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

Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

news.lettersofnote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 326 posts

Re: Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

#81

Post by CalRobert »

marlowe221 wrote: post #71
vlunkr wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bluey is a fantastic show, and the fact that it's unapologetically Australian is part of what's so fun about it. I think it's just the choice of nervous higher-ups to localize things like this, and not actually what people want. Like Douglas Adams says, people can survive hearing references they don't understand. And they might even learn something about another culture.

My kids (ages 6 and 3) LOVE Bluey. We are American and (sadly) English-only speakers. The fact that the show is full of Australian accents has not impacted their ability to understand or enjoy the show in any way at all. The exposure to places that are not-America is good for them!

I didn't even realize it but when Bluey, Bingo, and dad go to watch Chunky Chimp (the kids' movie with a big storm) the characters' accents are American.

"it's just a bunch of singing monkeys I wouldn't read too much in to it"

Re: Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

#82

Post by coldtea »

dymk wrote: post #55
vrc wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s why the continuous motion ones are so sought after and pricy. The mechanical continuous motion watches are really marvelous feats of engineering

The movement is still quantized if you look close enough.

Not in any discernible degree without at least an electron microscope...

Re: Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

#83

Post by bananabiscuit »

JaceLightning wrote: post #60

The example of digital watches is interesting. I found the digital version exponentially easier to read than the watch hands one.

Digital easier to read, but I personally think analog is easier to “feel”. I get a much larger sense of urgency when the minute hand approaches an anticipated position. And same goes for when the hour hand crawls downward to signal the end of the work day. Seeing it physically close the distance to the 6 o’clock position gives me a much better feel for how much of the day I have left than “3:24”. It really is like a pie chart in that sense.

Re: Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

#84

Post by CalRobert »

twofornone wrote: post #61
vrc wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there’s something about British narration of nature docs that makes them more relaxing and engaging for American audiences. Especially those who grew up in an era of Discovery Channel and PBS where the narration was usually British, or South African, or Australian, or in the Commonwealth-tinged flavor of English of that location. Perhaps it’s nostalgia.

I agree and I think part of it is nostalgia for a time when educational channels actually broadcast informative content, not semi-scripted, over edited, over dramatized reality tv. Did anyone else notice the slow boil of channels like History, Discovery, Animal Planet? Just irresponsible to coast on their reputation and start showing nothing but junk TV 24/7 to people who thought they were learning. I think it starte…

It really is painful to watch. It's been so long since I watched anything that wasn't a streaming service that when I see old fashioned TV with commercials and horrible editing it drives me up a wall.

I remember when my complaint about the History Channel was that it was WWII all the time. It was still massively better than today; at least I learned about the Battle of the Bulge over and over and over.

Re: Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

#85

Post by CalRobert »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #27
CalRobert wrote: post #5

There's a deeply frustrating infantilisation when something is localized in the same language. My kids and I love Bluey, an Australian show, but apparently the producers had to refuse to have it redone with US and UK accents to stop it happening. Never understood what the problem with having David Attenborough instead of Sigourney Weaver narrate Planet Earth was either.

I don't care one direction or the other, but for example Doctor Who is just fine without having to be redone and loved by people in America regardless of the accents. Is there a reason you'd love to see it redone outside of just having the show have more exposure in America? I can understand the sentiment.

Oh, no I definitely do _not_ want it redone. It's better this way. I love Puffin Rock too (an Irish show) and can't fathom that with American accents.

Re: Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

#86

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #63
Abekkus wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first planet earth wasn't just given different voiceover for American audiences, it was recut. The brass called the Attenborough cut "excruciatingly slow-paced", so once they decided to re-edit, it was probably easier to recast the narration than to try and edit down Attenborough's own speech. The Attenborough cut is my personal preference too.

Honestly I’m an avid fan of all of the “Planet” series precisely because of Attenborough.

It's deeply lamentable that in this day and age one has to resort to throwaway accounts to express their fondness of Sir Attenborough.

Re: Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

#88

Post by gunfighthacksaw »

Abekkus wrote: post #43
CalRobert wrote: post #5

There's a deeply frustrating infantilisation when something is localized in the same language. My kids and I love Bluey, an Australian show, but apparently the producers had to refuse to have it redone with US and UK accents to stop it happening. Never understood what the problem with having David Attenborough instead of Sigourney Weaver narrate Planet Earth was either.

The first planet earth wasn't just given different voiceover for American audiences, it was recut. The brass called the Attenborough cut "excruciatingly slow-paced", so once they decided to re-edit, it was probably easier to recast the narration than to try and edit down Attenborough's own speech. The Attenborough cut is my personal preference too.

It blows my mind that Attenborough would ever be replaced as a narrator because he is the best of the best vis-à-vis nature documentaries.

Or to provide an Americanized analogy, you wouldn’t replace Morgan Freeman in a situation where you needed the sage reflections of an old man in voiceover form.

Re: Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

#89

Post by quesera »

Intermernet wrote: post #52
Joeboy wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess David Attenborough probably isn't so well-known in the US? It's apparently much harder to get people to show up for something without a big name attached. Edit: > Actress and conservationist Sigourney Weaver was brought in to replace David Attenborough as narrator, as it was thought her familiarity to American audiences would attract more viewers.[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_Earth_(2006_TV_ser…

David Attenborough is by far the most famous nature documentarist in the world. No one comes close. I'm not sure what name would be regarded as bigger.

Ken Burns is a candidate, though not strictly natural world stuff.

Re: Please don’t let anyone Americanise it (1992)

#90

Post by frosted-flakes »

bombcar wrote: post #74
vrc wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there’s something about British narration of nature docs that makes them more relaxing and engaging for American audiences. Especially those who grew up in an era of Discovery Channel and PBS where the narration was usually British, or South African, or Australian, or in the Commonwealth-tinged flavor of English of that location. Perhaps it’s nostalgia.

For me at least, for no real reason and perhaps because of British narration of documentaries, the British accent "by default" sounds more learned. Now I'm sure there's variations of British accents, but the ones we were exposed to as children seemed to coincide with "scientific" or other educational content.

> Now I'm sure there's variations of British accents

That's an understatement.

Post reply on HN