It needed subtitles...

When I first saw DotD, I remember thinking that subtitles would be useful in helping me understand more of the dialogue, and was surprised to discover that they were not available.

I later learned that Julie Dash had made the conscious decision to forego subtitles, which after thinking about it for some time, I eventually agreed with. I can only guess on why she decided against subtitles, but some of my thoughts were that subtitles would be distracting from the important parts of the film. People would get too caught up in the plot, which is secondary to the poetic way that the lines were delivered and the aesthetics of the film. Also, the dialect was obviously purposeful- the lines were meant to be heard in that manner, not read off the screen. It seems silly that we would need a translation for a language that we speak, just because it sounds "different" than what we are used to.

I've seen the film several times since that first viewing, and it has helped tremendously in understanding what they are saying, and the importance of it in the film. I would give this film some time, because it is an absolute gem and changed everything for me. After a little patience and higher volume, if you still don't "get" it, then I could try to share why I found this film so brilliant and beautiful.

I agree with you. I thought I would be able to understand since I understand Jamaican patois, but some of the actors/actresses were speaking so quickly that I missed what they were saying.

Otherwise, this is a great movie. Very powerful and emotional. I would love to visit the island to see if the remaining African Americans have held on to their unique culture.

One way to view the film is as a sort of "tone poem", with emotional meaning carried by the visuals and the music and the general attitudes, with the specific dialog not being all that important. One of the proponents of this way to view the movie is Roger Ebert. Some will find this way of viewing the film completely satisfactory all by itself. For this, subtitles aren't needed and I agree would in fact be distracting.

Another way to view the film is as a coherent story that makes reasonable sense. I had to view all the "extras" on the DVD and listen to the commentary and watch the film a couple more times before I really got it this way. Just understanding a few major things: what was a flashforward and what was a flashback and how there were two different narrators, and how and when the "unborn child" was called out of the womb and then returned to the womb, and how the "unborn child" was visible to the younger children and the photographer but not the older children or adults (sort of like Calvin and Hobbes:-), made a really big difference for me. I agree that (except for folks that have some background that I suspect is not common) it's difficult to enter into the world of the film on the first viewing.

I found that -once understood- the "Gullah dialect" wasn't at all hard to make sense of. A few words are heavily modified or replaced, and the syntax is a little different, but frankly for me it was easier to follow than most "rap" recordings (or Br'er Rabbit stories:-), except for the difficulty of understanding it in the first place. It was more a matter of dialog spoken facing the other way, thrown into the wind, and overlain with natural sounds or music, than it was of the actual words.

I got the sense that subtitles were omitted on purpose to force us viewers to "do the background reading" to understand all the context. However I too regret that decision, and wish there had been subtitles available, because (unlike for Shakespeare) I have no idea where to look for such context expanding readings. It's Julie Dash's life, and for her it was clearly correct to omit the subtitles. But for me it's (and I hope this doesn't come off insulting) a "one off" - the movie itself is my only window into that different world; what I do (or don't) understand from watching the movie is all I'll understand. That's why I too regret the absence of subtitles.