Rating: 
Summary: LOST IN TRANSLATION??
Review: I just FOUGHT hard to watch this movie today after renting it and I lost the battle. It angers me that so many critics put this piece of trash on their best of 2003 lists and that it is nominated for BEST PICTURE Oscar when it is not deserving of anything grand!!!!! I will not even get into the story because there hardly is one. It is supposedly about a middle aged man having a mid-life crisis and a young woman unsure of where to go in life meeting, yada yada yada......the sad thing is the movie definitely did not have me care about Bill Murray's character "Bob Harris". Murray is up for BEST ACTOR????? Ick!!!!!!! He does not do much the entire movie. Scarlet Johanssen has major talent and will go far!!!! That much I could tell! The movie is spotty, boring, blah blah blah.....COLD MOUNTAIN should have been nominated for BEST PICTURE in its place. It was deserving!!!! Critics proved with this something I have ALWAYS believe......their praise does not equal a great movie!! F!!!!!!!
Rating: 
Summary: Try to ignore the overexposure; Lost is a great LITTLE movie
Review: As good as the movie is, it almost feels like a fluke that "Lost in Translation" found so much success. Since its release, this story about a middle-aged actor and a young newlywed who form a bittersweet friendship during their stay in Tokyo, topped just about every critic's Ten Best lists for 2003; it made a pile of money; and it's been nominated for most of the major Academy Awards.That's a heavy weight for a little movie to bear and "Lost" is a little movie. It's the kind of fragile, off-beat sleeper that usually falls beneath the mainstream radar: It has a slow pace, an odd structure and hardly any story at all; it's funny but not quite a comedy, sad but not quite a drama. The main characters, played by Scarlett Johansson and the recently Oscar nominated Bill Murray, are sympathetic but cold to everyone except each other, and they're both moping around a mighty fine five-star hotel. So now that "Lost" has been released on DVD to a much wider audience, will it face a backlash from viewers who watch it expecting too much and wonder, "What's the big deal?"
Many of the reviews here indicate a "yes" in answer to that question, which seems a shame because "Lost," while not exactly your typical crowd-pleaser, is a subtle modern classic. Viewers who haven't seen it but have heard the massive hype surrounding it should keep their expectations in check and focus on the movie's simple pleasures: a careful script by writer-director Sofia Coppola; beautiful cinematography by Lance Acord; and a great, Bogart-esque performance by Murray - aside from possibly (possibly) Al Pacino, I can't think of a fifty-something actor other than Murray who could pull off the character's complicated mix of humor and seriousness. I actually found that "Lost", with its lonely characters and late night settings, improves on home video. It's a movie best suited to watching alone in the wee small hours of the morning, and its ending left me feeling a nostalgia usually reserved for movies like "Before Sunrise" and "American Graffiti."
Rating:
Summary: Incredibly pretentious and just plain bad
Review: All of the hoity-toity people that walk around holding one pinky in the air and talk about films using words like "dichotomy" and "apotheosis" will undoubtedly just love, looove this movie. The rest of us mortals will just sit and stare at this pretentious and overly-politically-correct drivel, waiting for something, anything interesting to happen. And then when nothing does and it's all over, you'll feel like you've been jerked around by the unbearably precious artsy fartsies that created this crap and are now laughing all the way to the bank. If you want to see a movie where the main character (Murray) is as dull and boring as they come, continuously makes poor life choices, and defines the "stupid morally bankrupt American in a supposedly superior foreign land," then be my guest. If you want to see a movie where you'll care absolutely nothing for any of the main characters (actually after a while I was wishing Murray would tragically perish in a freak karaoke accident or something, just to get this movie overwith), then go right ahead. Further proof that most critics (overwhelmingly liberal-minded) are so out of touch with the normal folks that they have lost nearly all capacity to tell the good from the awful.
Rating: 
Summary: If you are depressed, don't watch that movie!
Review: I was very curious about that movie everybody is talking about these days. First of all, don't expect a good scenario because there is none, just everyday banalities. This is mostly about the atmosphere surrounding a very boring hotel life in Tokyo, where two people meet and share their loneliness. I wish that movie could have been shot, let's say in Paris. At least the atmosphere would have been more romantic (instead of witnessing those phony disco clowns everywhere) and with a good scenario, would have been more meaningful. Something is missing in that movie and it would be very presumptuous to even think that movie would get an Oscar for best movie, best director etc... Sofia Coppola could have done a lot better with the two very good actors she had (Murray and Johanssen) but, unfortunately the result is very boring and superficial. It's a nice try though...next time maybe...
Rating:
Summary: Unbelievably over-rated
Review: Let's see: A female lead who is far too young (and indecisive by nature) for anyone to actually believe she's married (let alone for 2 years and to a dude she obviously can't stand)... a male lead who's been married for 25 years, yet has a young son and a baby daughter... a female lead who is, essentially, a blob... a male lead whom we are supposed to care about, despite the fact that he forgets his son's birthday and describes having children as if it's the worst thing that will ever happen to you... the requisite contrived, nagging wifey back home... a female lead who seems to be alone and lost in a foreign city she's never been to, yet suddenly half way through the film has close friends who barely speak her language and are middle-aged... a male lead who apparently, and with no explanation, has ESP (how else would he know which room she was staying in when she invites him to go out on the town with her?)... oh, and don't forget to add some borderline racism and one joke over and over about how Japanese people switch their "R's" and "L's" in place of actual humor... ...And then there's the [INAUDIBLE WHISPER] at the end, which proves once and for all that the inablilty to give a movie a satisfying ending is contagious (thanks a lot, Spike!). Come to think of it, being outrageously over-rated must be genetic (well, OK, Francis did make two great films-- Godfather I and II). Two stars for the cinematography and acting, which were great. Minus three stars for the lack of anything else. Next time, write a script, Sophia, not just a hackneyed collection of plot holes without a plot.
Rating:
Summary: lost on me
Review: Definetely in the top 5 of the worst movies I've ever viewed! The movie starts out the same way it ends. Nothing ever changes. After 5 minutes you can turn it off because you have basically viewed the whole thing. Just because a movie is terrible, critics have to love it and call it arty. Its so bad you are drawn into it because you know something interesting has got to happen. The only attention grabbing part is at the very end with the "whisper in the ear" and even that is a let down. I highly recomend seeing this movie just to see how awfull it really is! Thank you
Rating:
Summary: Sadly, Opens with Mandatory Commercials
Review: This is a touching, understated film deserving four stars, but on DVD it opens with a long set of mandatory commercials -- the Menu function is disabled so you must watch the commercials before you can watch the movie. It's hard to recommend purchasing a product that forces you to watch advertising, and I can't give it more than two stars. I believe Amazon should inform people when a DVD contains mandatory advertising.
Rating: 
Summary: Could Not Stop Watching Murray & Johansson
Review: Lost in Translation, guided by Sofia Coppola's deft direction of her own script, is perfectly cast. She employs Bill Murray's remarkable ability to portray a kind of has-been middle aged actor, Bob, who is stranded in Japan filming a liquor commercial for the big bucks. Stranded not just by his inability to speak the language, but by his age-related emotional detachment from his family back home in the U.S., and his sense of drifting in his life, Bob is wandering aimlessly through this oddity (to him) that is Japan, adrift emotionally, no anchor at home from his wife of many years. Yes, it's time for That Car, for middle aged Bob.
Or for ...something, at any rate.
Instead, unable to sleep, he meets Charlotte, played by Johansson, who is staying in the same fancy hotel, a third wheel coming along on her husband's photo shoot. [note: husband is played by Giovanni Ribisi--wonderful choice].
Charlotte can't sleep, and neither can Bob. They keep bumping into each other, and exchanging glances, and finally they talk. The conversation is so honest by the time they talk, it is as if they have known each other for years. What follows is a curious trip to a place neither whould have expected...the Japan they would never have experienced unless they had explored it together in the few days they have, alone with each other. It is a dream shared by two and will be treasured.
Scarlett Johansson was only 18 when this film was made. How did she get so good? She is perfect for Murray. She isn't too weak, and yet she is superbly wry in a female way. What a match for his dry wit and that charm he has tons of. As always. "Lost in Translation" is not about sex, or affairs, or old guys hitting on young women...it is an examination of that curiosity which is a relationship which develops within a specific time frame, and in a place, which can never happen again and is like a memory of something before it even is finished... You get to watch as Bob and Charlotte grow to care more and more about each other, even as they begin to realize that what they have at home is the reality that this sidetrack will not affect. I was longing for them to have an affair, and I was longing for them NOT to. This is the appeal of this film, a super little film with a lot a humor and humanity to it. There isn't a dishonest moment in this film, and when you get to the ending, you sigh. I highly recommend Lost in Translation. The performances, direction, and appeal of this movie will stay with you in little bits and snatches long after you have watched it. Then you will watch it again. And find something else to grab you.
Rating:
Summary: what's the big deal?
Review: This movie was not as great as people make it out to be. I liked it enough to make it worthwhile, though. Maybe I missed something.
Rating: 
Summary: What's the big deal with Sofia Coppola?
Review: The movie is not that great, but like many debuts is an honest attempt. I'll give her props for that, but this year's selection must have been pretty grim for LiT to win all those awards. And yes, there is a strange undercurrent of racial ignorance and stereotyping. Either that or it's meant to bring us into Scarlett and Bill's (characters') drunken, self-absorbed perspective on things. Depressing, disappointing - they were not good for each other, did not understand each other, and left each other more jaded than when they met. Not that it has to be feel-good to be a good film, but let's at least bring it all into perspective.
| 
