gay people exist everywhere, my dude.

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          9 days ago

          In what world are same-sex relationships not a difficult topic, because I would very much like to move there.

  • FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.websiteEnglish
    0·
    10 days ago

    I am conflicted here. On the one hand, I agree that subtitles would have been nice. On the other hand, I think folks with hearing disabilities get shut out of other content so much that I don’t think this somewhat solitary case makes it good mildly infuriating material. It’s most likely just an oversight. Much less likely a clever scheme to highlight ableism.

    • drcobaltjedi@programming.devEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      I mean, by US law (back when analog TV was standard) all TV broadcasts had to include closed captions on scanline 23(?) for people with hearing disabilities. it was part of the vertical blanking interval so it didn’t interfere with the regularly visible broadcast. It is good to include subtitles for all dialogue, spoken in the local dialect, in a foreign dialect, and even the various sign languages. That’s isn’t to say that yes, I fully agree that differently abled people should be able to take part in the dialog and should have accommodations where needed.

      Semi related, did you know American sign language is closer to French sign language than it is to British sign language?

  • Rug_Pisser@piefed.zipEnglish
    0·
    9 days ago

    Sometimes, and specifically on Amazon prime, if a show / movie has hard coded subs (for sign or other foreign languages) you will need to turn off the optional subtitle setting.

    Of course then, when someone does speak out loud you won’t get your normal subs until you turn the setting back on. I used to put in a new complaint for each show that it happened on until i canned prime altogether and went back to pirating all their content.

    • Carighan Maconar@piefed.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      Germany adds the funky police that sometimes only German subtitles are allowed no matter the audio language you pick. So if there are no German-language subtitles because none were ever made, well you’re shit out of luck now, fuck you and your subtitle needs! 😐

    • yermaw@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      Its really weird that they do that. Like I would have assumed that the hardcoded subs were part of the video.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      10 days ago

      My Dad is incredibly dyslexic, and it’s a legit issue for him.

      Growing up, if a movie or TV show had subs we had to take turns reading it out loud for him. I still have to catch myself trying to do automatically it when we’re watching something with other people.

      • cobysev@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        10 days ago

        if a movie or TV show had subs we had to take turns reading it out loud

        I do this for my wife, because she spends most of a film on her phone.

        She’s listening to the audio and can mostly follow what’s going on by glancing at the screen and reading subtitles every now and then, but if there’s a foreign language with subtitles, or a text description (Paris, 11 AM or 10 years later, etc.), she’ll miss it and then be completely lost.

        I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to pause a movie and give a quick recap to get her caught up with the plot.

        • huppakee@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          10 days ago

          I believe Netflix order movies to be understandable to people who are not paying attention. Maybe they have something that is good enough for you, it would save you from having to recap stuff.

          • Carl@anarchist.nexusEnglish
            0·
            9 days ago

            Second Screen Viewing, yeah. Basically, Netflix is dumbing down their scripts so people can understand the plot even when it’s just playing on their second screen while they do other stuff. Apparently our attention spans have shrunk so much that people can’t even be expected to pay attention to the movies they put on.

            • Fluke@feddit.ukEnglish
              0·
              9 days ago

              Yeah. Fuck all that shit.

              I’m living in the “how it happened” stages of Idiocracy. What the fuck is this timeline?!

      • anguo@piefed.caEnglish
        0·
        10 days ago

        I grew up in a country where movies are rarely dubbed. I was reading the subtitles out loud for my siblings who couldn’t read yet for entire movies.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.socialEnglish
    0·
    9 days ago

    I see this more and more with shit on streaming services where, for some fucking reason, they strip the subtitles out for the non-native language parts even tho they are supposed to be subtitled for the audience. Like for example I wanted to see the new Ghostbusters the other day since it was on HBO which I have, but half-way through I had to stop it and pirate it anyway, because all the scenes with just the bad guys talking was supposed to be subtitled but they took the god damn subs out. They didn’t even translate the dialogue in closed captioning even tho the audience is supposed to know what they are saying!

    • immutable@lemmy.zipEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      My favorite is when services will put a caption like “[speaking spanish]” over top of the English subtitles that are in a film for a Spanish speaking character.

      The film maker put the subtitles in there so if you can’t speak Spanish you can understand what the character is saying and then you can’t read it because Amazon decided to helpfully inform you they are speaking.

    • Wispy2891@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      I was watching rental family (an american guy moves to japan to be an actor and speaks a very little japanese) and somehow they decided to ignore all the parts in japanese and from the subtitles there was only the english parts. In the beginning i was like "ok, it’s to let the audience know that the protagonist does not understand what they’re shouting to him - then finally i had to pirate a sub from opensubtitles to understand was going on as the dialogues were 95% in japanese

  • IWW4@lemmy.zipEnglish
    0·
    9 days ago

    I am a bit lost here.

    I just watched A Quiet Place on Amazon and it had subtitles…