Rating: 
Summary: boring rubbish
Review: Don't waste your time on this.
Rating: 
Summary: This makes up for Godfather III
Review: We all know Sofia had a starring role in Godfather III and that she sucked. I know I was happy when her character died. So it was with some hesitation that I rented this movie - just her name sent shivers up my spine. Wow. What a beautiful piece of work. I watched this with my father, and his only comment after the film was "I don't understand why he didn't get any from her". He missed a lot. And not just the lesson about saying something like that in front of your daughter. I attempted to explain the themes of growing too large for things and not quite fitting in, etc..., all to no avail. But hey, at least he watched something without Ahhhhhhnold in it for a change! This film is subtle and brilliant, and definitely needs to be viewed more than once. Bill Murray's best role since Rushmore (and if you liked that movie, you'll like this one), and Scarlett Johanssen's best since Ghost World (which grew on me after several viewings). This makes up for that sappy, quasi-feminist Hollywood slop of a film, Mona Lisa Smile, in Johanssen's repertoire. A seriously intelligent piece of work, and visually stunning to boot. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Bad.
Review: If you are faced with choosing between this movie and the "other one", always choose the "other one". I do give this movie five stars, however, for its title: the title means a lack of gaining full meaning from communication and this movie itself functions as a communicative medium that presents little meaning.
Rating:
Summary: This is the worst movie ever.
Review: "Lost in Translation" has got to be the worst movie I have ever seen. I have no idea why so many people love it. It is horrible and full of bad acting. All Bill Murray does it sit there with a smirk on his face, which hardly constitutes a best actor nomination. You see the whole movie in the previews. The movie starts out with a 15min "BUTT" shot of Scarlett Johansson. The movie 2 hours of boredom and then when you get to the end of the movie you have no idea what happens. Bill whispers something in her ear and you have no idea what. You can't even guess at what he said because the story goes no where. All you can deduce form this movie is that Bill Murray hates his wife and cheats on her with the bar room singer, and Scarlett Johansson is mad that her boyfriend does not pay attention to her and decides go after bill Murray. The only thing this movie is good for is a scenic view of Japan; there are great shots of the city with in the film, and that's just about the only good shots. I am welcome to you comments on why you liked this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Epiphany
Review: One reviewer below mentions Chekhov, which I thought was incredibly apt. I'd also throw out Winesburg Ohio and Dubliners. Even if nothing much happens plot-wise, works of art can still trigger a powerful emotional response. (What's the "story" in a Rembrandt?) If you've ever experienced inexplicable melancholy, then this movie is for you. If not, then it's not.
Rating:
Summary: Hated It
Review: I heard all the accolades this movie received so I went and bought it on DVD without renting it first. BIG MISTAKE. I couldn't tell you how horrible this movie is with just a 1000 words. I am an American that lives in Japan and could relate to the characters the first time I came here, but this movie just never grabbed my attention.
We passed this around to our friends who had similiar reactions. The best quote was from one friend who gave it back and said, "I'm sorry we didn't get to finish the movie, we had to go change our sock drawer."
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful writing makes a great movie.
Review: Sofia Coppola has written one of the best screenplays in the last 15 years. Lost in Translation captures the purest essence of romance. It the feeling of leading up to that first kiss when love is at it's purest form. Bill Murray keeps demonstrating that he is one of the most versatile and talented actors of our time. His dry wit matches perfectly in this melancholy film about a man drifting in a sea of loneliness. Scarlett Johannsen plays a young neglected wife who crosses the path of Murray several times in a Tokyo hotel. Together, they share in each other's quiet despair while denying that there are romantic feelings brewing. This is a beatiful story of star-crossed lovers with an ending that will keep you guessing. A must see!
Rating:
Summary: Waste of time
Review: When I read the description of this movie, it didn't sound too interesting to me. But when I heard it was up for best picture, I thought there must be something to it. WRONG. This was a terrible movie. There was little if any story, none of it made any sense, it was full of scenes that had nothing to do with what was going on (i.e., Bill Murray staring at his razer, Scarlett Johannson sitting in the bathtub staring into space) and I never once felt the urge to find out how the story ended. I am sure that is because there was no story to end. I asked around and every person I found who had seen this movie felt the same way -- it's a dud. I love Bill Murray as an actor, but there was simply no material in this movie and there was no interesting acting (except for maybe the one scene when he was making a commercial). This movie was certainly not worth what I paid for it, and I doubt I would even recommend the $3.95 to rent it.
Rating:
Summary: Subtle and wonderful
Review: Some people complain that nothing happens in this movie, and yet in Chekov's "The Three Sisters", nothing happens and it's considered a classic. In life, we don't always fight these huge battles, we don't find out that our significant others had an affair...not every day, at least. I think the beauty of this movie lies in its simplicity. It mirrors the state of the characters- they're both in directionless marriages, they've reached a standstill, so a fastpaced movie would contradict the story. Before I'd seen the movie, I saw a few clips here and there and figured that Bill Murray was simply playing himself. But after watching the movie, I have much more respect for him as an actor (I've always loved him, but I love him even more now.) Because while there are moments where he seems to be playing himself, you realize (hopefully you realize) that the acting's a lot more subtle, and there's a lot more to him. It's not Bill Murray playing a guy similar to him. It's hard to explain, but... some people don't apprectiate his performance. Truly appreciate. It's completely natural and subtle and beautiful. And I felt very fulfilled by the end of the movie. I don't think movies need a clear cut THE END at the end. With few exceptions, life is never certain. And I felt that the overall message at the end, the overall feeling...was just...survival. Just to keep going. So even though they were both ultimately where they started, they had changed, maybe not in a monumental way, but internal. So even though there's no event to really say "hey we got somewhere", I think that there IS closure to it, but to have a defined finality to it would kind of... defeat the purpose. It's just a very natural movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Sofia Coppola and her cast get Lost in Translation
Review: Visualize Tokyo. Got it? Now add popular favorite Bill Murray, doing his "lovable shmoe" shtick. Toss in American Rhapsody's up-and-comer Scarlett Johansson, doing her standard "like, duh" face. Dip them both into emotional torpor in the sleek Park Hyatt, add local color, stir. Et voilà: Lost in Translation.
For Sofia Coppola, this must have been the easiest pitch in the world -- which is perhaps helpful when pitching to Daddy. The youngish director and heiress to American cinema did things her way a few years ago with her ambitious adaptation of Jeffrey Eugenides' novel The Virgin Suicides, crafting a truly poignant slab of Middle American art with A-list Hollywood talent. This time around, though, her effort feels as pedestrian and confused as its subjects. She hasn't delivered a turkey -- it's a cute little movie, if not as rich as her brother Roman's similarly themed CQ -- but when work this potentially satisfying remains flatly obvious, it's almost worse than being flat-out bad. We begin with a close-up of an ass, and it's tempting to suggest that the remainder of the film is simply a product thereof, but the project's kindly nature doesn't call for that kind of harshness. Rather, the tone is more distinctly bumming. The peach-panty-clad glutes belong to dewy depressed Charlotte (Johansson), who's loitering at the Hyatt in hopes that her busy photojournalist husband, John (Giovanni Ribisi), will take five to comfort her. No such luck, but Charlotte does find a surrogate friend in Bob Harris (Murray), an American movie star and cultural castaway who's in town for the noble task of plugging whiskey. Perhaps it cuts just a little too close to home when Charlotte bemoans: "I just don't know what I want to be. I tried being a writer, but I hate what I write. I tried to be a photographer, but I don't take good pictures." Well, that's OK, but if she's the director's mouthpiece, we've got a problem. This is further complicated by Lost in Translation's being another feature shot on 35mm film with an A-list cast. An amateur with a DV camera would be more welcome under these circumstances, or even the director herself just wandering with her friends across the street from her father's San Francisco offices into Chinatown. But a well-heeled princess with a professional crew struggling to prove her funky street cred ends up feeling lost indeed.
| 
