MovieChat Forums > One Day in September (2001) Discussion > Inaccurate Translation

Inaccurate Translation

posted 18 years ago by marwanjamiel
18 replies | jump to latest

I am an Arab who speaks Arabic, and the first thing that struck me about this film was the poor translation. Only about half of what the terrorist was saying was translated, relying on the rest to be assumed. This I thought was bad work considering this is oscar material and so it should be 100% accurate, however there was one part which showed that this was not carelessness, but it was intentional. In the film, the subtitles come up saying that the terrorist says "We then went to the olympic park to watch two volleyball games," however this was not even close to what he actually said. What he really said was "At this point I did not know fear, fear was beyond me and all I concentrated on was what the mission is going to be."

Another point is when they are discussing the enterance into the first apartment, and how the subtitles said that one of the team members panicked and killed the coach. What the terrorist actually said was that the coach started attacking them, and when one of their friends came into the room (He was behind them at the time) he immediately killed the coach in order to defend his friends. This is far from the disorganised rabble the documentary wants you to believe the Black September group was, who would kill people if they panic.

This proves that "One Day in September" is hugely biased, to the point it has to innaccurately translate what the terrorist is saying in order to make a case against him.

[–] nagle71 18 years ago

marwanjamiel, thank you for clearing that point up. Until you mentioned this inconsequential mistranslation, it's true, I had thought that the Palestinians who carried out the kidnappings were heavily armed men responsible for the deaths of a dozen innocent human beings, most of whom were sat with their hands tied, unarmed, and defenceless.

Now though, I realise that the Palestinians who carried out these killings were brave, honourable, badly-translated, heavily-armed men responsible for the deaths of a dozen innocent human beings, most of whom were sat with their hands tied, unarmed, and defenceless.

And in case it has escaped your limited intelligence; yes, I am being sarcastic. But thank you for coming on here and defending Palestinian murderers, so that we can all see what you and others like you actually think. You are a sad excuse for a human being, and I pity you.

[–] hudayounis 18 years ago

I did not get your point nagle71.Since Marwanjamiel clearly referred to the "Palestinian murderers" as "terrorists", It is obvious that marwanjamiel was only raising the fact that the tramslation was not accurate in an oscar winning film regardless of its contents, for which I do not think he/she becomes a sad excuse for human being neither requires to be pittied!please keep this forum friendly!

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] marwanjamiel 18 years ago

You obviously know nothing about the conflict. If you knew what a terrorist action was, you would know that Israel carries out a myriad of terrorist actions (for example operation wrath of god bombed the refugee camps the terrorists were from in order to terrorise them) You also do not understand that it was the Palestinians land, they do not need to be nice to the Israelis. Israel was created due to Jews migrating to Palestine in droves, before the year 1900 there were only 10,000 Jews living in Palestine. However after they came in huge numbers to Palestine, demographics worked against the Arabs and Israel was annexed. If you allow me to assume that you are American, how would you feel if America had Mexicans come over the border in droves, to the point where there are so many of them that the state of America ceases to exist, making you flee the border to Canada where you are neglected, and you know that you have no hope but to return to America. With nothing to do, you shall attack the United States of Mexico in anyway possible.

P.S. What you must understand is that the Palestinians didn't want to kill anybody unless they had to, they even had friendly conversations with the hostages, they didn't want to hurt anybody, they just wanted the release of prisoners whose only crime was nationalism for Palestine. It would also help if you knew that Palestinian athletes were barred from representing their country at the Munich Olympics, however the Israelis (who took the land off the Palestinians) were free to, now hopefully you understand that not everyone lives in a politically stable situation such as you and I, and that standards of behaviour and conduct in our situation cannot be compared to those that the Palestinians must adopt, because they don't have an army to fight Israel, they must do it themselves. If you compare your situation to that of the Palestinians, it is like comparing apples with oranges.

You are a sad excuse for a human being, and I pity you.

[–] bqk9506 18 years ago

is there really such thing as "didn't want to kill anybody unless they had to?" - that seems like such an opportunistic hypocrisy, based purely on exceedingly subjective notion of "necessity". the very notion of attacking "in anyway possible" is an aggressive and mindless statement, that in many cases allows for a pathetic excuses for terrorism. there was no war waged on palestinians after the united nations, mind you, agreed to allocate a reasonable space for jews to establish their state. given a chance to become citizen of the state, to actually get education, and promote healthy co-existance as opposed to senseless "just because we feel suppressed" opposition, not to promote hatered or any form of religion that allows for such - THAT is "way possible". israel is yet to START a war. israeli are yet to claim that anyone's existance contradicts their way of life. and references to "friendly conversations with the hostages" smells to much of a pre-dinner small talk that a wolf would have with a sheep.

an eye for an eye goes as far as your consciousness allows. letting some people live on the land that you think is yours can be difficult, painful, and force a reflection, dialog and perhaps a review of the moral ideals that somehow diminish the value of the human life that is not a part of your herd. killing kids on buses and disco is a cowardly tactic that gets you nothing but knee-jerk defensive operations from the victims, miserable image in the world, and zero, ZERO benefit in the long run. the moment palestinians rise up and claim that no land, no city, no job is worth the blood being shed, will be the moment that the dialog can start.

in russian there's a saying, "if living with wolves, cry like a wolf". noone took innocent palestinians hostage while they were trying to teach their kids how to grow crops, or how to build a bridge, or how to perform a surgery, or how to compete in the olympic games. if palestinians didn't have guns, israeli wouldn't need guns. if palestinians talked about fresh water for all, crops for all, a place to raise babies and bury the old for all, noone would come out screaming "you don't deserve any of that" or "you are pitiful animals that need to be hunted down and killed". jews did not have their state for thousands of years, and arabs overall did pretty well with the space. the fact that palestinians are trying to force them out of the patch of land - that's been allocated by the world community - is nothing but an offensive and arrogant move. and i tend to sympathise with those defending against an excessively aggressive neighbour.

lastly, there are social and political structures that can be used. there are elections in israel, and palestinians that are israeli citizen can very well force issues through the government. i'm yet to read a comprehensive plan that would emerge from any palestinian party within israel. if instead they are focusing on building new generations of selfless killers and suicide bombers, then the treatment they get is one reserved for terrirists.

there are no people that are born evil (well, there are a few exceptions but hopefully they will be voted out of their congressional offices shortly). there are no people that are born with the notion of killing other people, or taking over their posessions. it's what we teach them. teach tolerance, and teach the value of human life. that, my friend, is enlightenment, not what they teach the kids in those camps.

and please don't throw out things like "who took the land of the palestinians". israelis didn't and couldn't do that, and if you are implying that they could you are exposing your own lack of understanding of that precedent. your attempt to draw justification for militant action just because israel HAS an army - though they wouldn't have to use it if palestinians and arab world as a whole stop attacking them, right? - is at best deceiving and near-sighted. and any attempts whatsoever to glorify murder by pulling a nationalistic card is descpicable.

[–] Dukerox6393 18 years ago

You're confused. That's a bad example cause it would never happen. The US is way stronger than Mexico and that would never happen.

[–] imazar18 18 years ago

"they didn't want to kill anybody unless they had to, they even had friendly conversations..." with the hostages.

Please. At the airport. The shooting had been going on for two hours. Five terrorists were dead, three still alive. The hostages were tied together, unarmed and helpless in the helicopters. The world had been watching for 21 hours, so the terrorists had already met their stated goal of getting their issue into the headlines.

Yet still. TWO FULL HOURS after the airport shooting started. One of the surviving terrorists threw a grenade at the helicopter and killed every one of the hostages inside. Another one of the terrorists emptied a clip into the other helicopter full of defenseless hostages. This was totally unnecessary. A total waste of human life. They DIDN'T HAVE TO KILL the hostages. The scene was a bloodbath even before this. The hostages were bound and were the only unarmed people on the scene. They were the most vulnerable of everyone present. There was absolutely no reason to kill them.

That fact erases your entire thesis, marwan.

[–] i_am_i_be 17 years ago

It is sad that you missed the whole point of the doc.

For the record: I am concerned over the Israeli/Palestian conflict. For me, Palestians are justified in feeling oppressed in their occupation, however, as a pacifist, I do not agree with the violent means in which either the Israelis or the Palestians use to carry their message.

What the film was really about, and what is really tragic about the events of the Munich massacre, is that is was at the Olympics, and the people who were killed had nothing to do with the occupation of Palestine.

I think it is sad that you underplay the murders of these athletes citing that the terrorists "didn't want to kill anybody unless they had to" - yes, the two men who were killed first deserved to die because they were defending themselves and their friends. Oh, and the subsequent mess at the airport that resulted in the murder of the remaining hostages was absoultely necessary - I mean, the men were obviously criminals and a threats what with their hands tied behind their backs.

Yeah, sure, whatever. The point is that the people who were the targets - the Israeli athletes - were innocent of the occupation and tragedies in Palestine.

[–] Belladonna- 18 years ago

That's a really interesting point. I don't know if I would go to the lengths of saying "hugely biased" but it's something that wouldn't have crossed my mind. I wonder if they were taking pieces from other parts of the conversation? Either way, that's given me something to think about. Thank you for pointing that out.

[–] shahids72 18 years ago

I have noticed innaccurate Arabic translation also in some other documentaries (at this stage, i cannot recall their names sorry) about the problems in Palestine coming from an Israeli (ie biased) perspective.

IN regards to this show, its another piece of propaganda rubbish, with a tad of Arab/Palestinian input to show that the Israeli's have balance and fairplay on their minds. It pushes the bull that the moral Israeli's, who have the most humanitarian hearts in the middle east try to get on well with their neighbours....

When your lands and homes are occupied by the aggressor, and you are denied basic human rights, you have every RIGHT to do anything in your power to fight back.

We are sick of the sympathy grabbing. You got your wish Jews, for your homeland. That cancelled out for millions of years more than anything that happened to you during the holocaust and even before. However you crave for sympathy always, to gain some material advantage.

58 years have passed, of constant occupation, agression, killings, annexing in Palestine. We are called terrorists if we do something a fraction of what IDF does; then what are the Israeli's? saints? angels?

Yeah right!

[–] dirtfan2002 18 years ago

I'm sorry but is your name Shahids or Skinheads? Palestinians can blame the Jews for all their problems just like the Nazis did but the fact is they've fighting, killing and screwing each over for a thousand years. Jews or not.

[–] i_am_i_be 17 years ago

Shahid or Skinheads? What a truly ignorant thing to say. I recommend you actually find out what skinheads are before you call someone one.

[–] kaydee_allstar 18 years ago

due to the fact that no character language (ie, Hebrew, Arab)to english will ever be 100% correct, there is bound to be mis-translation, common to all foreign language films.

it is sad how the only common factor, besides incredibly losses due to unnecessary conflict, between Israelis and Arabs is their common ancestor, Abraham/Abram/Ibrahim according to the Jewish Torah, the Islamic Koran and the Christian Bible. Abraham's son to his wife's handmaiden: Ishmael became the father-figure of Islam, while Isaac, son of Abraham's wife Sarah/Sarai, became the father-figure of Judaism. Isaac is also known as Israel - the name God himself gave him which means(in close translation as hebrew is a character language and cannot be EXACTLY translated): "God strives".

The fact that the land of Israel is the only land in the middle east that is not oil-rich, and yet it is the only middle-eastern country to EXPORT food, is quite amazing, seeing as the others are apparently over-flowing with wealth.

Also the fact that Israel had to BUY it's land off the arabs when apparently the UN "gave" it to them (at more than 3 times the price suggested by the UN) and the land being sandy desert in parts and swampy marshlands in others, i do not agree with the Jews "getting their homeland - cancelling out the holocaust and more" - "getting" something is often perceived as being given something. israel BOUGHT the land, hence it was not GIVEN.
if only YOU and YOUR FAMILY experienced the Holocaust would you truly understand the amount of pain and suffering it brought to the nation of israel. NOTHING could take away that memory.

Well, yes, the Palestinians are treated rather badly, aren't they?
free education,
free medical assistance.
terrible, terrible things.
and they're fighting against THAT???
car bombings, bus bombings, building bombings.
why aren't they called bombers instead of "freedom fighters"?
I agree that if you are being suppressed you have a right to fight back, but terrorism is a pathetic excuse. if Islamists are apparently a "peaceful people" then they would seek this retribution through the government - both the Israeli government and the Palestinian/Lebanese Government.

i find it quite peculiar how palestinians declare the land was theirs.
according to the old testament (bible) and the torah, God declared it Israel's Holy Land. NOT palestine's.

the closest match i can find for palestine to have some say in the matter is perhaps there is a connection between the ancient philistine's and today's palestinians. this excuse falls thru, however, as the philistines were wandering nomads that occastionally attacked Israel (in particular Jerusalem).
Jews have been recognised for over 3000 years (approximately starting at 1200BC with Moses) while Palestinians have only been recognised as a legitimate peoples for a few hundred years.
you do the math.

oh, and no, Jews aren't saints and they aren't angels.

They're God's Chosen People.
have a good day :)

[–] stephanieleon89 17 years ago

You TEll them Kaydee Allstar!

[–] i_am_i_be 17 years ago

kaydee_allstar: i find it quite peculiar how palestinians declare the land was theirs. according to the old testament (bible) and the torah, God declared it Israel's Holy Land. NOT palestine's.

Oh, how religion justifies everything terrible one man can do to another.

Anyone who believes that any group, even if not their own, is chosen by God, shouldn't have reproductive organs. I'd buy them off you, but they're probably worth dirt.

[–] stirlingwarrior 17 years ago

If it makes you feel any better, the German translations were not all that accurate either...

Bad translations or not, the point of the movie remains true.

Cowardice. The Palestinians.
Ineptitude. The Germans.
Innocence. The Israeli athletes.

[–] OldboyAlex 13 years ago

I agree with stirlingwarrior.

The examples given by the initial poster lead to their conclusion that the documentary was biased. However, from a truly critical level of the movie's production ONLY - I felt a fair reflection on the aptitude of the Palestinian terrorists was most certainly given.

Without any background to the atrocity, I watched the film and was surprised at the revelation towards the end that there were in fact 8 terrorists.

Mistranslation or not, I believe the watching world could well have also underestimated the high level of planning of the terrorist group (note the pathetic attempt of counter attack by the German/lack of live public criticism from the journalists) just as the viewer did - only for it to change.

The belief that the original poster managed to established bias from this point of view is absurd, political view or non political view, when a specific act of terrorism is the subject of analysis, in no circumstances at all can you accuse the production as biased. Terrorism is terrorism to all those that suffer.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]