Rating: 
Summary: snore
Review: I couldn't finish watching this movie because I found it to be such a bore.
Rating: 
Summary: its all in the translation
Review: This morning I heard someone tell a co-worker not to bother to
see this awful movie about nothing, with no ending.
So I had to check amazon reviews to see if anyone else had loved it like I did. It looks like the people who loved it, had explained it perfectly.
It is not for someone who prefers a less subtle movie -
action films, or the in-your-face style comedy of the Farrelly Bros. Some movie watchers don't want to translate, they want the point to be obvious. We thought this movie was touching, magical, funny and sweet. A reviewer said it best - it makes you feel something you haven't been able to put into words. My husband and I didn't want the movie to end, we had become so involved with the chemistry of these two people.
Obviously not for everyone.
Rating: 
Summary: lost in hype...my money that is
Review: good acting. beautiful views of the city. incredibily overrated. with all of the hype surrounding this movie, i figured i would save myself the 4 bucks it would cost to rent this movie and just go ahead and buy it...b/c i was assured by the world that i would like it. so i'm sitting, watching, trying to be engaged by this 'amazing' movie, 30mins, 60mins, 90mins...still waiting for the scene where i come to love this movie, that defining moment when i identify and empathize with the screenwriter, the characters, the city. 45 mins into it my wife said, 'this is dumb' and i said, 'wait, maybe the big payoff is coming. i'm still waiting. with the exception of the cinematography, there is nothing in this movie that wasn't in harold and maude...that other weird movie about the old and the young shacking up. i can't even really describe what this movie is about. is it a midlife crisis movie? a movie about loners and lonliness? a soulmate movie? my wife pointed out that trying to tell someone about this movie would be a difficult chore b/c no matter what you said, no matter how you recalled the story, the message, one way or another, would get...lost in translation.
Rating:
Summary: WHERE'S MY $3.00??????????????
Review: I WANT ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE CONSIDERING BUYING THIS HORRIBLY BAD MOVIE THAT SOME TIME AGO, I ASKED ANYONE WHO WROTE A REVIEW OF THIS MOVIE AND GAVE IT 5-STARTS, TO SEND $3.00 TO THE CHARITY OF THEIR CHOICE IN MY NAME (FUFUPAME) AND AS OF YET, NO ONE HAS PAY ME BACK THE $3.00 I SPENT RENTING THIS EXCUSE FOR A MOVIE.
BE FORWARNED! WHOEVER GIVES THIS MOVIE 5-STARTS IS HOPING YOU BUY THE COPY OF THE MOVIE THEY BOUGHT FROM THEIR LOCAL BLOCKBUSTER STORE. DON'T BE FOOLED! RENT.. OR BETTER YET HAVE ONE OF YOUR VICTIMS... EXCUSE ME, FRIEND WHO BOUGHT THIS MOVIE BY MISTAKE, TO LEND IT TO YOU FIRST. TRUST ME, IF YOU SPEND MONEY ON THIS MOVIE, YOU WILL REGRET IT FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE! PLEASE EMAIL ME AND LET ME KNOW THAT SOMEONE HAS PAID ME BACK MY $3.00 -- P.L.E.A.S.E!
MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS: FUFUPAME@PEOPLEPC.COM. THANK YOU.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Movie, Poor DVD
Review: This isn't a review of the movie, just a warning about the DVD. FIVE MINUTES OF ADVERTISING THAT CANNOT BE SKIPPED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS DVD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In other words, every time that I will watch a movie that I love, I will start out angry.
Rating: 
Summary: you either get it or you don't
Review: For those of us who identify with the characters, "Lost In Translation" pinpoints the heart of what we have never found words to describe.
Rating:
Summary: Lost in Filming
Review: I'll start by saying that I did not like this movie. I was ready to stop watching it after 30 minutes but stuck it out to the end. Mostly, what I appreciate in a movie is good writing. Acting and cinema photography help but, in my opinion, cannot carry a movie. The nighttime photography was rather compelling but it made me want to visit Tokyo about as much as Potterville (which it rather resembled.)
This just might have made a good book, however. The thoughts and feelings of the three primary characters could have been presented (in a book) in such a way that the reader would have a different impression of them than was obtained from the movie: indifference. I neither liked nor disliked any of the main characters and felt no more involved in their lives than I would to the guy next to me at the airport after having listened to one end of his cell phone conversation.
This book/movie comparison works both ways. One of my all-time favorite books is "Catcher in the Rye." I have felt like I have known Holden Caufield all of my life. It would, however, make a horrible movie.
"Translation," (as a movie) in my opinion, had the makings of a good story. As I see it, it completely failed. I would be very interested to see it written as a novel.
Rating:
Summary: What a beautiful film!
Review: I just will say I saw "Lost in Translation" on a plane from the United States, and it may be the only time in my life I have enjoyed watching a film in flying. I think Japan must be a very interesting place. It has a good mix of old and modern and I can see it will be very hard for an out sider to understand. I have been through a very same experience in US, and even I could follow the language. You might think it not believable that a 20 year old girl could be so close with an older man but I have seen it happen all the time. Even many I have seen get married. Both of the main stars in this film were very good. I was so happy to see it win the Oscars when I was in Sacramento. I think the woman director is very charming and very talented. In India we do not have enough of this quiet sort of film. Even the films we see from America are not like this. I wish I could see more such films.
Rating:
Summary: I (REALLY) wanted to like it
Review: I have enjoyed Bill Murray's work over the years. I haven't always LOVED it, but he can always make me laugh. My favorite is "Ground Hog Day," which shows more character depth than many of his others. I was interested in seeing this movie because of the things that I heard about Bill and this role. I heard that he was deep and meaningful. I was prepared for a bit of "artsiness," and I was prepared to like Bill Murray if not the entire film. I figured - with the Academy Award nomination and all - that he must have broken new ground and stretched his acting range. Well, I failed to enjoy the movie and found Bill Murray almost unrecognizable as a living person. Perhaps the movie was just about how shallow many people are. Perhaps it was about how difficult it can be to be married, to get older, to be deeply bored, to have a mediocre career, to think you made a big mistake. Maybe it is about how an unlikely, inconsequential individual can show up and almost ruin your life, that of your spouse, and that of any existing children. Any of these seem like plausible themes for this film. However, there was almost no character development and almost no plot. As a result, I will never know what this movie was trying to do. Furthermore, I'll probably forget all about the whole thing as soon as I hit the save button for this review.
Rating:
Summary: Words upon words
Review: Over a thousand reviews already. Who would expect a movie like this would excite so much commentary? And who would expect it to be so controversial? I don't see anything there that I'd expect people to get so worked up about. I am amused though to see the occasional comment about "insiders" getting rewarded ... obviously from people who have not much idea about how Hollywood works, or who have forgotten that for long chunks of his career even Francis Ford Coppola could not get films made. Money is the key. "Lost in Translation" cost small change for Hollywood. Probably less than the Lord of the Rings trilogy spent on catering. According to one English paper that 4 million dollar budget has so far brought in 44 million, NOT counting DVD (or maybe overseas markets). THAT is how and why films get money in Hollywood. And rewards. Ever known a flop win Best Picture Oscar? Even "Titanic" has never made 11 times its budget. And all the hype in the world can't do that. That gladdens my heart. I can't remember if it was P.T. Barnum or H.L. Mencken who said "No one ever lost money underestimating the (American) public". Most Hollywood films prove him right. The fact that "Lost in Translation" can make money also proves the opposite is true. That you can believe in the intelligence and insight of enough of the public (maybe - judging from what I've read here - more outside of America than in) and still make money. In London we get to see a lot of European movies, and we don't always think a movie is an "art film" just because it has subtitles. Or just because it is not middle-of-the-road. Or because it moves at its own pace. It's true "Lost in Translation" is a young person's film. But let's not forget most of Mozart's work is a young person's work too. When US movies seem to worship the young - at the expense of the mature - I don't even see why anyone complains about youth. "Jaws" was a young person's film too. So was "Star Wars" (which remains irredeemably childish). Maybe people only complain about youth when it makes a movie to which they are unable to respond. "Lost in Translation" speaks to the head and the heart. This story of an actor perhaps a little past his prime, and a young woman who is realising her marriage and life are going nowhere, is a film of rare insight and delicacy. It's beautifully judged, and walks a knife-edge where the relationship of these two adrift individuals in Tokyo is concerned. A directorial or writing mis-step either way and the whole edifice would come tumbling down. The fact that it doesn't is a superb reflection on Miss Coppola's abilities as a director. Many veteran directors could have done no better. There was a time when Hollywood made many intelligent and subtle films like this and huge audiences - even in the US - loved them. One wonders what has happened when doing so causes so much outrage in the modern world. Even "The Best Years of Our Lives" would probably infuriate the Matrix crowd today.
|
