MovieChat Forums > Performance (1970) Discussion > why the overdubs?

why the overdubs?

posted 20 years ago by herecomethewarmjets1974
9 replies | jump to latest

hey-about 11 or 12 years ago i recorded performance when it was shown as part of a banned season on the bbc-that was that-one of the best fims ever-still got that exact tape-a few years back i watched a friends copy he'd bought from the shops-the fear when i heard harry flowers' voice-not only had they overdubbed him but they overdubbed him with the scariest old freaky man voice-i also noticed they overdubbed the little girl/boy's voice too-both really badly-sounded like they got any old person to do it-as other peeople have said, it makes the film unwatchable-also, my friend didn't know what i was talking about-so people buy the film now and don't know their getting screwed-that's bad-what i wanna know is why they overdubbed the voices?-what was the matter with the original ones?-anyone know the story?-and the gangsters are always refered to as "east end gangsters" when the first part of the film takes place around wansdworth which is south west london-well-hope someone can help

[–] marc-367 20 years ago

If I had to guess I would say that there was (is?) some sort of contract dispute.
-Marc

[–] looneyfarm 20 years ago

I've understood only the US version was dubbed, right? If that's the case, maybe they tried to tone down Harry's accent to make it more suitable for American audiences. Just my two cents, tho'.

[–] mcintyro 20 years ago

Hi

I've been watching PERFORMANCE for the last seventeen years at least once every two weeks.

Yes, you're right about the voices. But, regarding Harry Flowers, I must say that the guy who did dub him matches his lips EXACTLY. It took a while for me to notice.

As for the little moppet at Turner's place. Possibly, it was a midget as, who would let their ten year old in that type of environment. Also, as somebody else pointed out, maybe it was too cockney. Chas was cockney, but at least you could make sense of what he said, as the part was taken by a great actor.

[–] TheBrothersCarruthers 19 years ago

The thing is that both Lawrie (the little girl) and Harry only have some of their dialogue overdubbed thus making it really obvious that they've been overdubbed. It's SO annoying and it's self-defeating too. Also, watch Noel at in the railway station lounge, speaking to his Mum. I'm sure that the actor's dialogue was completely overdubbed by another actor and it sounds very much like Paul Nicolas(?).

[–] skiosk 19 years ago

The actor who voiced Noel was Kenny Lynch.

[–] TheBrothersCarruthers 19 years ago

Yes!!! Thank you. Now that you say Kenny Lynch, I can really put his face to the voice. Thanks for your reply.

[–] TheBrothersCarruthers 18 years ago

"The thing is that both Lawrie (the little girl) and Harry only have some of their dialogue overdubbed thus making it really obvious that they've been overdubbed..."

My video version was taken from a BBC2 broadcast ages ago. The one that's on BBC2 right now has all of Lorraine's dialogue dubbed not just some, as is the case on my previous BBC copy. The DVD had better correct this nonsense.

Edit: I saw the BFI print of the film at the weekend and - praise be! - the idiotic dubbing of some of Harry's and Lawrie's dialogue was totally absent. Noel's one and only scene with his Mum at the railway station was still dubbed but, strangely, it wasn't nearly so annoying on the big screen than it is on the little screen. Also, I'm sure that this print contained a number of scenes that ran slightly longer than my own video copy. Which is all to the good for the upcoming DVD, I think.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sunznc 18 years ago

I have read they dubbed because of the different accents. For some reason, they wanted everyone to sound like they came from the same neighborhood.