Rating: 
Summary: Very Lost In Translation
Review: What is wrong with this movie is that it desperately wants to be profound, but it feels like Sofia Coppola wrote herself into the corner and didn't know how to solve it. In the end, it seems, she was unable to solve it even for herself, so she leaves the ending an enigma, and not even an engaging one. There was no climax to this movie, and there was next to no plot. Certainly a movie could still be a great picture without either of these things, but to do so it must convey SOMETHING to make you feel better for having watched it, and Lost In Translation failed at that.The little plot this film did have was disjointed, which, while adding to the overall feeling of confusion, left me feeling a disconnect with the characters and their circumstances, It jumped around without any regard for scene continuity. This did not create the feeling of being "lost" so much as it created a feeling of a lack of direction and attention to detail: The "friends" Charlotte knew in Japan she never spoke to or appeared to know, and she of course abandoned them without thought, the two characters connection that jumps to familiarity with hardly a conversation, Charlotte asking Bill Murray's character he can come out with her that evening without telling him her name, room number, what time, or where they should meet, and then the sudden appearance of Bob in her hotel room making himself at home. Because of scene discontinuity and flat dialogue, the characters feel one-dimensional and do not inspire me to feel any connection with them, even though I have felt the emotions they seemed to be struggling with many times. There are a lot of moments in the film that almost allow this connection, but they are too few and far between to get any real sense of the people involved, and we see the main characters much in the same way that they seem to see Tokyo: far removed and unrelating. Part of the characters' one-dimensionality seems to come from Sofia Coppola's heavy-handed version of "subtlety." An example is the obvious comparison between the way Charlotte's husband reacts when the pretty blonde approaches him, and the way Bob Harris reacts in almost the identical setup. If the movie's plan is to be a subtle portrait, which I can only assume is the purpose, then I would prefer it not to hand feed me such details, but let me discover them for myself. This kind of writing seems to have come directly out of some beginning screenwriter's handbook, not from the hand of a genius. Overall, the movie manages to express the feeling that you get when you're stranded in a foreign place, but it failed to take that feeling anywhere. Yes, there is some wonder, some oddity and confusion, some loneliness and introversion, an assessment of your life especially compared to what's going on around you, and an amplification of your own thoughts because you're isolated. But what of that? What is the insight, the revelation? What makes this movie important or worth wasting 2 hours for? We've all felt that, we all know it. Going there with a couple of uncharismatic characters was not worth my time or my ten bucks. It's like taking a 35mm picture of a strange couple in front of a sunset. In the first place I don't know the couple so I don't really care to have their picture, and in the second place, the 35mm picture couldn't capture what the sunset was really like, especially if I've seen it first hand. You need to give me something more, and Sofia Coppola didn't in this film.
Rating: 
Summary: A classic love story and a trip to Japan!
Review: What to do while watching: Try to guess what's going to happen. Meanwhile, don't miss the savvy sound track and fascinating glimpse of Japan What to eat while watching: Sake from one of those square, wooden cups. If you don't own one, you could make one from scrap two-by-fours. How hard could it be? Some people don't like it. For them it's not enough, somehow. Maybe it's too haphazard, too free from uproar and hysteria, too much like regular life. Maybe these are the people who feel that movies should be something far bigger than life--more like reality TV. For them, Lost in Translation is exactly that. That the Academy-Award-winning screenplay of Sofia Coppola hinges to some degree on an inaudible line might throw off viewers who like things to be simple and obvious. Your friend Gooden tends to get grouchy, however, when a writer or director holds my hand too much. I don't want to see a family reunited knowing that I'm expected to cry. I like when a story ends before all plot lines are drawn to a close, like the final scene in Laurel Canyon where the protagonist sinks into the swimming pool, questions unanswered, or Memento where you leave the theater unsure what happened or countless other examples. I like to reach the end of the film wondering about the characters in their world. Especially when I'm watching a DVD and I have time to look at the bonus features, which often adds fuel to my imagination's fire. Lost in Translation is very subtle. There are several transcendent moments that tie back into the title without elbowing you in the side. Coppola's other work The Virgin Suicides stands in contrast. That film was heavy handed in all regards with broadly stereotyped characters doing things that were as predictable as they were melodramatic. Obviously Coppola has matured as a writer. The uncanny Bill Murray shines as Bob Harris, an aging movie star well into the product-spokesperson phase of his career. He travels to Japan to film whiskey ads and finds himself sunk into deep loneliness. He does not like hobnobbing with the sundry Westerners who recognize him and around the Japanese majority in Japan, he is awkwardly blocked by linguistic and cultural barriers. In the same hotel is Charlotte (the fetching Scarlett Johansson), new wife of an up-and-coming young photographer. She's come with him to Japan because she's just earned her philosophy degree from Yale and doesn't know what else to do with herself. Note that Johansson is a transparent, or at least translucent, doppelganger for Coppola herself, a young woman, born to a leisurely life, trying to find herself. Such is the woman we saw at the awards petulantly fidgeting with her Oscar. Charlotte is clearly a brainy character. She takes herself by day into Japan to discover its mysteries and wonders. Nevertheless, she too is lonely with her husband gone most of the time. In a subtle moment, she glances at some polaroids of her husband and herself. In these photos, he is looking out of the picture at the camera, not at Charlotte. She notices this at a significant time, but the moment is simply what it is: no attention is called to the detail, and, in fact, the Mrs. didn't even notice it. Both Bob and Charlotte are plagued with insomnia, and they take to drinking in the hotel bar. It isn't long before they meet and, charming as they both are, they start to hang out. They drink together and eventually have a nighttime adventure when Charlotte goes to visit a Japanese friend from college and Bob tags along. The all-night party takes them from place to place in a dizzying montage of Japan's hip cultural circles. At last, the two fall asleep only to repeat the adventure the following night. The story sets up for a torrid love tryst between the young Charlotte and the mature Bob. In many movies, something explosive would have to occur, bringing sadness, regret, craziness, murder, or something to grip the "gimme-it-straight" type of audience member. But this isn't most movies. Both characters have their marriages, challenges and all, and Bob deftly sublimates the sexual tension. The friendship, therefore, is very touching. The two teach one another very lovely and ephemeral lessons. I call this movie a classic because it has a sense of innocence and simplicity that I associate with golden-era films. There's an earnest attempt to portray several characters, two in the middle, with all their foibles. It's a film like this that one can enjoy like a good book. It can envelope you and change you with a soft touch. I look forward to Coppola's next work.
Rating:
Summary: Impressive
Review: One of the secrets of a good film with a personal vision is that people who share that vision will love, people who do not it (or who'd be better served by The Terminator or Titanic) will hate it, but that it will provoke strong responses in all of them Lost in Translation has over 800 comments, which are mostly either 5 stars or 1. Extreme enthusiasm or anger fit to be tied. One thing I don't understand is the people who use the term "art film" as an insult. There are no art films. There are good films and bad ones. This is one of the great ones. Looking at the negative reviews you can see the pressure placed on some film-makers to conform to the pap mill. Luckily Sofia Coppola doesn't. Hopefully she never will.
Rating:
Summary: NOMINATE THIS??? - PLEASE ALLOW ME TO GIVE 0 STAR.
Review: I AM REALLY DISGUSTED WITH THE WHOLE lost in translation (NON-CAPITALIZED LETTERS... ON PURPOSE) AFFAIR. THAT IT WAS NOMINATED ON SEVERAL CATEGORIES WAS BAD ENOUGH. THAT IT WON ON ANY CATEGORY... UMBELIEVABLE! PLEASE, ANYONE WHO LIKED THIS UMBELIEVABLY BAD MOVIE, SEE IT IN YOU HEART TO GIVE ME BACK THE $3.00 I SPENT ON RENTING THIS MOVIE. I DON'T NEED THE MONEY. ACTUALLY, IF YOU REALLY DID ENJOY THIS MOVIE - WHICH I DOUBT - AND DECIDE TO GIVE ME BACK MY $3.00, WRITE A CHECK TO YOUR FAVORITE CHARITY AND THEN LET ME KNOW, PLEASE WRITE TO ME AT FUFUPAME@PEOPLEPC.COM. PLEASE!
FOLK: CRAPOLA IS CRAPOLA EVEN WHEN BY COPPOLA!
Rating:
Summary: Pleeeze, Bill Murray is NOT funny
Review: Bill Murray cannot be considered a comic, this man is not, has never been and will never be funny. OK, so you insist he is funny? Did anybody see the David Letterman interview with Ms Coppola? She brought in a tape of Murray doing some kind of dance, was that supposed to be funny? I didn't find it even slightly humorous. Murray sucks as a comic.
Rating:
Summary: Lost in life
Review: I enjoyed the film a great deal, and apparently for some of the reasons that many other people disliked it... the lack of plot line, and the less then in depth character development. Yes there was little plot, but isn't that the point. When we get lost in life, we lose our own plotline so to speak. Bill Murray's character Bob Harris is in just that position. His career has peaked, and he's no longer angry about it, just accepting. The magic/excitement has gone out of his marriage, and he knows that his children have something to do with it, so its not bad, just different (because he loves having children - "They are the best people you will know"). If he were at home in a more comfortable environment his state would be covered up in activites, friends, family, etc. I mean why did he go golfing in the middle of the film? To try to find something familiar that he could grab hold of. Unfortunately for him it doesn't work either. It is only with this young woman (well played by Scarlett Johansson), also lost, that he finds some solace, as they share their perceived problems. The fact that they don't have any real reason to be upset, doesn't matter either (I mean who wouldn't like to go to Tokyo for 2 million dollars to advertise whiskey). It is self perception that colors our lives, and each of these characters feels emptiness, and it is only their common feelings, and culture that brings them together. Ultimately their friendship keeps each grounded in a foreign land. In my personal favorite movie moment, Bill Murray states just that in the excruciating version of More than This, the Roxy Music song. He looks at her and sings that there is nothing more then this, and in that moment Bob Harris means just that. As far as the depth of character, how well do we know each other after a few days. I was crazy about my wife, but what I knew about her was quite superficial as compared to the 13 years we have been together. I know I would like to know more about each character, but I definitely knew enough about each of them to care about them. If I knew more about them, honestly I may like them less. For example how old are his children or wife, compared to him. Does he have a previous family that he left? He is an actor after all. We could come up with the same type of things for Charlotte. Rather I want to know the characters from the few days they show us. It is those people that I feel for. I agree with the few who have written that it doesn't matter what he whispered to her at the end. I, like the one previous reviewer, can't put it in words, but it works for me. They are connected, and that is what matters. I can't speak highly enough of Bill Murray's performance. I did not see Mystic River, so I cannot compare his performance to Sean Penns, but did see Pirates, and I feel that his performance was at least as good as Johnny Depps. I will continue to see his movies, because he is an outstanding actor, something I would never have thought possible fifteen years ago. The scenes in Tokyo as almost all have agreed were wonderful to behold. I really liked this movie, and do recommend it, but understand that like anything else it is not for everyone.
Rating:
Summary: A Pre-Adultery Game on Film
Review: I was really excited to see how Bill Murray had invested more of his life and brilliance for the globe. Unfortunately, despite his enjoyable tell-tale acting, the essence of the film and slight plot subtract from his persona. Review after review states the lack of plot owned by "Lost in Translation". As a movie buff, I've slowly conditioned myself to look past plot issues or undertone disagreements to eye the ways the movies are brought to life, to discover the beauty in cinematography and direction. Unfortunately, although as stated before that the plot is minimal, it is that very fact of minimality that causes the viewer to be caught up in it and to be "entertained". (entertained because of its uncommon edge.) I couldn't enjoy the plot because it was slow and weak, and I couldn't enjoy the film aspect because of the slow and weak plot. I am greatly surprised that this film won an Oscar, and even more surprised that so many people agree that it should have won. Not only do all these factors deny it favor, but the essence of character development is that of life dissatisfaction and looking for ways of spicing up life by sneakiness and living on the edge of betrayal. It is sad that the two main characters are concerned with nothing short of a pre-adultery game, and it amazes me that more viewers aren't repulsed by the thought of one of the characters being their own spouse or family member. What a sad day it is when that can work it's way into culture and be accepted as a masterpiece.
Rating:
Summary: Comedy it is not!!
Review: I thought this was a poor excuse for a movie, what a waste of Bill Murray's talents. I had a hardtime staying awake in this one. Basically, a snoozer!!
Rating:
Summary: Lost Time I Want Back
Review: I would rather have my teeth cleaned then watch this again.
Rating:
Summary: Lost My $18.00....
Review: Lost the time it took to watch this plotless wonder.
Lost the Oscar (thankfully.)
Almost "lost" my mind.
Please, choose another movie!
| 
