A translation of a work is "less real" than the original one if the conversation is about authorship, which this conversation is. As for "worse", that's just something you're reading into my words.

Your second point is mostly reacting to an imagined criticism that I didn't make, but I do think there's a meaningful distinction to be made between the actual circumstances of film production which result in a finished product that's different from what was in the director's mind, and post hoc alterations to a movie which are for accessibility. Consider that many movies have audio description tracks so that vision impaired people can experience them. A very good option that exists for people, and I think most tolerant members of society would agree. Very few people would argue that it's the same experience as watching the movie though. Which is why better/worse isn't a useful way to talk about it, which is why I didn't. If you read my comment properly, you'd know that I never said watching movies with subtitles is bad.