MovieChat Forums > Berlin - Die Sinfonie der Großstadt (1928) Discussion > Bad translation of the title

Bad translation of the title

posted 15 years ago by jg1972
15 replies | jump to latest

I have always thought that the English-language title of this film was off. I know that the DVD is sold under the name "Berlin: Symphony of a Great City," but that doesn't necessarily make it correct.

The German title is "Berlin: Die Sinfonie der Großstadt." But "Großstadt" or "Grossstadt" does not really mean "great city." I would translate "great city" as "große Stadt," i.e. a city which is great ("große"). The word "Großstadt" more properly means "metropolis" or "large city." New York is a Großstadt; today's Berlin is a Großstadt; London is Großstadt; Tokyo is Großstadt, etc.

Moreover, this film isn't about the greatness of Berlin as city. It is a snapshot of life in a single day in a modern metropolis.

But now that the American DVD of "Die Sinfonie der Großstadt" is sold as "Symphony of a Great City," it's too late. Virtually everyone uses in the incorrect title.

[–] jg1972 15 years ago

I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

A film critic at WNYC made essentially the same point.
He wrote, "I did see 'Berlin: Symphony of a City,' more accurately entitled 'Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis,' at Zankel Hall, and enjoyed it for what it was, which was an imagistic tone poem."

http://www.wnyc.org/music/articles/88756

[–] jg1972 15 years ago

I suggested to IMDB that "Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis" be added as an alternative title, and it has been done.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Felonious-Punk 14 years ago

very nice work. in your identification of a problem and your efforts to announce and rectify. Bravo!

[–] Artemis-9 14 years ago

Well said. Although not commercially shown in Portugal, the few occasions the film appeared in film club or cinemathec showings, it is titled A Sinfonia de uma Capital, meaning literally The Symphony of a Capital (a State's major city).

[–] John-367 14 years ago

Regardless of how accurate a translation of the title "Berlin, Symphony of a Great City" is, whether you like it or not, that is the English-language title almost universally used since the film's release.

If you Google "Berlin, Symphony of a Great City" you currently get 878,000 results.

In contrast, if you Google "Berlin, Symphony of a Metropolis" you currently get 38 results.
38! I get more than that!

Most of these meagre 38 are on sites copying IMDB or on wiki-type sites where I suspect you have made similar changes.

The uninformed looking at this film's IMDB page will now assume that a title known by virtually no-one is as widely used as one used by virtually everyone - including the film's assorted distributors.

It's one thing to point out what you believe to be a misleading translation, it's a whole different matter to falsify history.

[–] Felonious-Punk 14 years ago

There's a difference between falsifying history and correcting it. Besides, jg1972 didn't even ask IMDb to change the title, jg1972 asked them to make it an alternate title.

And, in my way of thinking, it's a good thing to correct mistakes and to strive for greater accuracy, and not to remain trapped in the past. Yes, learn from the past, yes, enjoy memories of the past, such as this movie, but not become slaves to it.

[–] John-367 14 years ago

"There's a difference between falsifying history and correcting it."

This is not correcting history it is lying about the fact that this film has always been known in English as "Berlin: Symphony of a Great City".

Perhaps you could point out a single English language film print or video/DVD release which has ever in the titles said "Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis".

In any case, films are often released with an English title which is not a literal translation of the original title and it could easily be that the original English Language distributors weighed up alternate translations and decided that "Symphony of a Great City" sounded better than "Symphony of a Metropolis". In that case it would not have been any kind of mistake at all but a decision based on aesthetics, marketing and showmanship.

"jg1972 didn't even ask IMDb to change the title, jg1972 asked them to make it an alternate title. "

It isn't an alternative English language title for this film, it is an alternate literal translation of the German language title - which is an entirely different thing.

It is one thing to point out in the trivia section that, in your opinion, a literal translation would have been different - but to suggest that "Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis" has equal status as a title is ridiculous.

[–] Felonious-Punk 14 years ago

I must correct myself, jg1972 didn't even ask to make it an alternate title, that editor asked to list the title under the section "Also known as". So, actually, there isn't any misleading going on. Nobody is saying that it was released under the title "Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis". If that were the case, I would agree with you. What is being asserted is the fact that you yourself received 38 results for the title. And to update the info, I have just finished Googling "Berlin, Symphony of a Metropolis" for which I received 9,540 results.

With that said, I actually don't mind the "Berlin: Symphony of a Great City" title, now that I know the true intention of the filmmakers, the intention behind the word "Grosstadt". You're right, John 367, I agree, as far as "aesthetics, marketing and showmanship" go, it's not bad at all. It has served well.

[–] hakof 14 years ago

This film is definitely "also known as" Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis. Academics call it by that name.

When I did graduate work on modern German literature, that's the name we used for the film. Additionally, Stanford, Princeton, and Rutgers, to name a few schools, use that name.
www.stanford.edu/dept/english/deptWebFiles/syllabi/2993syllabus.pdf
www.princeton.edu/hellenic/news/announcement-archives/04dec/
german.rutgers.edu/courselist/currentofferings/S08382.doc

The Bauhaus Foundation in Germany calls it Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis, as does the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation for some of its English-language programming.

Obviously, not everyone uses that translation of the original German title, which is not the commercial English-language title. But some people do use it, especially those who know German. To note that Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis is "also" a name for this film is not to "falsify history," which, incidentally, is very strong accusation, as is to accuse someone of lying.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] John-367 13 years ago

"This film is definitely "also known as" Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis. Academics call it by that name."

Oh well, just another example of the tendency of some film academics contempt for the actual films and the people who actually made and distributed them.
The egoism of insisting that one demonstrates ones superior knowledge of something - in this case German - at the expense of historical accuracy is unfortunately not uncommon. As is the assumption that the original distributors were ignorant rather than making an informed choice about what title, literally correct or not, was likely to be most effective in their market.

[–] megArnold 11 years ago

There is no "historical accuracy" in the stupidity of the initial distributor. The correct title is "Symphony of a Metropolis". Plain and simple.

But of course, who needs to respect the original filmmakers, whose own fault is to speak such an obscure language (German)?!

--
Grammar:
The difference between knowing your sh**
and knowing you're sh**.

[–] BlueGreen 13 years ago

Of course you're right, OP.
But that pales in comparison with the inexplicable fact that eleven members (as of today) actually rated this masterpiece 1.
(Evidently I am not including all those who rated it with slightly higher but still low grades.)

[–] blacksunday52 12 years ago

I don't know enough German to comment on the quality of the translation. That said, what effect could the earlier release of Fritz Lang's Metropolis have had on the choice of title? Did execs at Fox think it potentially confusing for audiences? Were they worried about UFA and Paramount taking them to court? Dunno. Thoughts?