Rating: 
Summary: thank you thank you thank you
Review: "Lost in Translation" is a gem. There've been so many good movies lately that I wonder if we're going through a renaissance of Hollywood movies, towards the great period of the early seventies, when the US was making good films about serious themes.This, "21 Grams", "Mystic River", "Shattered Glass", and a host of others, make such a welcome change from the routine. Scarlett Johansson is a luminous talent. You should also watch her in "The Girl with a Pearl Earring". Bill Murray shows he can act when given the chance, as he did in the excellent "Groundhog Day". Those who want to see him just goofing off Ghostbusters style should look elsewhere. And Coppola. It's a name that already means a lot to film lovers. Now it means even more. And I can't wait for her next film.
Rating:
Summary: Could this possibly be a bad movie?
Review: Could this possibly be a bad movie? No it could not. Bad movies do not inspire the kind of love that those who love it (including critics and the most discerning filmgoers) have for it. Nor do they - at the same time - inspire the negative feelings that others have for it. What it is, is a highly personal movie, a film that's different from what some people expect. And what a rare thing that is. I know that connections can get you a lot in the Hollywood film industry. But what connections can't get you is talent. Sofia Coppola has that in spades. And one of the most fascinating things is that it's a very feminine talent, very unlike that of her father. The world of "The Virgin Suicides" and "Lost in Translation" is certainly not that of her Dad. It is at the opposite extreme from his occasional bombasticism and operatic sweep. Coppola is a miniaturist. A painter of emotions. Like "21 Grams" although in an entirely different way, this is a film that takes effort on your part. It's a movie for people who can understand genuine emotion instead of the ersatz and fake feeling that we're usually spoon fed. COmpare it with Eric Rohmer, if you know who he is. Murray and Johansson are both superb. Lance Acord's cinematography does miracles on a low budget. It's funny about Tokyo, and its characters, but also loving. There isn't any meanness in it. I loved the scene where Bob let his morals slip and woke up wondering what had happened. I loved being able to laugh at that, and also knowing that it was - in a small way - heartbreaking. And yet, she has no reason for her heart to ache. It does anyway. And that's how life is. For those who bring up "prejudice" issues, I say get a life AND a reality check. Bill Murray is over six foot tall. As someone who has been to Asia I can tell you that, yes he is going to tower over a lift full of average height Japanese. He towers over Sofia Coppola in the interview on the DVD. That's hardly being prejudiced against Sofia Coppola. This is a film for grown-ups, in a movie-going world with all too few such films. Looking at some of these reviews it seems there are all to few grown-ups too, whatever their chronological age.
Rating: 
Summary: Something special
Review: I accept "Lost in Translation" is not for everyone, and no doubt has its faults, but I can only say that I loved it. It was so wonderful to see a totally unconventional film with such pitch-perfect acting. In so many films these days, even comparatively good ones, you know exactly what the characters are going to say and what's going to happen next. This film was a refreshing change from all the formulaic plots, with so many unusual and beautiful moments, and a realistic look at a kind of relationship that I think quite a few people have experienced but is seldom portrayed. Some have complained about the lack of plot and that "nothing happens" in this movie, but it is not about a story with a nice clear beginning, middle and end - it's about a relationship between two people. Which is one that I'm sure is hard to understand if you've never felt a special connection with someone when outwardly there is nothing at all to connect you, a virtual stranger with whom you have an inexplicable and perfect understanding, and who beyond all reason you somehow feel you belong with. Which strangely has nothing to do with age, class, race or physical attraction. I think unless you've found someone like that - whose companionship makes you feel perfectly content, and alive and complete in a way you never imagined, who you weirdly feel totally physically comfortable with without being attracted to - it's almost impossible to understand Bob and Charlotte's relationship. It's so strange, you can't believe it until it happens and then you can't believe something like it could happen to you - but what's there is real and palpable and can't be ignored. You can't deny you've never felt this way about anyone, and although it's wonderful it's heartbreaking that there is no future in it, that there can't possibly be an "ever after" because it was never going to be that, never a definable class of relationship at all - destined to just be a moment of unique honesty and intimacy, precious and rare and fleeting - that will change and never quite leave you, that will remain pristine and untarnished by the years and memory, because it was just so immaculate. It's like something beyond physicality, beyond any need for that kind of contact because it's perfect as it is - and as Bill sings at the karaoke bar, "...you know there's nothing more than this." It's the most perfect love of all, bittersweet and beautiful, with nothing to explain it but its existence.
Rating:
Summary: for those who don't get it
Review: The first time I saw this movie I enjoyed it, but things didn't really connect up for me. I was too concerned with where the movie might be going to actually see that it was already there.
I now find this film to be brilliant, moving, and uncommon. It establishes it's theme immediately and adds layer after layer as it moves along. You'll read a lot of retellings of plot and descriptions of things people found comical. These are all fine, but, to me, they miss most of what makes this film so special.
Okay, the film starts with a shot of Scarlett Johnasson's [behind]-and I can only guess what that means. But then we cut to a beautifully shot and scored scene in which Bob (Bill Murray) wakes up in a taxicab as it cruises through the brightly lit streets of Tokyo at night. He rubs his eyes, as if waking from a dream (or into one). Amongst the unintelligible (to him) signage, he sees a large billboard of himself: he is somehow an accepted part of this overwhelming landscape. Then we get a close-up of a flashing neon sign with huge Japanese letters, as if it is announcing something absolutely germane to existence. What does it say?! Well, to people who can't read Japanese, it doesn't say anything. That's the point. No matter how urgent or spectacular the presentation, most everything we encounter in life has no inherent meaning. This movie is filled with such images-and the fact that many of them reference the Japanese culture is incidental. Every culture is filled with customs that seem odd or silly to those outside of that culture. (One could easily argue that the present state of American television programming is just as absurd as the weird stuff that's on Japanese TV in the film!)
Amidst this landscape we have Bob and Charlotte, each trapped in a life that, for them, lacks depth. By that I mean that they are unable at the present time to grasp with confidence onto anything "more than this"-that is, anything more than the surface of existence. They may have the funds to stay in a wonderful hotel, but there is nothing intrinsically wonderful (or terrible) about their lives. Their lives have basic comfort, but little else. There is no joy in their careers, and they are both in marriages that have settled into passionless routine with people whose priorities lie elsewhere.
What Bob and Charlotte recognize in each other is themselves. Charlotte searches for something that she can connect with (religion, tradition, culture, etc.); the film gives us many examples of her observing others going about their daily endeavors with zeal and/or devotion. None of it is the right fit for her. When she meets Bob, she discovers someone who has the same cross to bear, but is much further along in the journey. "Does it get any better?" she asks, and his first instinct is to say, "No." It's this shared burden that makes it so touching when they are half-flirting, half-commiserating, and he sings to her, "Show me one thing more than this... There is nothing."
I'd better cut this short, but let me say that it's no surprise that a lot of the reviewers here have had strong, negative reactions to this film. It's only right that so many should not "get" it; in fact, I'm shocked that the movie has found such a large audience: at its deepest level, this is a movie for those of us who don't "get" most of what goes on in this world.
Rating: 
Summary: sleeping pill
Review: This movie was terrible. If you suffer from insomnia, rent it and you will be cured. STAY AWAY!
Rating:
Summary: Gorgeous
Review: Isn't it exciting to see a promising new talent blossom and grow? With 'Lost In Translation', we have the unique pleasure of watching three such talents bloom and find themselves. The first one is, of course, director Sofia Coppola, daughter of the grand master Francis Ford, and a proud collaborator in the family business. 'Lost In Translation' is only her second feature film, but all the promises made by her debut, the acclaimed 'Virgin Suicides', is fulfilled in this movie. Though it shares with its predecessor a kind of drowsy, atmospheric slowness, 'Lost In Translation' is a much better structured movie, and shows Sofia truly on her way as both director and writer. It earned her an Oscar for best original screenplay, and golden globes for best screenplay and best film (comedy / musical). The second is young actress Scarlett Johansson. I had my eye on Scarlett since I saw her in two of my favorite films of recent years - Terry Zwigoff's 'Ghost World' and the Coen Brothers' 'The Man Who Wasn't There'. She played supporting roles in both movies, yet I was still impressed, and not just because of her young age (in 'Ghost World' she plays a highschool graduate along with Thora Birch, yet she is two years younger than Birch - she was only 16 when the movie was made!) This year, though, we can see her in two leading roles - in 'Lost In Translation' and 'Girl With Pearl Earring' - and in 'Lost In Translation', she really proves that she's a talent to be reckoned with. The third is - yes, that's right, Bill Murray. So, yes, he's been around for nearly a quarter of a century now, but we never really thought of him as much of an actor, right? Good though he was in 'Ghostbusters' and 'Groundhog Day', never before have I imagined him to be anything more than a comedian actor, and capable of playing a lead dramatic character successfully. In 'Lost In Translation' he is both funny and touching, and his performance is worthy of an Oscar. 'Lost In Translation' is a beautiful, moody, atmospheric little piece of perfect cinema from a young director just beginning to show what she has to offer. It moves very slowly and has very little plot, but never gets dull. Altogether, it's one of the best and most intelligent films of the year. Very highly recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: Good acting/Bad story
Review: I loved Bill Murray in this movie and Scarlett Johansson was very good too. The attraction between the two was undeniable. However, this movie had no story and the ending was terrible. I told my fiance..."I walked into this movie not knowing what it was about. I walked out of this movie not knowing what it was about." I think that sums it up. What is this supposed to be about???
Rating:
Summary: Boooorrrrrrrrring
Review: Bill, please get back to doing movies like Stripes! I have no clue what the academy saw in this movie (they must be 60+ in age).. If this movie was on in the Dentist office I would recommend the Musak machine instead.
Rating:
Summary: Bill Murray in a coma
Review: This is an impenetrable chick flick featuring Bill Murray in acting so low-key I thought I was watching Kim Novak in Bell, Book & Candle. The scenery is LOW, LOW budget (like Ginsu knives), the non-English is apparently improvised -- in fact background dialogs are directed as "wall of sound" noise, and subtitles are NOT available. The high point of the script is a sophomoric flipwit about Yale philosophy majors working pro bono, and it doesn't get better. Coppola made it out of the basin ok in Godfather I, but she drowns in this one.
Rating:
Summary: close, but not quite
Review: The movie was a good story, but left me wanting something that had some bite to it. Bill Murray showed how versatile his comedic style was.
| 
