Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Inventing a Language, from the Guy Who Made Dothraki (2015)

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 81 posts

Re: Inventing a Language, from the Guy Who Made Dothraki (2015)

#11

Post by WilliamEdward »

ggambetta wrote: post #5
ghaff wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See also the articles about the level of detail in the costumes in Game of Thrones. There is a lot of attention to detail, probably including a fair bit that doesn't make it on camera, in big budget video/film productions. You could probably cut a lot of it and still have a "pretty good" final product. But being obsessive about detail rather than being content with good enough in all sorts of aspects of production, i…

I get that. But spending a lot of money on things that don't make it to the final cut always felt like a waste to me. I'm very very marginally into filmmaking (see bio), and I've always had the impression that costs and time could be cut drastically just with better planning. I often wonder what would happen if you applied startup principles to making a movie. Thinking in terms of MVP, customer value, efficiency, on…

I mean, you can consider the cost of making a language like this as part of marketing. It's getting thousands of people online to talk about the show.

Re: Inventing a Language, from the Guy Who Made Dothraki (2015)

#12

Post by classichasclass »

I always theorised there was some extra-auditory or human-inaudible cues in Ubese (Boushh) that filled in the gaps. After all, the only individuals responding directly were non-human: Jabba (who probably could understand, but choose to use C-3PO for egomaniacal and/or ceremonial reasons) and of course old Goldenrod himself.

Hey, my linguistics degree had to be good for something.

Re: Inventing a Language, from the Guy Who Made Dothraki (2015)

#13

Post by ygra »

robbiemitchell wrote: post #8
ggambetta wrote: post #2

I guess this partially explains why making a movie or TV episode can cost millions / hundreds of millions of dollars :-/ Yes, Dothraki being an actual language is probably "better" than Leia speaking gibberish to Jabba, but to me it feels like it's way past the point of diminishing returns.

I don’t see how this explains those massive costs. It’s one salary out of hundreds of millions, and it’s a one-time investment. Plus, once you have a language, you can translate an English script into it vs constantly making up (inconsistent) foreign dialogue as you go.

Well, the language is extended as needed, so it's still making up foreign words as you go. They just have to fit into the language properly.

Re: Inventing a Language, from the Guy Who Made Dothraki (2015)

#14

Post by magic_beans »

de_watcher wrote: post #6
ggambetta wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that. But spending a lot of money on things that don't make it to the final cut always felt like a waste to me. I'm very very marginally into filmmaking (see bio), and I've always had the impression that costs and time could be cut drastically just with better planning. I often wonder what would happen if you applied startup principles to making a movie. Thinking in terms of MVP, customer value, efficiency, on…

Reminds me of "The Matrix" with detailed sketches of how exactly should it look.

Most movies do this. See: http://www.storyboardsinc.com/news/archives/2274

Re: Inventing a Language, from the Guy Who Made Dothraki (2015)

#15

Post by ggambetta »

robbiemitchell wrote: post #8
ggambetta wrote: post #2

I guess this partially explains why making a movie or TV episode can cost millions / hundreds of millions of dollars :-/ Yes, Dothraki being an actual language is probably "better" than Leia speaking gibberish to Jabba, but to me it feels like it's way past the point of diminishing returns.

I don’t see how this explains those massive costs. It’s one salary out of hundreds of millions, and it’s a one-time investment. Plus, once you have a language, you can translate an English script into it vs constantly making up (inconsistent) foreign dialogue as you go.

By "partially explains" I meant that if you spend money in this kind of thing, minor details that sometimes don't even end on the final cut, the costs can add up. I'm wondering to what extent the producers get good value for their money, or whether the Pareto principle applies here - is it possible to make something 80% as good for 20% of the cost, by focusing on the 20% that matters?

For an extreme example, think Transformers, where hundreds of millions and dollars can't save bad writing. Making things better at the screenplay level is probably much more cost-effective than spending millions in VFX (or, in this case, creating a full language where subtitled not-entirely-random gibberish would probably do)

Re: Inventing a Language, from the Guy Who Made Dothraki (2015)

#17

Post by saiya-jin »

ghaff wrote: post #4
ggambetta wrote: post #2

I guess this partially explains why making a movie or TV episode can cost millions / hundreds of millions of dollars :-/ Yes, Dothraki being an actual language is probably "better" than Leia speaking gibberish to Jabba, but to me it feels like it's way past the point of diminishing returns.

See also the articles about the level of detail in the costumes in Game of Thrones. There is a lot of attention to detail, probably including a fair bit that doesn't make it on camera, in big budget video/film productions. You could probably cut a lot of it and still have a "pretty good" final product. But being obsessive about detail rather than being content with good enough in all sorts of aspects of production, i…

While it makes sense to give attention to details, I see too much detail put into things without any effect on the result. Movies are primarily about good acting and scripts. One could slash budget significantly and still have the same final product. I wonder how much effort studios do in this space.

One example - GoT - their costumes have details ie in sewing that you can only see when somebody takes a camera and shoots it up close on purpose. It will never be visible in show, not even in 4k and huge screens.

Shows/movies moved past realism with how good dress/weapons/decorations looked in the past. If you visit any medieval castle, the stuff for kings and queens pales with what even mediocre TV shows can produce.

Re: Inventing a Language, from the Guy Who Made Dothraki (2015)

#20

Post by icebraining »

lazyjones wrote: post #19

I wish they‘d use real, dying or dead languages instead of inventing advanced gibberish for movies. We could preserve languages for posteriority and the result would be more realistic.

And be accused of cultural appropriation?
Post reply on HN