Rating: 
Summary: Yeah, so I already reviewed this....
Review: After reading all the reviews on here good and bad, I have come to this conclusion.... This is OBVIOUSLY one of those movies that is split down the middle as far as audiences go. Hence the 3star average. But this does NOT make it a bad film in the least bit. Each well-thought out review good and bad seems to make sense to me in its points. So what have I learned about the movie? Well, personally I'd like to say, I really enjoyed it. I wasn't bored at all, and I don't think that there wasn't any acting involved as some have said. I'm sorry, but just because you are'nt reading from a script DOES NOT mean you're not acting. Improvisation anyone? I am an actor, and I know that most the time its what's not in the script that is where the acting comes from. Of course you have lines, but you have to figure out what the characters thinking and feeling and such. Haven't you ever heard actions speak louder then words? Most of our speaking comes from body language NOT words. Whether or not Johanssen and Murray read from a script is not important, they added life to these characters. Does this film go anywhere? Yes & No. In a way you could say it doesn't. However, the characters are going places, even if the plot isn't necassarily moving forward like in a well-paced thriller or whatever. The characters are in a place in their life when they're meeting people whom are making them realize things they never did before. Like how much they've treated their family like s*** or how much their spouse prefers a blonde airhead actress over her own intelligent and elegant beauty. This is the kind of movie that casual movie-goer probably wont enjoy. This is almost the kind of movie that could've been made 50yrs ago, before we had special effects spectacles and action epics. Before we had woman in scantilly clad outfits gracing the screen every ten seconds(okay so there is some skin in here, but at least its not for 2/3 of the film, only after 1min). I will admit there are a few rascist movies, but in a way I think that ALL people make those kinds of joke. British people always make jokes at americans expense, unfortunately its a part of life. Maybe they were just trying to display that, who knows. Maybe we just need to stop being so uptight? If we didn't complain about it, would it be rascism? Anyways, my main point is, you don't have to like this movie, and there is NO IN-BETWEEN with this movie, you'll either absolutely love it or absolutely hate it. Okay, so maybe a few will be like "I can take it or leave it...", but for most of is, its a love-or-hate affair. And for me, I love it, its one of my new favs... So whatever.... God Bless & *enjoy* ~Amy
Rating: 
Summary: Bored out of my mind
Review: I usually enjoy snail pace movies with minimal dialogue and long periods of "meaningful" silence, yet this movie was somehow... dry. And SLOW to the point of being irritating. Granted, there were a few gems (electric curtain scene in the morning, low shower nozzle, ad production scene, etc), but the rest wandered off and formed an incoherent jumble of garish colours, neon lights, night clubs and bad karaoke. Even the dialogue was disappointing, especially for an art movie ("life is hard... but it gets easier... marriage is hard too... one day you'll find yourself" - semi-direct quotes). One word about Murray's performance though: phenomenal.
Rating:
Summary: Reason why I like it.
Review: Well everyone on here either likes it or hates it, and the ones who hate it want a reason why we like it. Welp. I like it because it makes me smile. Bye bye
Rating: 
Summary: LOST IN WHY THIS IS A OSCAR WINNER.
Review: i give 2 stars, each for the actors. As for the rest
the film goes everywhere and yet nowhere and when it
it over the first thought in my mind is....."let's
go see a movie, its been such a long time". Boring,
with some interesting moments this is the most
hyped film of the year. I thought a second viewing
would change my mind. There is NO way i could sit
through this again, I realized after the first
10 minutes..............all over again!
Rating: 
Summary: Nothing was Lost in Translation!
Review: In my opinion, 'Lost in Translation' was a movie that will be difficult for me to forget, due to the acting of Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson. This movie is the best work that the vastly underrated Mr Murray has done since "Groundhog's Day," and I feel that Ms Johansson has a brilliant career ahead of her. True, in some ways this is a movie "Seinfeld," a movie about nothing: two lonely people meet in a foreign city where neither of them speaks the language, both of them are having problems within their respective marriages. Murray's marriage is obviously in trouble, and Johansson's is eventually going to need CPR. They spend some time together, nothing really seems to happen, except that it becomes clear to the viewer that they are indeed that overworked word: "soulmates." Sophia Cappola wisely resisted the temptation to allow these two to consumate their relationship, which would have changed the entire dynamic of the film. When they finally fell onto a bed, they ended up sleeping, with Murray tenderly holding Johansson's foot. To sleep in the presence of another person, and in this case someone you hardly know, is a brave act, an act of trust (thank you, Dianah Gabaldon, for pointing this fact out in your wonderful book "Outlander," which is also the story of two soulmates). At the end of the film, Murray's character seems to have awakened from a long sleep, which is a life where he has spent years just going through the motions. What will happen to the character when he leaves Japan is pure conjecture on the part of the viewer: I like to think he went home and told his wife that they needed to put their marriage on the right track, and was willing to live with the consequences if she failed to understand him. I also particularly enjoyed the sequence at the beginning of the movie where Murray, looking like a burnt-out case, was filming the liquor commercial. A once big action star, his career had fallen so low that he was reduced to making commercials abroad. That he had virtually checked out of his life was evident, reinforced by him fleeing the hotel bar when he was recognized by two American fans. IMO it is a shame that Murray did not win an Oscar for this subtle performance. Ms Johansson turned in an intelligent performance of an intelligent young woman who seemed to have married too soon, and to someone who did not appear to be her intellectual equal, a young man superficial enough to be dazzled by a pretty air-head. It is difficult for me to believe that she was not nominated for an Oscar for either 'Lost in Translation' or 'The Girl with the Pearl Earring.' I am confident her day will come!
Rating:
Summary: Good movie, for those who know them
Review: Ok, I'll admit, I was a little doubtful at first. I didn't get what direction it was going. But at the end, I realized that the climax I was waiting for wasn't going to happen. This movie is definetly not plot driven. And it's not suppose to be. I watched it again and absolutely loved it. It's artsy and well written with good acting and directing. If you want a good, meaningful film, rent Lost in Translation.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Movie for Self-Righteous Snobs
Review: I find it interesting that most reviews that give this movie 1 star bash the movie itself, while the 5-star reviews can't really explain why they liked it; they just bash the people who didn't like the movie. As one person so aptly explained, "you need cultere" (love the spelling!). Some people like to equate this movie to a good foreign film, but as a lover of foreign films myself, the storytelling in this one was extremely weak compared to just about anything I've seen from offshore. And why the high praise for the camera work -- average at best. Also, this was NOT a comedy by any stretch of the imagination. An all-around substandard cinema experience.
Rating:
Summary: I just dont get it
Review: Quite frankly, this movie was average. I am a person that usually loves independent or foreign movies, and that seemed to be when this movie came out the audience that it appealed to. i just dont get it. The only thing special about this film that I noticed was its attempt to be "realistic" and extremely melancholy boring feel, a type of portrait into the life of a buisnessman on a buisness trip or something (what could be more exciting!). There is next to no plot. Some people think that this is artistic or original. It may very well be original, because most film makers aren't stupid and/or brave enough to make a movie without a plot. I went into this movie open minded, I do to any movie that doesn't have Vin Diesel or Paul Walker in the cast, but this movie was just boring. It isn't what I would call intellectually stimulating. I suppose that you are kind of wondering at the end, but I didn't even care to try to find the "deepness". Sometimes I wonder that in movies like this if everyone likes them just because their friends and/or favorite critics do. Whatever I was extremely disappointed that this seemed to beat Big Fish in practically every award for comedy this year. David Lynch, Darren Aronofsky, Tim Burton, these are good film makers whos films stimulate the mind and have an orignal flair and a plot at the same time (yes, its possible). This movie, in my opinion, just didn't have it. It could have just as easily been a made for tv movie and the people who are giving it 5 stars now would be giving it 1 star for its cheesiness and bad filming. Big Fish deserved the awards.
Rating:
Summary: Aptly Titled
Review: From all the movie critic reviews, I thought I was getting either an artsy film or a comedy. I got nothing instead. This is the most pointless and boring film I've seen since "About Schmidt". I know where Coppola was going with the film, as I have been stuck alone in Tokyo and other foreign cities numerous times, but she just wasn't able to pull it off. The only thing she got right with this one was the quirkiness of modern Japanese pop culture. The plot was too loose, and the only funny scene was the one in the exercise room. This was an extremely disappointing film, particularly since it got so many rave reviews from critics.
Rating:
Summary: Quirky character study
Review: The movie trailer and even the DVD box promise a hilarious comedy. In truth, Sofia Coppola has created a nice companion piece to her brother Roman Coppola's film "CQ" in that two Americans abroad find friendship and potential romance despite many obstacles and differences. This is a character study in which Bill Murray gets to deliver an often subtle, serious portrayal of an actor in the twilight of his career. This isn't "What about Bob?" or "Ghostbusters." To be honest, I was exceptionally impressed with Murray, and could fully understand why he was nominated for the Academy Award. Scarlett Johansson does a fantastic job too, but can't outshine Bill Murray. I couldn't give this DVD 5 stars, because most of the extras are pointless. Coppola's interview reveals little about the film we couldn't figure out by watching it; the deleted scenes were deleted for a good reason, and the music video isn't very catchy. I usually prefer broad slapstick, but found myself enjoying this film more each time I saw it. I recommend it to anyone who wants to see a non-cutesy romantic film.
|
