Reconfiguring a Chinese Superhero through the Dubbed Versions of Monkey King: Hero is Back (2015)

The film Monkey King: Hero Is Back (2015) premiered in mainland China and quickly topped domestic and then global animation box-office charts, accruing 956 million yuan. Hailed as a milestone in domestic animation, it blends Hollywood animation techniques with traditional Chinese storytelling from Journey to the West (1592). The study explores how this Chinese heroic legend is adapted for Western audiences by focusing on the English-dubbed version, using the original Mandarin-dubbed version as the source text. Two monolingual corpora (Chinese and English dialogues, including trailers) are compared to identify linguistic and cultural features, with emphasis on key norms and idiosyncratic language in the English dub. The research addresses: (1) What changes are made to reconfigure a Chinese superhero through the English-dubbed version compared to the Chinese-dubbed version? (2) What are the study’s practical and theoretical contributions to Audio-visual Translation Studies (AVT)?

Contextualising the film in the West: The English-dubbed version appeared first on U.S. streaming platforms and then in cinemas a year after the Chinese release. The director emphasised the film’s focus on humanity, resonating with both Chinese and Western audiences. Online reception highlights praised its animation quality and action; the IMDb user rating reported is 6.8/10, and Quentin Tarantino lauded the film. Five dubbed versions exist (Mandarin, Cantonese, Uygur, English, Japanese). Notably, the English-dubbed DVD lacks subtitles, whereas Mandarin releases often included bilingual subtitles, illustrating varied intertextual practices and audience expectations. Reviewing scholarship: A CNKI search (as of 19 Aug 2022) found 542 papers on the film, more than triple the 2020 count, yet few compare dubbed versions. One study examines the Uygur dub via functional equivalence; five focus on subtitling or other aspects (box office, marketing, production, aesthetics, industry influence). Western studies use multimodal analysis (e.g., Praat) to show how the Monkey King’s heroic image is reshaped for American audiences. Crowdfunding aided production and promotion. Overall, dubbing practices for Monkey King remain underexplored, especially cross-version comparisons.

The study builds a macro–micro conceptual framework. Macro level: two translation theories (Even-Zohar’s polysystem theory; Gutt’s relevance theory) and three translation models (Chesterman’s causal models; Pérez-González’s psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic models derived from process models) structure analysis of external and internal determinants. External factors (source culture visibility, genre, audio-visual interplay) are addressed via polysystem theory, neurolinguistic model, and source-text-oriented translation. Internal factors (target audience assumptions and processing) are addressed via relevance theory, causal and psycholinguistic models, and target-text-oriented translation. Micro level: the study contrasts source-text-oriented and target-text-oriented film translation strategies and examines specific techniques (e.g., zero-translation, neutralisation, explication). Data and procedure: Mandarin (Simplified) and English dubbed versions (from official DVDs) were transcribed; Mandarin lines were back-translated into English for comparison. The main analytical foci are dubbing norms around (1) appellations/titles used for Sun Wukong and (2) idiosyncratic language (e.g., orality markers, nursery rhymes). Trailers in both languages were also analysed for added information, subtitle practices, and audio-visual composition, applying neurolinguistic and relevance perspectives. Multiple scene-based examples (six) illustrate strategy use and effects on reception.

• Trailers: The English official trailer provides added background information (e.g., “500 years later,” plot cues), highlights star appeal (“Jackie Chan is Monkey King”), shows more action scenes, and includes no subtitles; it is longer than the Chinese trailer. The Mandarin trailer uses on-screen slogans (e.g., indispensable freedom, fighting for faith and love), with Chinese subtitles repeating spoken text, emphasizing thematic messaging and cultural pride. - Appellations and idiosyncratic language: In six examined instances, five confirm that the English dub predominantly employs target-culture-oriented strategies—zero-translation, neutralisation, and explication—using standardised, straightforward language that reduces culture-specific humour and rhetorical nuance carried in Mandarin (e.g., dialectal markers, self-aggrandising titles like “Great Sage Sun,” kinship-based address “your Grandpa Sun”). - Specific examples: Example 1 (野猴子): English uses zero-translation, relying on visuals and sound effects; Example 2 (俺…脑仁儿): English neutralises dialectal humour into a direct complaint; Example 3 (孙大圣): English explicates with “I’m no ordinary monkey,” avoiding culture-bound titles; Example 4 (你孙爷爷): English omits sarcastic kinship address, relying on psycholinguistic processing of context; Example 5 (nursery rhyme): English omits an available idiomatic equivalent, again depending on multimodality; Example 6 (Pigsy): both versions maintain humour but via different imagery (Mandarin irony about being “skinny” vs English self-deprecation/exaggeration). - Overall, the English dub’s target-audience orientation privileges accessibility and fluency, often leveraging multimodal cues instead of verbalising culturally dense content. Mandarin dubbing is more dynamic/adaptive, richly recreating orality and cultural idiosyncrasies. Quantitatively, five of six examples align with the target-oriented hypothesis. - Implication: Strategies chosen align with causal, psycholinguistic, and relevance considerations—maximising processing ease for Western viewers in an action-driven genre while downplaying Chinese archaism and wordplay.

The findings address RQ1 by showing that the English dub reconfigures the Monkey King through standardised language and strategies of zero-translation, neutralisation, and explication, thereby reducing culturally marked humour and rhetorical titles and leaning on visuals and sound to convey meaning. This shifts the hero’s persona toward a Western-friendly, action-focused framing, consistent with target-culture processing preferences. For RQ2, the study demonstrates practical insights for AVT: when translating culturally dense, action-oriented content, multimodality can justify omission or simplification in the dialogic track if comprehension remains high. Theoretically, the integrated macro–micro framework (polysystem and relevance theories; causal, psycholinguistic, neurolinguistic models; source/target-oriented strategies) effectively captures how external systems and internal cognitive factors shape dubbing choices and audience reception. These results underscore the non-binary interplay of strategies in dubbing, guided by commercial and audience-oriented norms.

The study shows that, contrary to claims that foreign-tongue trailers are avoided, both Mandarin and English trailers exist and deploy distinct strategies: English adds contextual information without subtitles; Mandarin offers summative, pride-inflected slogans with subtitles. The main hypothesis is supported: Mandarin dubbing tends to be source-text-oriented, enriching idiosyncratic language and orality, whereas the English dub is predominantly target-text-oriented, using explication, zero-translation, and neutralisation to enhance accessibility. Five of six examples confirm this pattern, with one (humour via different imagery) being a partial exception. The research contributes an integrated macro–micro framework for AVT analyses of culturally hybrid, genre-specific films and highlights how dubbing decisions respond to audience expectations and commercial imperatives. Future research should test more language pairs, include more representative examples, and examine how target audience expectations dynamically shape strategy selection.

The scope is limited by the number of examples analysed and language pairs compared. The English-dub subtitles were unavailable for traceable analysis. Results are based on two dubbed versions (Mandarin and English) and selected scenes, which may limit generalisability. Future work should expand sample size, include additional languages and versions (dubbing and subtitling), and empirically study target audience expectations and reception.