Spanish dialogue in Spielberg's "West Side Story" remake won't be subtitled

[Sam Chavez]

Saw this film tonight. Plenty to talk about and I'm old enough to have seen the original version as a young adult several times and now this version. It's hard not to compare this version and the original, scene by scene. But each has to stand on its own. The actors portraying Tony and Maria are certainly much better actors than Richard Beymer and Natalie Wood. For sheer beauty the original film was far prettier if that is the point.

But look at us all weighing in on how films should be made. One has to wonder how Spielberg, Tarantino, or Nolan ever managed to make a film without our help.

[James Biggins]

I've read quite a few reviews of this movie and the subtitle 'issue' has never been mentioned in any of them so far.

Just sayin'.

[Leo Enticknap]

Which supports the suspicion that Spielberg's statements about it is more a PR stunt than indicative of a serious problem in selling this movie to the public.

Sam - from what you saw, do you believe that the unsubtitled dialogue is likely to be a problem for a non-Spanish speaking viewer?

But look at us all weighing in on how films should be made. One has to wonder how Spielberg, Tarantino, or Nolan ever managed to make a film without our help.

They certainly do need the help of moviegoing customers (and to a lesser extent movie theater workers, who do a significant part of the job of selling their movies to customers) to continue having access to eight- and nine-figure budgets for new productions: those putting up the money expect a ROI. When filmmakers simply ignore the sensibilities of the paying public (and I mean ignore as distinct from challenge), their Hollywood careers tend not to last long. I know this is an ancient example, but my favorite one is to compare the Hollywood careers of Alfred Hitchcock and Fritz Lang, both of whom were megastars in their European countries of origin, and went to Hollywood within a decade of each other. The former became one of the most successful and influential figures of his professional generation, whereas the latter was quickly reduced to making B-movies that were later celebrated by critics and professors, but which mostly lost money (despite having cost so little to make) and were seen by almost no-one, before finding himself out of work and having to go back to Germany in the late '50s. A comparison of Psycho and While The City Sleeps will quickly show you why. Both were crime movies inspired by real events: but whereas one was a cleverly crafted, audience-engaging thriller that took care not to take too much of a deep dive into what Ed Gein got up to (which would make the shower scene look like children's TV), the latter was yet another "the American dream is actually a nightmare" depressing rant, of the sort that only the arthouse crowd would willingly pay good money to see. Bringing this back to the subject of remakes, Gus van Sant's Psycho remake offers a hint of where the film might have gone if Hitchcock had done the deeper dive, which is one of the things I like about it.

Admittedly I'm veering OT a little, but my point is for a filmmaker to announce publicly, before the movie's release, that it does something that is likely to put a viewer of average education and intelligence off seeing it, that is a risky strategy, to put it mildly.

[Bobby Henderson]

Admittedly I'm veering OT a little, but my point is for a filmmaker to announce publicly, before the movie's release, that it does something that is likely to put a viewer of average education and intelligence off seeing it, that is a risky strategy, to put it mildly.

Given the already deeply polarized opinions of American society I don't think Spielberg is risking much at all. The movie is going to appeal to a part of the public, not all of it. As I stated earlier, many of the people taking offense at that choice of not subtitling a Spanish language scene will take offense at several other aspects of the movie. They're divided off in their own camp. People who do enjoy musicals, dance numbers, shows set in New York City, etc will likely not be too bothered by it.

Really it's too bad any press releases or making-of documentaries on ABC drew attention to the issue. Many viewers probably would not have noticed the lack of subtitles on some scenes, as long as the non-subtitled dialog was not important to the plot. If Spielberg is going full-blown Rosetta Stone Spanish language immersion on the audience then it would be a foolish choice. That's going beyond something that is "woke," it would just be ignorant of practical reality. A movie has to communicate effectively to an audience in order to entertain. It doesn't have to do so in a conventional sense, but it has to do so somehow.

[Sam Chavez]

Replying to Leo, can't claim to be an expert on what bothers white people. LOL.

There is certainly more immersion into Puerto Rican culture and the actors speak more Spanish than the earlier version and it's more "ethnically correct" as it should be considering the subject matter. On the other hand, I am bothered by the over emphasis of certain newscasters like Jose Diaz Belart's insisting on rolling every last R in every Hispanic name. But I am way off topic. Disculpe por favor.

[Leo Enticknap]

The movie is going to appeal to a part of the public, not all of it.

When the negative cost is $100 million (call it $120-130m after publicity and distribution), compared to around $60m for an average Hollywood, theatrically released feature, it's got to appeal to most of it. Therefore, the strategy of making a public statement that risks provoking an adverse reaction among potential viewers of the movie is, shall we say, an interesting one.

[Bobby Henderson]

When the negative cost is $100 million (call it $120-130m after publicity and distribution), compared to around $60m for an average Hollywood, theatrically released feature, it's got to appeal to most of it.

That's only looking at it from the perspective of a wide-release Hollywood movie playing in garden variety multiplex locations in the middle of the US. Those kinds of "Hollywood movies" aren't made just for the US market anymore. Spanish is the primary language in nearly all the countries South of the US, as well as Spain over in Europe. The rest of the global market is what it is, a patch-work of many languages and cultures. World-wide Spanish is the primary language for over 550 million people (a little over 40 million are in the US).

Even without the relative safety net of the global market this wouldn't be the first big budget movie to target a niche audience. Not by a long shot. Considering what a single movie ticket costs in most places it would only take a fraction of the Latino-American population showing up to theaters for this new version of West Side Story to make back its production costs. A movie can gross over $100 million with less than 10 million tickets sold. Not every big Hollywood movie has to be tailored to appeal to English-only white people.

Heck, we couldn't even have certain genre style movies if they had to appeal to an overly broad common denominator. American movie distributors actually leave a lot of money on the table by making most of their movies for age 20-something white men. It's pretty annoying when members of the still very dominant group display their fragility when a movie is made that is inclusive of another large demographic of people.

[Ed Gordon]

I've read quite a few reviews of this movie and the subtitle 'issue' has never been mentioned in any of them so far.

Just sayin'.

That has been my experience as well. The Seattle Times reviewer did mention that subtitles were not used, but did not complain about it (see last sentence below)

Many of the characters feel more richly drawn this time around — Tony (Ansel Elgort) now has a backstory that explains his reluctance to be drawn back into the gang; Maria is given much more autonomy; Riff (Mike Faist) is less carefree and more damaged — and one is changed entirely: Doc, the drugstore owner, is now Doc’s widow Valentina, played by the Anita of the previous film, Rita Moreno. And the Puerto Rican characters frequently speak Spanish to each other, as feels natural; it’s not subtitled, but the emotions behind the words are clear.

You can read to full review here.

West Side Story is based on Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, not Much Ado About Nothing.

[Mike Blakesley]

my point is for a filmmaker to announce publicly, before the movie's release, that it does something that is likely to put a viewer of average education and intelligence off seeing it, that is a risky strategy, to put it mildly.

Probably some publicist decided "Well, there's no such thing as bad publicity" and decided to write up the press release.

[Frank Cox]

The weekend box office articles indicate that West Side Story is pretty much a dud, doing even less business than In the Heights did on its opening weekend.

West Side Story. One of the most well known titles with (I thought) name recognition similar to Gone with the Wind and the Wizard of Oz.

So... what's wrong with it? I haven't seen it but I assume it must be at least some good since the articles say that audiences are giving it an A.

[Steve Guttag]

This is pure speculation on my part, because word of mouth is that it is an A+ movie...the (Broadway) musical movie market caters to an elder generation. These are the very people that are still not comfortable going to movies. They've been brainwashed into thinking that theatres are inherently unsafe (in a Covid sense) despite no evidence. Going to the movies is something that they can certainly do without and before long, they'll be able to see it in some other form. My art house customers are not seeing anywhere near the bounce back that my conventional theatres have seen. Again, art houses tend to have customers in an age group that is less comfortable going out again.

[Leo Enticknap]

Agreed completely, and I've read reviews speculating the same thing (e.g. here: "...but older moviegoers, who made up the bulk of ticket-buyers for Spielberg’s latest, have been among the slowest to return."). Nothing I've read has attributed the poor opening weekend to the unsubtitled dialogue, even as a minor factor. Another aspect could be that the movie addresses a "difficult" and politically sensitive topic (immigration and assimilation), and has a pretty downbeat ending, both of which make it a tough sell at this time of year. A summer release would have been a better fit, IMHO.