Rating: 
Summary: Like Ex-President Ford: Nothing Bad, But Sadly Unimpressive
Review: I didn't really dislike this movie per se. I think that it's strengths lie in its cinematography and art direction. Also, I found the dialogue to be subtle, understated, nuanced, and compelling. Other than that, the movie did not really impress me. First off, this film falls into the genre of "Emo-type Americans who travel to a non-English speaking country and try to 'find themselves.'" What usually happens is that world-weary protagonists travel to foreign countries where they are unable to communicate with the native population because they are not able to speak the language of the country they are visiting (in this case Japanese). Thus, the native population comes off as mysterious and inscrutable, their customs strange and exotic, and their culture beautiful but ultimately unknowable. This irreconcilable gulf between the protagonists and the native population helps to highlight and symbolize the alienation and isolation that the protagonist feels toward the rest of humanity. It also leads to many humorous scenes when the protagonists are arbitrarily thrown into disorienting and/or stereotype-reinforcing situations, such as a protagonist finding himself taller than the rest of the Asian men in an elevator, or a protagonist being beset by an E.S.L. prostitute who no doubt caters to all sort of deviant sexual fantasies for the native men, fantasies that the foreign protagonist cannot begin to fathom. The movie is beautifully shot, full of soul, and the dialogue and interactions between characters ring true to life. The problem is that the movie falls into this whole obnoxious genre of a stranger in a strange land. It is the film's only flaw, but it is fatal to the integrity of the movie. Both Murray and Johansson burn brightly in their respective roles. Giovanni Ribisi delivers a brilliant performance as a preoccupied and distant husband. Even Anna Faris makes an endearing appearance as a vapid, giggly blonde starlet shooting a Matrix-like action flick in Tokyo. Not surprisingly, none of the Japanese characters are in any way developed. (This, of course, would entail treating the Japanese characters as actual three-dimensional people instead of movie props, a possible complicating dynamic that Coppola is never in danger of broaching.) Despite the skillfully executed performances, the actors and actresses still far short of the Herculean task of animating this lifeless material. If you want a more satisfying film based on the same themes of lonely people finding each other in a cold and indifferent world, watch the British classic, "Brief Encounter" written by Noel Coward and directed by David Lean. Instead of taking the easy way out and giving his character passports to an exotic and distant destination somewhere in the British Empire, Coward makes the decisive choice to couch the entire film in drab suburban England. The sense of estrangement he creates is all the more heightened precisely because he doesn't flinch from the unrelenting loneliness and seclusion that one can find in the mundane and trivial setting of one's own home and community.
Rating: 
Summary: The last minute
Review: All I heard about for months from my American friends was "Lost in Translation." As I live in Japan and actually played piano at the Park Hyatt in the New York Bar & Grill for several years, I finally broke down and bought the DVD. I was expecting to see something wildly different, not to mention gut-bustingly funny, based on the clever trailers. I must honestly say that I almost turned off the film twice - especially during the karaoke sequence. As Sofia Coppola said herself, it was basically like a little "home movie." She went to the places she liked, she had the "characters" (I use that word loosely) at the hotel she liked, and she kind of followed them around as they floundered about in Tokyo. There were distinct moments when I thought Bill Murray (whom I love) was ad-libbing the scenes. Also, as others have pointed out, there really isn't a plot. Things just kind of unfold, and I too, felt the actors were just "real" people -- not really acting, just standing in front of a camera and making it up as they went along. And yet... by the time the film got to the last minute (and I won't give it away for those who haven't seen it), I felt something incredibly deep and sad. I felt like they had each found the right person and yet they would be going back to the wrong lives. It was very powerful, and despite the adlib feel of the entire film, when it came to the end, both the actors conveyed the emotion beautifully (something two "real" people off the street could not do). Scarlett Johansson was so beautiful that it was worth watching the film just to look at her -- although I feel the opening shot was absolutely pointless and my first thought was "Is Sofia a lesbian?" I didn't get it at all. The cinematography was great, and living here in Tokyo, I know how hard it was to get some of those incredible shots. As far as the film being "racist" -- the only moment that I felt uncomfortable with was at the sushi restaurant. It seemed like a weak, stupid joke, and the comment about the "r's" and "l's" was dumb as well -- but, hello, people -- this is how some people think and talk, especially those who have absolutely no understanding about Japan (like the Olsen twins, who said their only Japanese reference was "Lost in Translation" -- open a book, girls!). One thing that people who rave about this film might consider doing is turning on the English subtitles. They might be shocked at some of the inexplicable lyrics in the final song. I don't know what Sofia was thinking, or if she was thinking at all. She probably just liked the song. I can't imagine she listened carefully to the words. At any rate, if you don't mind taking a sort of ambling roundabout, strange and lazy journey through Tokyo for a couple of hours, you should (if you feel anything at all) be struck at how the last moment comes up and grabs you and makes you realize that maybe there is a right person in this world for each of us, but we may not realize it until it's too late -- or, even worse, may not make the effort to change our worlds to be with that person.
Rating: 
Summary: A great movie, but maybe not for everyone
Review: Here's why I would recommend Lost in Translation: 1. Lost in Translation is beautiful to look at and I enjoyed the film-making methods. There were no elaborate sets, and most of the movie looks like could have been filmed with hand-held cameras in Tokyo. The scenery of Tokyo is VERY impressive. Bill Murray and Scarlett Johannsson look like they are being themselves rather than reading canned lines. 2. It avoids the Hollywood cliches that seem to infect most movies. Bob and Charlotte could easily have fallen in love and had a happy ending, and Coppola could have forced you to watch that for 2 hours. But she didn't. Personally, I'd prefer to watch a movie that more closely resembles how things actually happen. This is a film with subtleties, and the movie doesn't hit you over the head with its plot. 3. You also see 2 people finding some degree of happiness in a melancholy situation. If everything in your life is going perfectly, maybe this movie will drag you down a little. But if you've ever been in a difficult relationship, or been overseas without anyone to talk to, this movie should strike a chord with you. This film is not a comedy per se; most of the straightforward comedy can be found in the bonus materials. I think a reader could use the above information to determine whether it's worth seeing. It depends on what you're looking for, but I would definitely recommend "Lost in Translation".
Rating: 
Summary: Face it, this movie STINKS
Review: Anyone who gave this more than 3 stars has never seen a well thought out, intellectual film. There is nothing interesting or engaging about this film, except that Bill Murray does a good job acting. But he was much better in some of his other films. People who give this film 4 or 5 stars are the type of people who think Red Lobster is fine dining because all they ever eat is Filet O'Fish. I can only imagine what they'd do if they saw an Ingmar Bergman or Roman Polanski film.
Rating: 
Summary: Time well spent.
Review: I finally rented this movie, having nothing to go on but the trailer and a few positive reviews. I tend not to read too much about pictures until I've seen them; if I liked a film enough, I may obsess a bit and read up on what I can find about it. This one, I liked enough. The characters connected, and I appreciated both their situations. They are both flawed, but their flaws are what make them human, and they are, through each other, coming to grips with these shortcomings. One of my favorite lines in the movie is when Bob asks Charlotte, who is giving him the business over his dalliance with the hotel's lounge singer, "Was there no-one else to lavish you with attention?" A great put-down, and a very eye-opening moment about the limits of his investment in their relationship. Yet in the end, their bond is deep. As far as "getting" this picture or not goes, I have to think that people who don't have not perhaps experienced the crises faced by the two main characters, or else are of the "buck up, little camper" mindset that countenances little time spent in introspection about one's place in the world. Bill Murray's performance is too nuanced for anyone coming to this with a "make me laugh, funnyman" attitude. Though there are comedic bits, I didn't particularly see this as a comedy, and wasn't expecting to, either. Besides his name on the marquee, I'm not sure what led those viewers so disappointed with this to come to it expecting some sort of laff riot -- none of the reviews I've now read paint it as such. Scarlett Johannson was enthralling, particularly considering the fact that she turned 18 during the making of the film. Usually one sees older actresses playing younger, but she very successfully turns this formula on its head. I didn't see the film being particularly racist; the whole premise is that Bob and Charlotte are alone together in a very foreign place, and Sofia Coppola has taken steps to accentuate this. In most cases, the Japanese people seemed quite normal; it's just that they inhabit a completely different world than the two protagonists, and speak a language that neither comprehends. If your idea of a good time for two hours is watching things explode or laughing until you think you'll piss yourself, then by all means, stay away from this one. If, on the other hand, you can appreciate the crises we face coming to grips with who we are, what we are doing with our lives, and why we are doing it, then I would suggest that you will very much appreciate this small, thoughtful film (budget was between 2 and 3 million dollars, I gather). The dvd itself left something to be desired. The transfer was generally good, though in the beginning there was some break-up in the dark backgrounds. The sound was very good. A commentary would've been nice, and I found it odd that Ms. Johannson was so completely neglected in both the interview and "behind the scenes" pieces. Only one of the deleted scenes (a brief telephone interaction the morning after the karaoke party) seemed like it might've added anything. Hopefully, a "special edition" will be forthcoming at some point in the future.
Rating:
Summary: Lost in Hype
Review: "The Virgin Suicides" was a solid, though overrated, directorial debut for Sofia Coppola. Moody, ethereal and meaningful, it presented a promising director and one to follow closely. With "Lost in Translation", her sophomore effort, similar gloomy and melancholic atmospheres persist, yet the movie doesn`t quite work and fails to impress. Sure, the idea of two lonesome individuals in a foreign land developing a peculiar relationship (friendship? love??) is somewhat enticing and could lead to a good introspective drama, still this cinematic experience drags too much and never seems to take off. Bill Murray plays, well, Bill Murray, and Scarlett Johansson is cute but far from excellent on her role. Trying to develop subjects like loneliness, communication and life choices, "Lost in Translation" only suceeds in delivering an indulgent story with uninteresting characters, enticing cinematography, a well-crafted atmosphere and a very good soundtrack (Air (again), Death in Vegas, Jesus and Mary Chain, My Bloody Valentine`s Kevin Shields, and many others). This effort is a cheap way of discovering some places in Tokyo at night (offering a realistic, documentary-like style), but a movie should tell an absorbing story with memorable characters, and this one just falls flat. I`ll admit that it`s pretty and enchanting at parts, yet some nice visuals and neons aren`t enough to provide a (good) movie. Disappointing and sterile.
Rating:
Summary: makes you think.. makes you remember..
Review: makes you really want some sake..
no seriously. have you ever met someone who has always remained a part of your life, he or she is now out of your life not because of something that happened badly just that they were a temporary part of your life, maybe they were a drifter, maybe it was a punk, maybe you were on vacation, maybe , i mean it could have been so many things, maybe even someone you knew in school. someone you never saw again and probly didnt even know their last name or home phone number. weve all had atleast one of those.
for these two its no different. their both people who arent exactly satisfied with their lives and then they meet eachother and they fill apart of one anothers lives only to be separated jsut as they always knew they would be in 1 week so they simply get as much of one another as they can to hold on to for a lifetime. bill murray and scarlett johanson are perfect in this movie but i will say that this movie is not for the dim witted or someone who doesnt want to watch a movie where they have to think about their own lives deeply to feel anything from it by knowing what these 2 are going through and why they do things that they do. the people ive known that hated this movie i never took seriosly due to the fact that they believed "dumb and dumber" was classic entertainment so dont believe every piece of negative feedback to this movie. its worth the money...
Rating:
Summary: Atmospheric lyricism, and an acting tour de force by Bill
Review: It is surprising that this movie calls many to debunk the very quality of the atmosphere and poetic lyricism of its structure by saying that Sophia Coppola essentially doesn't stay in the lines while coloring an original piece of art of her own making. It never ceases to amaze me how we live in what is supposedly the freest country in the world and yet so many Americans are deathly afraid and even contemptuous of artistic freedom when they find it. Is LOST IN TRANSLATION short on plot? Yes. Are several scenes in which the actors portray their characters improvised? Yes. Are the actors playing real people in real situations making flawed but human choices? Yes. And I can't imagine the people who did not like the film for these reasons--the central ones that made me give this movie four stars--enjoying much of anything beyond the standard action movie fare, with its mind-numbing cinematic conventions that are older than dirt and half as exciting. Sophia Coppola--daughter of the master Francis himself--has made a fantastic exploration into human emotion and the depth of human longing and love with this film, in the frame of today's paradoxically plastic and ancient Tokyo. Scarlett Johansson gives a performance that belies her age, carrying the expressions of emotions that seem to have a wisdom about them in their intensity. And Bill Murray's work is reminiscent of Miles Davis; understated, cool, ragefully/triumphantly quiet at the perfect times, emotionally detached in his representation of passion and excitement at others. He deserved the Oscar nomination for this work, as did Sophia for an enigmatic screenplay that deceptively reveals as much realism as any Impressionist piece by Monet or any of the photography of Steichen. You won't need to try and enjoy this movie with an open mind or anything. Just see it without trying to control it, and watch what happens. It is sweet--not like candy, but like Peppermint Schnapps; with a bite. And it is beautiful.
Rating:
Summary: Different
Review: This is a different movie, but worth watching. Murray's unique sense of humor makes this special, but other characters are weak. He needed another top box office star with him in this one. A lot of good but a lot of mixed moral messages in this one.
Rating:
Summary: Read Several Reviews, Then Decide
Review: This film does bitter sweet and introspection and character growth very well. For all you idiots who just gave this ONE STAR and said there is no plot I have three words: GO TO COLLEGE. In college, you will have the option of taking a course on creative writing. In this class, if the teacher is any good, you will learn the difference between mass-market popular fiction and true art. Need I make connections to film? Many others have given good reviews, so I will not re-hash over the pros and cons. I will simply say this: the movie was good, with a few minor flaws (cliched poking fun at r and l mix-ups, the one instance of nudity..), and one MAJOR flaw: THE HUSBAND PLAYED BY GIOVANNI RIBISI IS TOTALLY AN UNBELIEVABLE CHARACTER, and even more unbelievable is how Johanssen's character would have ever married him. I liked the tender, open-ended ending. I personally believe that this film is about a turning point in the lives of both Murray and Johanssen's characters. Enough said. 4.5 stars!
| 
