Rating: 
Summary: An excellent film with great performances
Review: Over 1,200 reviews so why add my own? Because I can't understand why the average rating is so low. This is a great movie but perhaps it's too sly and understated in a time when over-the-top is almost the rule in movies. Murray is dead-on and hilarious but he doesn't crack jokes or clown around much to make you smile, it's more subtle than that.Most of the humor is in the gentle mocking of Japanese culture and the two leads' reactions to it. Not in a mean-spirited way but there are aspects of their culture, especially the way they react to our culture, that are very amusing. This was understated, too, and well-handled since it could easily have become too mocking. Johannson is also great, this was the first time I'd seen her in a film and I was SO glad they didn't cheapen their friendship with any Hollywood-style romance. She's far too young for him and they both know it but they also are aware that it's unfortunate because they would have made a good couple. I dreaded the sight of them going the May-December route right up until the last moment and then I almost applauded. I don't have any complaint to make about this film except that I wish we could see these characters again. All in all, this is a great film with moving performances, great cinemetography and just the right mix of humor and pathos. It's easy to see that writer/director/producer Coppola was paying attention when her father made movies.
Rating:
Summary: great movie
Review: I gotta say, this is a really good movie. I liked this for a lot of reasons. Scarlett Johansson is a great actor. Bill Murray is a great actor. The movie takes place in one of the most interesting places in the world... JAPAN! :) The whole idea of the movie, two lost people trying to find themselves, is awesome. I highly recomend this movie.
Rating:
Summary: The ending, the most important part of a story!
Review: The acting was wonderful first of all! Secondly, as I have said in previous reviews, the ending is the most important part of the story ... this film has an awesome ending!
Rating: 
Summary: Better Than Ambien
Review: I still have not learned my lesson:if the film critics praise a movie I will probably hate it. I tried watching this movie twice; both times I fell asleep. I understand there are those who find this film beautifully realistic and a glimpse of people as they really are, but why watch a movie for that - just go sit on a bench at Wal-Mart and observe life as it walks by you. I found no point to this movie and it was simply BORING! I figured I had missed something the first time I had fallen asleep so I watched it again. Out like a light about 3/4 of the way through. This movie is the best sleep aid on the market!! Better than Ambien! You observe real life everyday - let Hollywood make exciting films. We want to be entertained.
Rating:
Summary: Terribly boring
Review: While I see the adulation here for "a masterpiece" and "a movie that makes you think", all I saw was two people feeling sorry for themselves and comisserating in Tokyo. Let me break down the plot for you - there is no plot. The whole thing is like a Seinfeld episode without humor. I think that all of the excitement over this movie was due to the director's last name. If she were Sophia Kent or Sophia Adams or anything besides Sophis Coppolla, this film would've never been made. It's got her name attached and so people think it must be great. They drum up some intellectual mumbo-jumbo about how meaningful the whole thing is and then a bunch of morons jump on the bandwagon, not wanting to be left behind and thought of as unsophisticated. Save yourself two hours of your life and do something - anything - besides watching this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Bill Murray.... yes... rest...no
Review: Alright now most reviews I saw here that were negative about the film were actually short and didn't appear to have any thought put into them at all, whereas the positive reviews were the exact opposite, I am going to try and clarify why I really did not think this movie was all that impressive and definitely not all it was hyped up to be. First of all I do believe that this movie is extremely longwinded, it takes forever to get from one scene to another it seems, up to the point where you want to reach through the screen and literally push the characters into the next scene. The movie failed to entertain me for almost the entire time that I sat through it. It never got my excited where I wanted to see what was going to happen next. Yes the scenery is amazing and it makes you want to go visit downtown Tokyo straight away, and of course Bill Murray delivers one of the best performances of his life-time and when you are talking about an actor like Bill Murray that is saying something, he is truly phenomenal in this role but even he cannot force me to watch this movie again. Even though I believe that his acting was great I do believe that the Academy made the right decision in passing him over and giving the Oscar to Sean Penn just because Mystic River was a much better movie.(...) believe everyone got caught up in the hype with this movie, does it look great at times. Yes it does. Does Bill Murray deliver one of the best performances of his career and does he literally drag the movie around on its back to make it even barely watchable...yes he does...is this Sophia Coppola's best movie? Not even close, if you want to see what I consider to be her finest work then be sure to check out the Virgin Suicides, which although isn't a feel-good movie is a very powerful work of art. In my humble opinion this movie was overrated and not all it was hyped up to be, however you might enjoy it...to each his own.
Rating:
Summary: Film snobs unite against the uneducated neanderthals...
Review: I am pretty disgusted with the majority of the 5-star reviewers here, who relish in pointing out how the rest of us common folk just can't comprehend the "real meaning" behind this film; that we're just not worthy enough to understand the deep emotional complexity that is right there before our eyes. Give me a break. Can't you accept that different people have different taste in movies and leave it at that? I'm very sorry if I can't match your superior level of sophistication, but please permit me to put forth my opinion anyway. Two of my all-time favorite films are Neil LaBute's "In the Company of Men" and "Your Friends and Neighbors," both of which are comprised almost entirely of dialogue and nothing else. There are no car chases, fight scenes, fart jokes, or gratuitous sex in either one. They were also shot in an eavesdropping, "fly on the wall" manner. All of this makes them very similar in style to "Lost in Translation." But the big difference is that LaBute's films had original ideas and engaging characters, while Sofia Coppola's doesn't. The whole "Two strangers in a strange land meet and find happiness together" plotline became a cliche before Bill Murray was born. And many of the other elements don't ring true at all. For instance, Charolette's husband John, who has just gotten married, suddenly becoming interested in an obviously airheaded blonde bimbo actress played by Anna Faris. Even if it were a purely physical attraction, and while Faris is certainly a beautiful actress, there is no man or woman I know who would prefer her to Scarlett Johansson. Ditto that for the lounge singer that Bob Harris decides to sleep with after just meeting her. Bits like these feel convoluted and manufactured in order to provide even more cliched moments like the jealous wife, and the moment when she knocks on her newfound companion's door just in time to catch him with --GASP!-- another woman, which of course leads to the obligatory tearful argument followed by the kiss-and-make-up scene. Basically, everything in this movie has been done many, many times before, which makes Sofia Coppola's Best Screenplay Oscar seem pretty baffling. And while both the lead actors do an o.k. job, there's nothing in the performances that makes the material any more interesting than it sounds. As another reviewer pointed out, there seems to be a big difference in opinion between those people who saw "Translation" in a theater and those who watched it on video, so I think it would be wise to lower your expectations if you're planning on picking this one up.
Rating:
Summary: SLOW and DULL
Review: The movie is slow, almost to the point of no story at all. If you don't like intolerable cruelty then you won't like this one either. I don't know why people kept saying its good, I would rate it only two star. It is just a story of two people met in Japan and they were bored to death and trying to entertain each other till friendship is develop. And that was it. There is no point to the story. No action, no big drama, its just DULL. Just plain DULL.
Rating:
Summary: A Quietly Brilliant Film
Review: The last time, at least that I'm aware of, that Bill Murray tried serious acting was in "The Razor's Edge." I thought it was a good film, but he was excoriated by most critics and fans thinking they were coming to see a standard Bill Murray vehicle. Fortunately, this time around he has received richly deserved accolades for his performance. "Lost in Translation" essentially follows Bob Harris (Murray) and Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson), as they both find themselves lost and adrift in Japan. Bob is a fading action star, who apparently is past his heyday and takes a job promoting a Japanese liquor for $2 million. Little hints along the way indicate he probably could use the money. It appears he has been appearing in plays and probably making decent but not necessarily great money. His wife is on a remodeling binge, which seems to hint at the fact that the big paycheck is something she has looked forward to. But Bob is more troubled by his life in general than by financial matters. He feels disconnected from his wife and children and can't seem to find a way to re-connect with them. He's in the midst of a midlife crisis and has no idea what to do about except withdraw into himself. Charlotte is in somewhat similar straits. She is questioning her two-year marriage to a photographer who has brought her along to Japan for a shoot but he is gone much of the time. She feels no connection to her husband and, worse, doesn't know what she is supposed to do with her life. Bob and she eventually meet and become friends. soul mates in fact, and writer/director Sophia Coppola wisely avoids what nearly any other writer and director would have done with the relationship-throw them in bed together. Instead the two develop a far more intimate relationship as they wander Tokyo and face an impending separation when Bob must return to America. This is very much a thinking person's film. There's no real action (well, at one point they are chased out of a bar by a bartender toting some kind of weird gun) but you remain engrossed. The two leads give incredibly nuanced performances. Murray in particular is brilliant in his restraint, as on more than a few occasions he has the opportunity to revert to his standard goofy/funny guy act and doesn't. This is one of the best films I have seen in the past year. I realize its not for everyone, some will consider it too slow or lacking in plot development, but they obviously will have missed the fact that sometimes a film can just be about how lost we feel in life.
Rating:
Summary: Beautiful, serene, perfect.
Review: From the sweeping and understated opening shots of Tokyo to the painfully real relationship depicted therein, this film is moving and, in a way, comforting. I didn't know much about this film before watching it, and I spent the entire two hours stunned. How could a screenwriter/director have such an understanding of people and how we operate? This movie is about reality. Period. There is no rising action and climax in real life, no reveting fight scenes, no supermodels and no car chases. If you can live with a movie that brings a reality close that Hollywood so often chases away - great. If not, do not see this movie. Escapism is not the game here.
| 
