Lost In Translation (Full Screen Edition)

Rating:
Summary: wonderfully lost...
Review: After I finally saw this movie, it haunted me for days - it's not tradionally plot-driven, but it is more subtle and lovely in its emotions than most films I've seen.

Rating:
Summary: Brilliantly acted but the film goes nowhere
Review: I really wanted to see this film. Mainly, like some people have said here, to see Bill Murray. Was I satisfied? Well yes and no. If I were to watch this movie before all the hype began to build I would have been giving you a 4 or 5 star review perhaps about how tragic this film entwines the characters but sadly when you put hype and Oscar nomination talk together it usually drowns out what might have been fun about the film in the first place. The film is brilliantly acted and it is really funny in places. As ever Bill Murray gets the best lines although Scarlett Johannsson does manage to get a few in herself and it does leave a distinct mark in your mind

So why 3 stars then? Well as I've said this film has completely been drowned out by all the critics' rave reviews of the film which is a shame really. What is understated could be passed off for underwhelming in some people's eyes. And I don't really blame them for thinking that. If this wasn't as talked about as it was - perhaps people could have enjoyed it a little more without some weight of expectation around it

I am glad though that the film picked up an Oscar. It deserved one if nothing else. It was, if anything, Oscar material.....but then usually I don't go for those types of movies ( American Beauty being a major exception ). I went to see it for 2 reasons - Bill Murray and I liked Sophia Coppola's last film - the fantastic Virgin Suicides.

So to cut it short I would recommend people watching this but I would also advise to lower your expectations - It isn't a major full blown piece - just a softly-softly film

Rating:
Summary: Coppola couldn't figure out what to write...
Review: hence, the whisper, that frustratingly unintelligible whisper. I am dismayed that this poorly-written movie was not only nominated for a screenplay award, but it actually WON! It is just ludicrous.

Murray did not deserve that nomination (yes, he was humorous, in that deadpan way of his; when Johanssen laughed, I laughed, but that is not enough to garner an Oscar nod ). But even more so, Coppola did NOT deserve those three Oscar noms, and to WIN for Best Screenplay is just plain WRONG.

This is exactly a two-and-a-half star movie -- not great, not terrible, just exactly there in the middle. It is no wonder that many of these four and five star customer reviewers don't just review the movie, they also insult other customer reviewers. They obviously lack heart, just like the movie.

Rating:
Summary: What writing?
Review: Best Original Screenplay? Give me a break! They just want to give an award for this film because of Francis Ford Coppola. Lost in Translation was not going to win Best Picture and Best Director; therefore, they just handed over the Best Original Screenplay award even when there was really no writing in the film. They gave the award away to Sofia Coppola in order to make history. This destroys the integrity of the Academy Awards because now I think Best Original Screenplay is not about the writing, but by the name of the writer. If it was Joe Blow who wrote the screenplay, the Academy Awards would have said: "Who cares!"

Lost in Translation sucks! Plain and simple--it sucked!

Rating:
Summary: Very good for insomniacs
Review: I actually farted during this film and enjoyed the odor more that the actual movie..a true story.

Rating:
Summary: This is not Bill Murray's best film
Review: Although a nice looking film this isn't even Bill Murray's best film to date. There are couple decent scenes, but it moves along very slowly at times. You have one character going though a midlife crisis and another with maybe a little neglectful husband. Both characters just seem to be bored with their lives and the only thing that makes this movie half interesting is they are in a different setting being in Japan. One reason why many critics liked this movie is because most critics are men over 40 which this will appeal to more than vast majority of people. A truely great movie can stand on its on merits and appeal to a wider variety of people. Sofia Coppola deserves some credit for shooting this in less than a month and writng the screenplay for a young director, but those things shouldn't come into play when juding how good a film really is. Scarlett Johansson looks good on screen and has a nice presence, but that could be just all those underwear shots they had in the movie. Just becasue a film is set in modern day Japan, "oh its so quirky and strange" doesn't make a great movie. There are better movies out there set in modern day Japan that never received this much critical acclaim one being Kikujiro. Some seem to have been Lost in the Hype on this one. No commentaries from Bill Murray, Sofia Coppola or Scarlett Johannson is also a negative in terms of the DVD.

Rating:
Summary: Search for intimacy
Review: Two people in techno-Japan have available modern technology that make intimacy unnecessary: automatically opening electric drapes in the morning (no chamber maid), cell phones, fax machines, Fed Ex, distance with exquisite manners, insincerity of advertising, etc.

The final scene shows a car driving through Tokyo's heavily populated areas with bridges and bypasses taking one passed people, traffic markings keeping people apart, automobile turn signal lights, electric directions so as to negate intimate human contact. In the midst of this isolation are two people who take the chance to be intimate.

The final dialogue is private: the ultimate in intimacy. The audience will never know what was said. It was delivered close to the ear in a whisper, no fax, no cell phone, no Fed Ex, and none of our business. If you don't tear up, your dead.

If you cherish intimacy, you will never forget this movie. It will haunt you forever.

Rating:
Summary: A movie filled with subtle humor
Review: First off, Lost in Translation is obviously not for everyone. Some people may not be able to connect with the movie due to the way it tries to convey its messages, and it does it in a way that most people (besides movie reviewers and actors) cannot recognize. Truly, because of my profession (I work in a video store), I have to listen to people come back and complain about how much they hated this movie. The reasons for dislike range from boredom to religious reasons (the two main characters are married, and during one scene they lie on the same bed, but nothing happens!) In my opinion, one should never judge a movie that is trying to be realistic due to religious reasons. The reason I actually docked this movie by one star is simply due to the fact that it really is not for everyone, and it can be somewhat irritating how slow it moves. However, this movie is absolutely great if you like slow, realistic movies.

I found that there are three basic elements to the theme/message of the story, this is just my take on it, so it differs with what a lot of people may say about it.

1) There is the setting. Our two main characters (Murray and Johansson) are two Americans that seem to be isolated in a foreign land, namely Japan. This is one element that I think a lot of people can connect to, especially if the person watching has been to foreign countries. There is the language barrier, and Murray finds himself being given surprising short translations from long, Japanese instructions. One has to wonder what was really said (hence the title), and this really adds to the feeling of isolation.

2)There is the fact that these two Americans actually meet and become very good friends due to similar circumstances in their lives. Anyone knows that having a good friend is important, but it becomes even more so when they are isolated in a foreign country. So Murray and Johannsen connect big time. Yet there are other factors that come into play here, a romantic involvement that can never be (as far as we know) because both are married. This presents a huge barrier that ends up being the third element of the movie.

3) Murray finds that he has really deep feelings for Johansson, and at the end of the movie you can see that Murray really needs to let these feelings become known, and he does it with a final act (I am not going to spoil it, but I think you can guess). Anyway, the end is the culmination of how Murray finds himself through feeling he has and expresses for Johansson.

Overall, the movie is not that exciting. If you want flaring guns and growling beasts, watch Underworld. This movie has a lot of subtle humor and it can convey quite a bit of meaning. However, if you do not really want to be thinking about the movie, and just want to be entertained, this movie is not really for you. I found it enjoyable but do not recommend it after a hard, stressful day of work.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: When I first finished seeing Lost in Translation, I thought to myself "Hmm, this was good, but not good enough for even an Academy Award nomination". But then after a long while, the more I thought about it, the more I began to like it.

Lost in Translation made me feel like if I lived the movie itself, that I spent an hour and a half with characters that I enjoyed being with in a country that they couldn't understand.

The direction by Sofia Coppola reminds me a bit of the style Francois Truffaut shot his movies, it almost feels like a documentary. Bill Murray and Scarlett Johanson were excellent in their roles and had a lot of chemistry inside their well developed characters.

Also it was a funny, interesting and inspiring film, but sadly it's very hard for me to recommend to everybody, it certainly is one of the most different offerings that I had ever seen for cinema and it surely is destined for backlashing now that is gathering an audience after it's academy award nominations, but I can definetly see why many would find it slow or boring. But for those who disliked initially I would recommend to revisit it.

In the end, this was one of my favorite films of 2003.

Rating:
Summary: yawn during it, can't-live-without after it.
Review: This is kind of movie that you yawn during it, but can't live without after you finish the journey. It's all about loneliness. General americans cannot understand the deepest loneliness. You think lonely is when you are alone in the house and talking to yourself? No, the deepest loneliness is when you are in a crowd and no one talks to you, no one touches you, and even no one looks at you. They are all occupied by their business and have no slightest interest in you. The loneliness is even deepened when the environment surround you are so beautiful, and you have no one to share with. When I watched the DVD alone in my apartment and had a couple laugh, I realized I made the right choice moving to the States, because I was there. I am too familiar with the loneliness. As such, I don't think this film will have any luck when release in Asia, because the film is just about the daily life of people there.