Rating: 
Summary: Mysteriously, Wildly, Completely Overrated
Review: Iffy script, middling performances, totally awesome eighties soundtrack. Also never out of the public eye for a millisecond in the past half year. Always leave them wanting more, not less.
Rating:
Summary: brain emulsifying mush
Review: this movie looks awsom at first. It has an interesting cast great reveiws and coupled with what should be an absorbing plot this seems like a no brainer.
sadly we were duped. the movie begins with promise there are a few rather humorous scenes in regards to the culture but that is it. all hopes for the movie to pick up are dashed when the leads finally do meet halfway trough the film. the rest of the film is simply spent folowing them through kareoke bars and strip clubs. the entire film says nothing and the only thing that kept me from falling asleep was the always exceptional acting from bill and hopes that somehow the movie would end up saying somthing of interest.
i think Gregory Weinkauf of NEW TIMES describes this movie, or lack there of, the best, "When work this potentially satisfying remains flatly obvious, it's almost worse than being flat-out bad."
Rating: 
Summary: Sophomoric filmmaking rescued by good performances
Review: Sofia Coppola's previous feature, THE VIRGIN SUICIDES, received widespread praise, yet was one of the most banal movies ever shot on 35mm film. Her second feature, LOST IN TRANSLATION, has received even more critical praise, plus 3 Golden Globe awards and Oscar nominations for best picture, screenplay, director, and actor. Surely it must merit such accolades? Alas, it does not. Although better than her previous turkey, LOST is yet another vapid distraction dolled up with multi-million dollar production values and A-list stars. Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson deserve praise for making something out of nearly nothing. Their performances add some soul to characters whom the script paints as nothing more than bland types, devoid of singularity, identity, or development--paltry clichés at best. They even manage to convey a sense of epiphany in their final scene together, which hinges on an utterly unintelligible line he mutters into her ear. (Even captioning on the DVD reports it as "Whispering, indistinct." Perhaps he said something like, "Is this a new low for Deus ex machina--God rescuing the screenwriter instead of the hero?")
Since the story is obviously not about character, or conflict, or action, perhaps it is about ennui. Unfortunately Ms Coppola does not understand the imitative fallacy in art. The pace drags, with more than half an hour spent establishing the characters' alienation and boredom--already adequately established in the film's opening minutes. In more skilled hands, the material implicit in the story might make a good feature length movie. As is, it might make a good 20 minute short. Too bad the film lasts 104 minutes. (Yawn.) Though failing as story, the movie might succeed in what film is really about anyway-visual imagery. It does boast a capable cinematographer, Lance Acord (of BEING JOHN MALKOVICH fame), and was filmed on location in Japan, offering a wealth of opportunity for exotic, beautiful, interesting images. Acord delivers some nice shots of Tokyo's pulsating lights, a Buddhist monastery, and temple grounds in Kyoto, for instance, and he even makes a hotel pool momentarily interesting. But the script mostly confines him to banal urban interiors and clogged city streets, not much different wherever you go in the world. We have seen it all before (including the gratuitous nudity), and there is nothing in this movie to make us want to see it again. (Sigh.) Finally, since the story focuses on two Yanks adrift in Japan, Japan itself plays a major role in the film. Sadly, Ms Coppola offers no insight into Japanese culture, character, or values, presenting only superficial glimpses reinforcing well-worn stereotypes: Japanese talk funny, adulate Westerners, sing karaoke, bow frequently, eat strange food, play video games, etc. (Ho-hum.) LOST IN TRANSLATION gets 2 stars out of 5-both for the acting. One star for Bill Murray, at last recognized for the dramatic ability in evidence since MEATBALLS (and blatantly obvious since MAD DOG AND GLORY). The other for the rest of the cast: Johansson (believable though out of her element), Ribisi (perfect as the adolescent, self-absorbed husband), and Faris (the ditzy blonde starlet-at least I think she was acting). And to the critics who praised this movie (and Ms Coppola's previous lame effort), I give a big, fat goose egg.
Rating: 
Summary: A beautiful dream
Review: "Lost in Translation" is an amazing achievement for the director Sofia Coppola and the actors Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson. The film plays like one long beautiful dream of friendship and shared experiences in an alternate universe. The film's plot is simple. Two Americans-a mid-50's, washed up actor played by Bill Murrray and a young, married Yale graduate played by Johansson-find themselves lost in Tokyo for a week. They're not really lost of course: Murray is there to shoot a TV commercial and Johansson to accompany her hip photographer husband. But being set adrift in the bright lights of Tokyo makes each realize how lost they are in their own lives. Murray's character is going through a classic mid-life crisis while Johansson's character is undergoing a more unusual beginning of life crisis. They connect in the hotel bar after seeing each other at various venues. Slowly and subtly a lovely, amazing friendship develops. They are at the same stage of their lives emotionally if not chronologically. And that's the beauty of the movie: how at a disparate moment of time, two souls can connect on an emotional and not a physical level. The frenzy of Tokyo day and night life provides a powerful counterpoint to the slowly unfolding friendship. Coppola has an amazing eye for the scenes and sights that tell a story--she gives you just enough of the neon lights and just enough of the green zen gardens to make you feel as if you are in Tokyo. I would recommend this movie to those individuals who gravitate towards intelligent, art house films. Yes Bill Murray does his deadpan schtick here: but it reveals the darker undertones that perhaps were always there. The DVD featurettes are good (you want more), particularly a conversation with Bill Murray and Sofia Coppola. The deleted scenes include more from Anna Faris, who turns in an outstanding supporting performance as a young and ditzy actress turned loose in Tokyo, whose experience could not be more dissimilar to Murray and Johansson's. I consider this movie one of the best that I have seen over the past few years--and I see a lot of movies!
Rating: 
Summary: worthwhile movie
Review: First of all, this movie is not "slap your knees" hilarious. It is a subtle comedy with humor implied by a passing glance such as it in reality. Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansen are terrific together. The main character is Bob Harris(Bill Murray), a past his hay-day actor and is "lost in life's translation" as he cruises through life. He chooses to further his career by doing a whiskey ad for the Japanese. Bob Harris is disenchanted with life in general& the choices he's made such as his young counterpart, Scarlett Johansen's character, Charlotte. Both are married to different people, stuck in situations where no one understands them, and are truely lonely. The choices they have made in life created the kind of lonely that makes a crowded room full of people you know seem foreign. The film creates this moment in time feeling that fate meant for these two characters to meet and realise that they are not alone. Even though they are "strangers" they recognize that they are soul mates. This movie is not cheapened with a may-december love thing , it is a coming of age , sometimes funny , sometimes sad look at life.
I enjoyed this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Sushi out of Water
Review: A critics darling and Oscar nominee in four major categories this year (Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Director and Best Original Screenplay), "Lost in Translation" was somehow lost on moviegoers in theaters with lukewarm box office returns last fall, but will surely avoid the same fate with its perfectly timed debut on home video. Set in Tokyo, "Lost in Translation" tells the bittersweet story of Bob Harris (Murray), a 50-something over-the-hill movie star from the 1970s who finds wealth in Japan as an ad pitchman and Charlotte, a young Yale college graduate with a degree in philosophy. Brought together by their loneliness as two Americans lost within the Japanese culture, the duo forms a unique bond that neither one of their spouses could ever fulfill. Written and directed by Sofia Coppola, "Lost in Translation" mercifully forgoes for the predictable route that fuels most romantic dramedies. Smartly set amongst a foreign culture (which instantly takes us out of any familiar territory), what makes the movie even more unique is its oddly compelling tale of friendship that constantly teeters on being something more. It presents an interesting quandary rarely seen in movies. Murray turns in a masterful performance as Bob, although his deadpan demeanor feels too close at times to the veteran actor's previous works. Johansson, on the other hand, comes scorching in out of nowhere to deliver in what is surely a star-making role for the 19-year-old actress. Ultimately, both are winners because they don't try to upstage each other with their talents. They have a perfect screen balance. While I admittedly fell for the hype and was disappointed by the theatrical screening of "Lost in Translation," the film played much better for me on video the second time without any monstrous expectations. Sure, the film still suffers from a laborious plot set up; but like before, it also has the power -- if not even stronger -- to keep me longing for more throughout its conclusion and beyond. In the end, any movie that leaves you with as many questions as there are answers is worth a second look. DVD Features: Interview with Coppola and Murray; "Lost on Location" behind-the-scenes featurette; deleted scenes and more.
Rating:
Summary: bored and red eyed
Review: WOW is the only way I can start..... Bad, Boring, Sleep Inducing, dribble. Being a film nut who's taste runs to independent and foriegn films what a bummer to discover this total waste of time. To show you how much I was looking forward to watching this film I not only purchased from Amazon I could not wait for it to arrive and bought a another at Barnes and Noble. So now I have two bookends of this boring film. The shocking part is that I am a fan of Bill Murray along with being an Italian and always pulling for a fellow Italian such as Sophia Coppola. There is nothing that I can say other than if you have a problem sleeping at night just flip this dvd in and I can assure you in no time at all you will be in dream land except for the occasional nightmare of this film playing in your head over and over and over and over. Really bad sorry Sofia.
Rating:
Summary: JUDGING ¿A MINDLESS HUMANITY OF DESPAIRING CONFORMITY¿
Review: Lost in Translation is a wonderful movie. It is a well put together, beautiful piece of art worthy of the praise it has received. It is also a ringing indictment of the world in which we find ourselves. Simply put--humanity, both collectively and as individuals, has a void which it is incapable of filling. We strive after multitudes of things to fill this gap--to block out, however temporarily the foreboding sense that there must be more to life. These things, be they products, people, jobs, or crusades for one issue or another, always fail to put an end to the void--to give us meaning. As time passes whole cultures are becoming frenetic in the energy they expend to try and narcoticize themselves to this fact of human reality. Things speed up. People disconnect from each other and abandon true community. We are satiated with the latest consumer goods and electronic gadgets. Lost in Translation is the story of two people struggling with the holes in their lives, the inhumanity of the cultures in which they live, and the wounds that they bear as a result. Charlotte and Bob (played brilliantly by Scarlett Johansson and Bill Murray respectively) are two lost souls who find each other while being doubly "lost" in a foreign land. This at first sounds like the plot for a standard romantic comedy (especially with Murray involved), yet Lost in Translation, in its fiercely honest portrayal of the lonely brokenness of the human condition, transcends its genre. Though darkly comic in parts, Lost in Translation hits the nail on the head in dealing with humanity's proclivity for compromising everything to try and fill our emptiness (which only leaves us more empty). There are a thousand clichéd questions that this movie begs one to ask; not least of which is: 'whether it is better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all?' (Not that anyone 'loses' here...but that brings up another whole series of questions.) But what strikes me as pertinent here is that neither Charlotte nor Bob was happy before their relationship begins bringing up all these questions in the viewer's mind. Bob's marriage sucks. So does Charlotte's. However, one senses that even before this these characters were looking for greater meaning. Bob has fruitlessly sought fulfillment from his work. Charlotte studied philosophy and tried writing (which left her just as empty as Bob). Could it be that while we pity the plight of poor Charlotte and Bob that we are missing a wake-up call (or perhaps in this case wake-up curtains) of our own? The catalyst for Bob and Charlotte's misery in Lost in Translation is that they are together in a place they both see as foreign, over-stimulated and in many ways incomprehensible. Yet being lost and unhappy in a foreign land is nothing exceptional compared to how most of us live our daily lives. Bob and Charlotte could run off and live in New York with each other-though nothing would change. We, like Charlotte and Bob, know we are disconnected. We know we are lost. On top of it all, we are caught up in the imagination and lifestyle of lands created by people drowning in their own terrible voids of doubt and meaninglessness-people who never had the strength to swim. The greatest gift of Lost in Translation is that it shows 'reality' for what it really is: a monumental lack of imagination and a false construct overlaying the possibility of a true life just waiting to be found. The truth of this movie, though perhaps only implied, is this: Not many of us are wise. Not many of us are strong. Yet when we grow still, when our struggles cease, there is a weakness stronger than our strength, foolishness wiser than our years. In the silence it lifts us up. I recommend this movie.
Rating:
Summary: Lost In Translation
Review: There were 6 minutes of previews at the beginning of this DVD which you are forced to watch because the DVD wont allow you to skip ahead to the main menu. Despite my mood being soured by the previews at the beginning of the DVD I enjoyed the movie.
Rating:
Summary: Ugh. Bad movie all-around. For fans of mindless fluff only.
Review: In this movie, Bill Murray and Scarlett Johanssen play two lonely people set adrift on the flotsam and jetsam of Tokyo. Sounds good enough. But unfortunately, it doesn't work, let me explain why. It's kind of funny, everyone I know who likes this film is a Vin Diesel fan - they all like Triple X and the Fast and the Furious and this movie. Now, you may say, what do those movies have in common? Well, they all subvert intelligence in favor of looks. This movie plays heavily (entirely) on the fact that Americans (I am one myself) are easily, like Nebraskans going to New York City for the first time, blown away by Tokyo. So basically, all you have to do is throw a bunch of flashy shots of Tokyo on the screen, and guar-un-teed, people will sit there with their jaws gaping going "This is amazing!" Well my friends. I have lived in many different countries around the world and it takes more than some Roppongi glitz or Shinjuku eminence to impress me. No offense to others who are impressed. Secondary to Tokyo (Tokyo may as well be billed as the main actor) is the handcart of bittersweet conventions pushed through the movie. Yawn. This movie feels like I've seen it before. Oh yes, I have, it's much like any other lovers in a foreign city movie. Bill Murray plays a sad, black humorous, defeated old man, much like Jack Nicholson did in About Schmidt. These sad old men rules are always shoo-ins for the big awards, I'm wondering why anyone can't see through this. Film school students will talk your ear off about what all those wistful shots of people doing nothing mean. What it means is this movie is boring and film school students like to be pretentious. Yawn. So, in conclusion, I would not recommend this film. I know, I know, I DARED, that's right, I DARED to give this film one-star, so I know everyone has to get hysterical with outrage and click "Not Helpful." Go ahead and retaliate in that weak fashion, deep down you all know I'm right about this film, and it scares you to death.
| 
