‘Translation Was So Bad’: Korean American Breaks Down The Scenes From “Squid Game” To Show How Inaccurate The English Version Is Interview
268Kviews
If you have also been glued to the screen for much of the last month, the chances are you were watching Squid Game, aka currently the No 1 show on Netflix in 90 countries.
But not everyone is happy with the English version of this massive global TV phenomenon. It turns out, an increasing number of Korean speakers are finding the translation very poor, to say the least.
One of them, social media content creator and podcaster Youngmi Mayer, tweeted “Not to sound snobby but I’m fluent in Korean and I watched Squid Game with English subtitles and if you don’t understand Korean you didn’t really watch the same show. Translation was so bad,” she said and added that “the dialogue was written so well and zero of it was preserved.”
So now, in a series of illuminating TikTok videos, Youngmi made a scene breakdown where she pointed out particularly inaccurate and flawed translations. It turns out, the English-speaking world is missing a whole lot of story!
Image credits: ymmayer
Image credits: ymmayer
ok i made this really fast so it’s not very good but these are the small examples i could find in ten mins pic.twitter.com/5kIsrlWDjq
— youngmi mayer (@ymmayer) September 30, 2021
Image credits: ymmayer
If you haven’t heard of the show Squid Game on Netflix, the chances are you’ve been hiding somewhere in a bunker for the past few weeks. Because the new Korean TV series has taken our screens by storm, topping out at 1st place on Netflix in 90 countries since it premiered on September 17.
The violent dystopian drama stars Lee Jung-jae, Park Hae-soo, Wi Ha-joon and Jung Ho-yeon as a group of outcasts lured by a mysterious organization into playing children’s games for a cash prize—with deadly high stakes. One of the lead characters, Jung Ho-yeon, who plays Sae-byeok, number 067 in the drama, was made Louis Vuitton’s international ambassador as her Instagram following soared from 400k to a whopping 17M.
What’s incredible about this new show dubbed a “phenomenon” is that it created an instant global craze with people shamelessly binging nine hours of episodes, or playing it on the digital game platform Roblox. Moreover, fans went crazy for the show’s signature green tracksuits and white Vans slip-ons. According to Sole Supplier data, the sales for them are up 7,800%.
Moreover, it’s the first time a Korean drama has ever been at the top of the US charts. Moreover, a whopping 95% of the viewers are outside Korea, debunking a previous belief that the younger generation can’t be bothered to read subtitles.
Korean:
English subtitle:
It turns out that with Netflix executive Minyoung Kim, the entertainment platform started a new content strategy by committing to spending over a half a billion dollars on Korean content in 2021 alone. Many analysts now believe Netflix’s strong lead in Korean entertainment to be one of the company’s key advantages.
In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter, Kim said that “We’ve always believed that the most locally authentic shows will travel best, so having a show that’s about really authentic Korean games and characters become really big not only in Korea but also globally—it’s such an exciting moment for us.”
Korean:
English subtitle:
Kim believes that part of Squid Game’s success is the appeal of the genre itself. “Number one, the genre itself is something that has global appeal. The director also wanted to make sure that even if you don’t already know those very Korean children’s games, the barrier of entry would be low and you could still easily enjoy it. He put a lot of focus into making sure the rules of the games he chose were very simple—and I think this simplicity is a big element of the international success.”
Moreover, “We also believe content that’s able to generate conversation has the best chance of getting really big. And Squid Game has a lot of those memorable, meme-able moments that people can play around with, and which drive conversation,” Kim explained.
Korean:
English subtitle:
Bored Panda reached out to Euijin Seo, Korean language and content creator on TikTok and Instagram living in South Korea. Euijin runs Good Job Korean online Korean course for beginners, so if you want to watch Squid Game in its original language without missing any details and references, be sure to check out his page!
When asked what was Euijin’s first impression after watching the first episode of Squid Game, he said he was “pretty shocked with the red light green light game.” He added: “The game that I used to play in my childhood turned into a death game in the show.”
Moreover, “One interesting fact is we also used ‘die’ (죽다 [jukda]) in Korean when someone failed in the game. But this became an actual death in the show,” Eujin explained and added: “Killing people with a gun comes as a shock to me as well. Guns in Korea are strictly restricted. So you barely see K-drama with guns. But I think Squid Game is one of the most gun-heavy shows.”
Image credits: ymmayer
Image credits: ymmayer
Image credits: ymmayer
When it comes to the English version of Squid Game, Euijin said that he didn’t pay great attention to the subtitles, “because I am a native Korean.” However, he still watched the show with English subtitles “anyway for some reason,” and found some differences.
“One example is one of Han Minyeo’s words translated into ‘I’m not a genius, but I still got it worked out’ from one of the episodes. But it is actually ‘내가 공부를 안 해서 그렇지 머리는 장난 아니라니까!’ which is literally ‘I am very smart, I just never got a chance to study.’ This translation was totally different.”
Euijin believes that if this part was translated literally, “people might be confused like ‘why does she start talking about studying?’” He explained that this line reflects Korean culture. “Koreans tend to say ‘He is good at studying (schooling)’ as the meaning of ‘He is smart,’ so if you get a bad score from the school, that means you are not smart.”
“So Minyeo’s line became one of the typical words (or excuses) that undereducated people make in Korea,” Euijin said and added that “I guess it is impossible to explain all this background in the translation.”
@jin_koreannerdy@unkn0wnhum4n 님에게 회신 anyone wanna join this game? 🦑😏 #squidgame #learningkorean♬ 오리지널 사운드 – JinKorean
Image credits: jin_koreannerdy
Euijin pointed out more flaws in the English version of Squid Game on his Tik Tok. For example, in episode 1, the characters played “red light, green light” from hell, which refers to a game many American children grew up playing in schools (except the violence). However, it’s actually called “mugunghwa kkoci pieot seumnida” in Korean. He explained that “mugunghwa” is the Korean national flower, and in the Korean version of the game, the rules were different. “Every time the flower bloomed, you gotta freeze”: this is what it meant in Korean.
According to Euijin, non-Koreans have also missed a reference in the scene where Sang-woo first comes back from the games and he soaks in the bathtub with his clothes on. “There is something beside him making smoke,” he said and added that: “Many non-Koreans didn’t notice that Sang-woo was about to kill himself. This is one of the well-known suicide methods in Korea — by smoking briquettes.”
Another inconsistency that Euijin noticed was the fact “this Korean word 오빠 (oppa) has been translated as ‘babe’ in the English subtitle. But actually, oppa is a title that girls use to call men who are older than them. So Duksu asked Minyeo if it is right to call him oppa for Minyeo. When Minyeo keeps calling him oppa, it implies Duksu is older than her. And Duksu doubted her age, and then he asked her ‘It is right to call me oppa for you?’ I liked this scene very much. However, this dialogue is translated in a totally different way, and oppa became ‘babe.’” Here is the video link to the scene (1:50) that Euijin is talking about.
According to Euijin, many inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the English translation of Squid Game have to do with the whole Korean culture. “I want to remind people that Korea is a homogeneous country. Plus, the territory is small. Koreans are not as diverse as other countries and share a very deep culture. There are tons of inside jokes, idioms, nuance, intonation, and expressions that only Koreans possibly understand.”
Moreover, “there are not interchangeable words in English and it would have been nonsense translations and distracting viewers’ flow if the dialogue were directly translated,” he explained. Having said that, Euijin believes that even though the English viewers do not miss the overall message, they still miss some jokes or nuances from the dialogue. “This might have affected their understanding of each character!”
“I am so happy about its success as a Korean creator. I hope people get to have an interest in the Korean language and culture through it so that they can enjoy K-contents more,” Euijin concluded.
More people joined the discussion to point out inconsistencies between Korean and English versions of Squid Game
Image credits: alexisashin
Image credits: worldpoop
Image credits: ADeVonJohnson
Image credits: ustadchen
Image credits: Jayeamber1
Image credits: 26JinX
Image credits: CassRudolph
Image credits: harveythepig
268Kviews
Share on Facebook
I am fluent in Korean, and I do video game localisation (which is translation for the most part), and let me tell you. All these people want a word-to-word literal translation, but that's not how it works. When it comes to creative content, it's translation+adaptation, in other words -> localisation. To make the product close to the audiences, in a way they can truly understand it, not only the language, but also the emotions, you need to adapt for the target region. This is also mostly why American and British sometimes need to translate each other's contents, not because they don't speak the same type of English, but because of cultural differences. Once the content gets its way into your heart, you can go and explore it further and find out about these differences, and that should be regarded as a personal little treasure, and if you're willing to share that knowledge, that's awesome. But here we're talking about accusations of a profession they do not understand. (Cont.)
(Cont.) It's cool that they're spreading the knowledge about the Korean culture, it truly is, but these things can be done without the "I'm better than you" kind of attitude, and the pooping on people's work. That last part of the original tweet was really uncalled for. She would've said the same for the English versions of our games without realising our English language team mostly has completely Korean translators whose work gets revised by native speakers of English.
Thank you for pointing this out, Daria. As a translator and a former subtitler, I can only agree with what you say. I have also noticed pretty big discrepancies between the dubbed and subtitled versions of Vincenzo, which annoyed me, but at least I know why they are the way they are. Accusing a profession you do not understand is easy. Translating ideas from one culture into an understandable and relatable concept in another culture, within a limited amount of characters, is not.
Exactly. Additionally, when it comes to subtitles, you are also confined by the time flow. You can't write a little novel for every single phrase they say, and yet, that would've explained what they mean sooooo perfectly and accurately. Nope. Not happening. Need to make it natural.
Yep. I do proofing of Russian to English sub title content and I rarely get the Russian version. My job is to polish the English and make it sound as natural as possible and there is almost always a character or line limit.
When you say that there are several layers or steps, in the end it will be a game of Chinese whispers , won't it?
No. You are moving ideas really from one language to another and the languages are not interchangeable in how things are said, constructed or phrased. The goal really is to have a good run translating the idea as best as possible and then a second run to make sure the version in the target language is the most natural sounding and engaging it can be.
Yeah, I mean, style is important, but there's so much more going on than mere translation.
Is “Chinese whispers” the same as a game of telephone? Speaking of language differences. . . .
I suppose so. Afaik Chinese whispers is chiefly british, and telephone chiefly US.
This was a brilliant explanation, Daria. I used to work within transcreation (localization for the advertising agency that emphasizes adapting concepts for the target cultural an audience while still preserving the text's original intent, style, and tone) As you mentioned, a lot of people don't realize that translation is never word from word-- it goes much deeper than that. With localization and transcreation, specific cultural, linguistic, and extra-grammatical elements such as dates are adapted to the target audience. (Take the example of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's versus Sorcerer's stone for instance). Furthermore, a lot of people also don't realize that there are rules for subtitling that restrict the amount of text that you can have on the screen at once; for example the BBC has entire rules for subtitles restricting how many lines and characters can appear on the screen at once. Subtitling and dubbing are no easy feat.
Thank you for the comment, Daria. Maybe people should think why it is called *localisation* and not merely *translation*. Dubbing neccesarily has an element of interpretation, even if a near-translation is sought. In fact, you can detect poor dubbing when you notice that the speech contains idioms that do not exist in the target but only in the source language.
Literal translations of idioms is biggest giveaway for poor language skills in whoever made the subtitles imo. It shows they're not really paying attention to the text or may not even understand it.
Thank you for understanding. Even in my works, I admit, when I was new and fresh out of university, sometimes I'd care too much about the source language ending up with results that would gather negative feedback from audiences, leading them to believe the translation wasn't made by a native speaker (which is not true btw), but rather someone who disrespects their language and helps themselves with artificial intelligence.
Absolutely agree with you. I know very little Japanese, like I couldn't have a conversation at all... but I do know the common interjections and some basics. They're almost always translated "wrong" because they just don't culturally make sense in English. It's just about conveying the same basic feeling. We have our own ways of showing respect/disrespect, of showing who's upper class and who isn't, etc, so translators need to find ways to make those fit.
I still think the subtiltles lacked, when it came to how people are addressed in relation to each other. It would be much better to just keep the "oppa" and "hyeong" and "eonni" with a short explanation in parentheses, than translate to stuff like "babe", or other words that don't give the correct nuance.
Yeah, about this one, I think I can agree. If it works for Japanese contents, and, sometimes, European contents as well, then it might work for Korean as well. Although, I think there should be a better way to explain it other than brackets. But I don't know the best solution to this, other than the viewers individually getting willingly curious and invested into learning about the Korean culture. Which is, actually, happening. In the end, thinking of it, back in 2000s, I remember they used to replace these words with just the respective names of the characters.
Absolutely. The subtitles in English and the words spoken in English don't even match and that's fine (this applies to all dubbed shows on netflix, every language - I've watched many). I think they do their best to match the spoken words to the lip movements while keeping the original meaning.
Yes, but what you're saying doesn't really apply to the examples she using. "I'm not genius but I can work it out," has a very different meaning than "I'm very smart, but I never got a chance to study." There's no reason to not use a more accurate translation in that case. It's telling that you're using the word "product," but the lines as written aren't just meaningless sounds. Someone wrote that script and changing the entire meaning of a critical line changes the meaning behind the entire work. By changing the lines you're essentially shitting on someone else's work of art, and robbing the audience of a deeper experience.
BoopBoop, as someone works in the language industry there's a very famous Italian saying about translation: " Traduttore, traditore" (Essentially: Translator, traitor). All translation is essentially one huge compromise. I highly urge you to read Daria, Mellon, and Samantha's excellent explanations about subtitling above. They have all worked in the translation, subtitling, and localization and explain the sheer complexity of subtitling. Translation is never a word from word rehash-- instead a good translation will aim to translate meaning and adapt cultural concepts and idioms for the target audience. There are so many individual elements that go into subtitling that are also often overlooked like the very strict rules that regulate how many words and lines of text you can have on screen at once due to reading speed. Sometimes a subtitler is forced to distill a very complex concept to just a few words on a television screen. Think about distilling a paragraph about your day into a couple of shorty sentences-- what stays in, and what stays out while still capturing the meaning?
@LLBK Technically you're right, but none of this applies in this case. I don't think anyone is saying the translations should have been word for word. The examples in the article were translations which did not convey the original idea the writers had in mind at all and could have easily been improved.
I honestly don't see where OP is "pooping on people's work". In one of their tweets they clearly say producers are at fault for underpaying and overworking people who make subtitles. And that's absolutely true. Treating translators this way makes their profession very undesirable. To have talented translators you need to pay them accordingly. I'm not from an English speaking country, the amount of bad subtitles I have started seeing in the last 15+ years is unbelievable and it is very obvious when the cause is poor fluency or even laziness. I've seen older movies I love be re-subtitled and the result is often incredibly poor, while the old subtitles do a much better job of translating the original message. Translation is hard because you need to be highly fluent in both languages and the trick is to make it understandable, but remain as close as possible to the spirit of the original. The examples in this article are a far cry from what is actually being said, they are poor literal translations, without accounting for the message the original is trying to send across. OP is right and the difference between the English (CC) and English subtitles proves it.
"This is also mostly why American and British sometimes need to translate each other's contents, not because they don't speak the same type of English, but because of cultural differences. " That's not a need. All it does is remove character and depth. People are not quite so stupid that this needs to be done.
It's not about stupidity. Is about the Englishes and the cultural context being so very different one version is unintelligible for the other group without reworking
Thank you. Example: British people washing themselves with a flannel does not mean they’re washing with a shirt. Being pissed can mean being drunk or angry; big difference.
Hey Fish, as someone who used to work in localization and transcreation for the advertising agent, you better believe their is a need for localization from American English to British English and vice-versa. For example, do you think an advertisement campaign featuring a bunch of American football players would work well with a British target audience? No-- American football is not widely played in the United Kingdom and has little cultural value to the target audience. It is the job of the localization team to come up with a similar concept that would resonate with the target audience in the United Kingdom. As a client, would it make sense to use a bunch of British slang terms on an advertisement for a product that I eventually want to market in the United States--no, it would only confuse my target audience. There slang, cultural elements, and idioms that don't always translate well to the target audience.
You may say there's no need, and yet, it happens. And if it happens, it means there's a demand for it.
Part of my job is creating subtitles and closed captions for TV shows and movies. It's a lot more complex than you would imagine. First of all, the dubbing. That is the most difficult, because the goal is not to get an exact translation, so much as matching the translated words to the mouth movements of the actors. Obviously, that really limits what you can put on screen. For the subtitles, you have a limited number of characters that you can portray on screen at any one time, and because of the average reading speed of viewers, you can't have them appearing too quickly one after the other. So subtitlers have to distill language down to the shortest basics possible, with fewer characters than a Tweet. It's really, really hard.
"many non Koreans didn't realise he was about to kill himself". What do they mean? It was super obvious!
Yeah I reckon! If you didn’t get that then it’s not because of the subtitles, there was no dialogue in that scene anyway!!
I am fluent in Korean, and I do video game localisation (which is translation for the most part), and let me tell you. All these people want a word-to-word literal translation, but that's not how it works. When it comes to creative content, it's translation+adaptation, in other words -> localisation. To make the product close to the audiences, in a way they can truly understand it, not only the language, but also the emotions, you need to adapt for the target region. This is also mostly why American and British sometimes need to translate each other's contents, not because they don't speak the same type of English, but because of cultural differences. Once the content gets its way into your heart, you can go and explore it further and find out about these differences, and that should be regarded as a personal little treasure, and if you're willing to share that knowledge, that's awesome. But here we're talking about accusations of a profession they do not understand. (Cont.)
(Cont.) It's cool that they're spreading the knowledge about the Korean culture, it truly is, but these things can be done without the "I'm better than you" kind of attitude, and the pooping on people's work. That last part of the original tweet was really uncalled for. She would've said the same for the English versions of our games without realising our English language team mostly has completely Korean translators whose work gets revised by native speakers of English.
Thank you for pointing this out, Daria. As a translator and a former subtitler, I can only agree with what you say. I have also noticed pretty big discrepancies between the dubbed and subtitled versions of Vincenzo, which annoyed me, but at least I know why they are the way they are. Accusing a profession you do not understand is easy. Translating ideas from one culture into an understandable and relatable concept in another culture, within a limited amount of characters, is not.
Exactly. Additionally, when it comes to subtitles, you are also confined by the time flow. You can't write a little novel for every single phrase they say, and yet, that would've explained what they mean sooooo perfectly and accurately. Nope. Not happening. Need to make it natural.
Yep. I do proofing of Russian to English sub title content and I rarely get the Russian version. My job is to polish the English and make it sound as natural as possible and there is almost always a character or line limit.
When you say that there are several layers or steps, in the end it will be a game of Chinese whispers , won't it?
No. You are moving ideas really from one language to another and the languages are not interchangeable in how things are said, constructed or phrased. The goal really is to have a good run translating the idea as best as possible and then a second run to make sure the version in the target language is the most natural sounding and engaging it can be.
Yeah, I mean, style is important, but there's so much more going on than mere translation.
Is “Chinese whispers” the same as a game of telephone? Speaking of language differences. . . .
I suppose so. Afaik Chinese whispers is chiefly british, and telephone chiefly US.
This was a brilliant explanation, Daria. I used to work within transcreation (localization for the advertising agency that emphasizes adapting concepts for the target cultural an audience while still preserving the text's original intent, style, and tone) As you mentioned, a lot of people don't realize that translation is never word from word-- it goes much deeper than that. With localization and transcreation, specific cultural, linguistic, and extra-grammatical elements such as dates are adapted to the target audience. (Take the example of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's versus Sorcerer's stone for instance). Furthermore, a lot of people also don't realize that there are rules for subtitling that restrict the amount of text that you can have on the screen at once; for example the BBC has entire rules for subtitles restricting how many lines and characters can appear on the screen at once. Subtitling and dubbing are no easy feat.
Thank you for the comment, Daria. Maybe people should think why it is called *localisation* and not merely *translation*. Dubbing neccesarily has an element of interpretation, even if a near-translation is sought. In fact, you can detect poor dubbing when you notice that the speech contains idioms that do not exist in the target but only in the source language.
Literal translations of idioms is biggest giveaway for poor language skills in whoever made the subtitles imo. It shows they're not really paying attention to the text or may not even understand it.
Thank you for understanding. Even in my works, I admit, when I was new and fresh out of university, sometimes I'd care too much about the source language ending up with results that would gather negative feedback from audiences, leading them to believe the translation wasn't made by a native speaker (which is not true btw), but rather someone who disrespects their language and helps themselves with artificial intelligence.
Absolutely agree with you. I know very little Japanese, like I couldn't have a conversation at all... but I do know the common interjections and some basics. They're almost always translated "wrong" because they just don't culturally make sense in English. It's just about conveying the same basic feeling. We have our own ways of showing respect/disrespect, of showing who's upper class and who isn't, etc, so translators need to find ways to make those fit.
I still think the subtiltles lacked, when it came to how people are addressed in relation to each other. It would be much better to just keep the "oppa" and "hyeong" and "eonni" with a short explanation in parentheses, than translate to stuff like "babe", or other words that don't give the correct nuance.
Yeah, about this one, I think I can agree. If it works for Japanese contents, and, sometimes, European contents as well, then it might work for Korean as well. Although, I think there should be a better way to explain it other than brackets. But I don't know the best solution to this, other than the viewers individually getting willingly curious and invested into learning about the Korean culture. Which is, actually, happening. In the end, thinking of it, back in 2000s, I remember they used to replace these words with just the respective names of the characters.
Absolutely. The subtitles in English and the words spoken in English don't even match and that's fine (this applies to all dubbed shows on netflix, every language - I've watched many). I think they do their best to match the spoken words to the lip movements while keeping the original meaning.
Yes, but what you're saying doesn't really apply to the examples she using. "I'm not genius but I can work it out," has a very different meaning than "I'm very smart, but I never got a chance to study." There's no reason to not use a more accurate translation in that case. It's telling that you're using the word "product," but the lines as written aren't just meaningless sounds. Someone wrote that script and changing the entire meaning of a critical line changes the meaning behind the entire work. By changing the lines you're essentially shitting on someone else's work of art, and robbing the audience of a deeper experience.
BoopBoop, as someone works in the language industry there's a very famous Italian saying about translation: " Traduttore, traditore" (Essentially: Translator, traitor). All translation is essentially one huge compromise. I highly urge you to read Daria, Mellon, and Samantha's excellent explanations about subtitling above. They have all worked in the translation, subtitling, and localization and explain the sheer complexity of subtitling. Translation is never a word from word rehash-- instead a good translation will aim to translate meaning and adapt cultural concepts and idioms for the target audience. There are so many individual elements that go into subtitling that are also often overlooked like the very strict rules that regulate how many words and lines of text you can have on screen at once due to reading speed. Sometimes a subtitler is forced to distill a very complex concept to just a few words on a television screen. Think about distilling a paragraph about your day into a couple of shorty sentences-- what stays in, and what stays out while still capturing the meaning?
@LLBK Technically you're right, but none of this applies in this case. I don't think anyone is saying the translations should have been word for word. The examples in the article were translations which did not convey the original idea the writers had in mind at all and could have easily been improved.
I honestly don't see where OP is "pooping on people's work". In one of their tweets they clearly say producers are at fault for underpaying and overworking people who make subtitles. And that's absolutely true. Treating translators this way makes their profession very undesirable. To have talented translators you need to pay them accordingly. I'm not from an English speaking country, the amount of bad subtitles I have started seeing in the last 15+ years is unbelievable and it is very obvious when the cause is poor fluency or even laziness. I've seen older movies I love be re-subtitled and the result is often incredibly poor, while the old subtitles do a much better job of translating the original message. Translation is hard because you need to be highly fluent in both languages and the trick is to make it understandable, but remain as close as possible to the spirit of the original. The examples in this article are a far cry from what is actually being said, they are poor literal translations, without accounting for the message the original is trying to send across. OP is right and the difference between the English (CC) and English subtitles proves it.
"This is also mostly why American and British sometimes need to translate each other's contents, not because they don't speak the same type of English, but because of cultural differences. " That's not a need. All it does is remove character and depth. People are not quite so stupid that this needs to be done.
It's not about stupidity. Is about the Englishes and the cultural context being so very different one version is unintelligible for the other group without reworking
Thank you. Example: British people washing themselves with a flannel does not mean they’re washing with a shirt. Being pissed can mean being drunk or angry; big difference.
Hey Fish, as someone who used to work in localization and transcreation for the advertising agent, you better believe their is a need for localization from American English to British English and vice-versa. For example, do you think an advertisement campaign featuring a bunch of American football players would work well with a British target audience? No-- American football is not widely played in the United Kingdom and has little cultural value to the target audience. It is the job of the localization team to come up with a similar concept that would resonate with the target audience in the United Kingdom. As a client, would it make sense to use a bunch of British slang terms on an advertisement for a product that I eventually want to market in the United States--no, it would only confuse my target audience. There slang, cultural elements, and idioms that don't always translate well to the target audience.
You may say there's no need, and yet, it happens. And if it happens, it means there's a demand for it.
Part of my job is creating subtitles and closed captions for TV shows and movies. It's a lot more complex than you would imagine. First of all, the dubbing. That is the most difficult, because the goal is not to get an exact translation, so much as matching the translated words to the mouth movements of the actors. Obviously, that really limits what you can put on screen. For the subtitles, you have a limited number of characters that you can portray on screen at any one time, and because of the average reading speed of viewers, you can't have them appearing too quickly one after the other. So subtitlers have to distill language down to the shortest basics possible, with fewer characters than a Tweet. It's really, really hard.
"many non Koreans didn't realise he was about to kill himself". What do they mean? It was super obvious!
Yeah I reckon! If you didn’t get that then it’s not because of the subtitles, there was no dialogue in that scene anyway!!