Talk:Volver

Plot
Just so you know, the plot synopsis is flat-out wrong. It needs so much work I don't have time to fix it, but its wrong. User:Pedant 08:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * its okay dont worry! 217.161.97.163 (talk) 09:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I just saw the movie and I would not say that it is completely wrong. However, the synopsis as it is emphasizes certain useless facts and glosses over some important ones. It could definitely use some work.--206.223.232.230 06:31, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Much better now. The anon comment above was after I 'fixed it' so you know it must have been bad. Thanks for fixing my fix, everybody, its a nice article now. User:Pedant 02:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I re-edited it on 1/30. I had just returned from the movie theater and thought that the synopsis was atrocious. Some facts were repeated unecessarily and were poorly written. Other descriptions were flat out wrong. Furthermore, certain plot details were revealed far before their occurence in the film—details which were important to reveal in their chronological order to properly summarize the film. My work needs clean up, though. I just thought that what was here before was just unacceptable. Specifically, I wish someone would go into greater detail regarding Agustina's role and talk about her appearance on the TV show.


 * It still seems out of order - Paco's death comes earlier, for instance. -- Beardo 06:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

It seems a bit LONG to be a synopsis --MathewBrooks 15:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

__ You need a britain fix tool for the incorrect parts of the story, so called 'synopsis! The plot is easy to tell: In a time space of three years a house has been burnt down, a couple died within the fire, a mother vanishes and two sisters and a cousin remain, having a daughter and a neighbours dog called Paco, working in barber business and restaurant either and recognize lately that mother is still alive. Watched it with amusement!--88.76.56.177 (talk) 13:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

As the plot is now written, it presents the film from the viewers viewpoint rather than telling the facts in the film as they really are (i.e., most importantly, the mother didn't die, which viewers only discover well into the film). Is this the preferred method on Wik?Kdammers (talk) 15:11, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Title translation
About the pronunciation, in Spanish, specially the one spoken in Spain, the v sound is pronounced just like in english, and there is a difference between "v" and "b" the former being pronounced utilizing your teeth and lips and the latter only using your lips. It is a mistake to teach people to not pronounce it the proper way, since you are spreading slang. Volver is pronounced "voal-vair" assuming the reader speaks english. I think simply "Return" is a better translation of the title than we have at the moment ("To return"). The solitary word "volver" conjures up a image of the essence of returning, not merely some narrow infinite-verb meaning. Almodovar would have chosen a title like "para volver" if he had wanted to convey the latter. I'll get bold and change it. - Draeco 22:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The title is taken from the tango mentioned in the article, which Penelope Cruz sings during the film. In the context of the song's lyrics, "volver" should be translated as either "to return" or "returning" (IIRC, the English subtitles used the latter).  At any rate, "To Return" is the translation used in the main Almodóvar article; so one or the other should be changed to make it consistent. 70.245.252.71 05:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Before reading this discussion I changed it back to "to return", simply because "volver" is not a noun but a verb, no matter what connotations it may have (which, I may add, seems a little personal). "Return" would be, in spanish, "Regreso", like in "regreso a los orígenes" ("return to the origins").
 * By the way, the phrase "para volver" is not what he would have chosen if he wanted to convey a narrow infinite-verb meaning. He would have chosen... guess what: "volver", which is the infinite-verb expression... Also, the image the title mostly may convey in spanish is that of the song, which is a very famous tango by Carlos Gardel. Nazroon 04:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I disagree. The infinitive has more uses in Spanish than it does in English.  Where English would use "returning", Spanish would never use "volviendo" except in the actual progressive tense.  It would use "volver".  "A story about returning" would be "una historia de volver"; there "volver" actually does function as a noun.  The only times English uses the "to" in front of a verb are in the infinitive listed in a dictionary (again, not directly equivalent to the Spanish infinitive as the Spanish one is used much more), and if there's an auxiliary verb in front of it, like "I want to return".  Neither is the case here, so I don't think it's appropriate to use the "to". --Galaxiaad 21:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I would admit "returning" instead of "to return", but definitely not "return". But keep in mind that in the tango song from which the title of the movie is taken, the word "volver" is, I would say, not a noun, but a verb (functioning as such). Besides,

when the present participle functions as a noun, it is better translated as a noun in spanish, although it could be translated as a verb (never as a gerund, or spanish present participle, as you correctly say). But this is the other way around; to me, it would be totally misleading to translate it as a noun (as in "return"); "returning" could be closer, but "volver" is to me always a verb. There are, to my knowledge, very few occasions in which a verb is treated as a noun. For example, when you say "el soñar" (the dreaming), but it is always best -or, at least, more common- to say "el sueño". Nazroon 08:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this as well... the infinitive has more uses in Spanish than it does in English.. Return is a more suitable translation than "to return." Spanish would never leave a dangling participle "volviendo" is a very poor translation. By the way Nazroon, you are mistaken with your example.. there are ocassions when those two can never be used interchangeably, like in this case " el soñar de horizontes lejanos" means "the dreaming of far away horizons" and would indicate the actual action, and is perfectably suitable, in the other hand "el sueño de horizontes lejanos" means "the dream of far away horizons" and indicates the actual dream.
 * I was thinking in spanish usage and not in any translation. In spanish is far more common to use the noun than the verb functioning as a noun. Perhaps it would be better to leave it as "returning". When you say "'volviendo' is a very poor translation", what do you mean? It is spanish to english, not the other way around. And, per your example, "returning" (dreaming) can be translated as "volver" (soñar). Nazroon 06:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I don#t speak spanish but a little italien and i know what a Revolver is. So in logik a isn't the same like a and a is the praedicat of X. So whose X is in and whose X is out leads to a marvelous game folio. Translation, meanings, connotations are fullhouse and mustn't be cut to one simplification.--Matida (talk) 13:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

About "V" and "B" sound in spanish
Both letters sound the same in spanish, there is no difference at all between them. The sound is like in the english word "back".

Partially correct: depending where you are in the hispanic world the "v" ("beh" o "veh") may sound either like the english v, or b. The return to pronouncing it like a v is a feature from large numbers of Europeans (who colonized south america) adopting spanish: properly it was that it be pronounced "b" however this feature arose from obliterating the distinction...I don't remember why, but it was a dumb reason (see below, and no offense, insult, or attack: I speak spanish). It partially depends on country, region thereof, and community.

On a similar note: the lisp in Spain, pronouncing "c" and "z" as "th" comes from a king with a lisp: and the rest followed suit: crazy. Toodles. :-) Infinitelink 17:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


 * That's an idiotic urban legend. If there had been a king or prince with a lisp, "s" would have been affected the same way. The "th" sound evolved from a "ts" sound. Don't people read books anymore?

Fair use rationale for Image:Volver.jpg
Image:Volver.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Music in Volver
A heard that the actress Penelope Cruz is a big fat fan of Karaoke. So she is used to sing, if others move there lips or is it a real vice versa?! So she moves as Raimonda like a samba buffallo and every one she passes goes: " MUUUUH!"--Matida (talk) 13:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)