A subtle masterwork from a sophomore effort

Rating: Null/10 (27 September 2003)

When "Lost in Translation" opens, Bill Murray is riding in the back of a hotel limousine along the Ginza Strip, looking like the jet-lagged visitor to Mars that he feels like. The hyper-bright and colorful animated signs surround him, but he's simply too groggy to comprehend, much less construct defenses against them. A stranger in a strange land, indeed.
The limousine arrives at the hotel and, in an almost throwaway moment the tone is set for the rest of the film: a hotel employee, wearing white gloves, carefully waves the limousine into position, as if the safety of a jet full of passengers depended upon his direction. Although the car stops a little short of his intended placement at the curb, the "conductor" waves "stop" after the fact, as if he intended it all. Perhaps this was an homage to the great director Jacques Tati, but regardless, it is as hilarious as it is subtle. Those who perform, do so without really satisfying, no matter how earnestly they try.
Bill Murray's character--"Bob Harris"--is clearly modeled on Clint Eastwood, if Eastwood had stopped starring in films in the late '70s rather than going on to be a good dramatic actor and fine director. More about this later. "Bob Harris" is a "movie star" who hasn't made a film in years, but has joined the ranks of so many other Western performers, making their living as pastiches of their former selves, making appearances and shilling products in Japan. Bob Harris has been brought to Tokyo to film a few commercials for the giant distillery Suntory, to promote their (rather characterless) whiskey. Being paid $2 million for the ignominy of parodying his past roles barely makes up for the bruising to his ego, but temporarily escaping his unhappy marriage is a definite bonus.
While staying in the hotel, he happens to meet a 20-something American woman ("Charlotte") who has come to Japan with her vapid husband, a trendy fashion photographer. Bob Harris recognizes in her the unspoilt beauty of youth and innocence he (and his harridan wife) lost long ago. She sees in him a charming, sophisticated rogue who is her intellectual equal--in short, the man her husband will never be. Their relationship develops in fits and starts, by intention but mostly by accident, as they face insomnia, alienation and the feeling of redundancy.
About the Eastwood connection: not only is "Bob Harris" clearly a tough action movie star, he even catches himself on late-night TV in a regrettable movie from the '70s where his sidekick is an ape--a transparent reference to Eastwood's flick "Every Which Way but Loose". Suntory has hired Murray to pitch their product, but no matter how he tries to please the commercial's director, he cannot follow his lengthy Japanese instructions. Likewise, "Charlotte" finds herself unable to perform her role as wife and recent college graduate (with a degree in philosophy), as life has neglected to specify exactly what it expects of her.
Coppola has said that she wrote the part (she wrote, directed and co-produced this film) with Bill Murray specifically in mind. In this, she took tremendous risk, as she did not know if he would accept or appreciate the role. Her casting--and his acceptance--of the part was a doubly-serendipitous move. It's hard to imagine anyone other than Murray in the part, and I've never seen him do more with a role. When one thinks of him in roles other than broad comedies, "The Razor's Edge" usually comes to mind. Murray did the best he could with Maugham's story, but it was not the ideal vehicle for his dramatic abilities. "Lost in Translation" however, is that vehicle. If he never does another dramatic film, this would be as good of a role for him to be remembered for as he could hope for. He is simply marvelous in it.
Scarlett Johanson is luminous and fragile, while maintaining a certain underlying strength. Perhaps her role could've been filled by one of a number of different star or starlets, but the fact that she isn't TOO pretty or too well-known works in the film's favor. I cannot fault her performance.
There is a hilarious running gag about the lounge performers at the hotel. The usual entertainment is a female singer and male pianist who call themselves "Soulsalito". Most people won't get this, but the woman performer must be based on Maria Muldaur, the singer who had a hit song with "Midnight at the Oasis", back in 1973. Muldaur lives just a couple of miles north of Sausalito, of which "Soulsalito" is a pun. Beyond the physical resemblance to Muldaur, the singer even warbles "Midnight at the Oasis" in a scene in the hotel room. Surely Sofia Coppola met Ms. Muldaur at a party in Marin County, where her father, Francis Ford Coppola often visits friends. But I digress.
"Lost in Translation" has moments of great beauty, such as a scene set in a Shinto temple complex where Charlotte watches a wedding procession and a heartbreaking gesture where the groom extends his hand to help his bride up the temple steps. Blink, and you'll miss it, but it's there as a point of reference for the hopes encapsulated in new relationships and fresh love. There are also moments of hilarity, from a scene set in a strip club to a brilliant scene of Murray swimming in the hotel pool while an aquatic exercise class takes place nearby. This is a film so well-balanced as to be uncatagorizable as "comedy", "drama" or anything else.

I strongly disagree with other reviewers who claim that "Lost in Translation" or its characters criticize or lampoon the Japanese people. This is an unfairly shallow reading of the film. I found great affection for the Japanese people expressed here. Making a joke about the Japanese pronunciation of English does not constitute criticism, and the jokes expressed by the actors are more a reflection of their own feelings of alienation than anything else. In fact, the film is much more critical of American culture, from its cult of celebrity to its institution of loveless marriage. Interestingly, the more damning the review, the more poorly it was written. Draw your own conclusion from that.
This is not to suggest that "Lost in Translation" doesn't have a few faults, but that some entirely missed the boat on the tone of the film, and then disparaged it for not meeting their expectations. It's like criticizing "My Dinner with Andre" for not being a cooking show. If you are expecting a comedy (which in Hollywood today can only mean "screwball comedy") or fast-paced entertainment, don't bother going to see this film. There's plenty of crap being pumped out by Hollywood that's sure to satisfy you. The fact is that "Lost in Translation" is a film for a more sophisticated audience, those who have the patience for subtlety, for carefully nuanced characters with actual character development, and those transcendent moments of "a-ha!" that come so infrequently these days.
Sofia Coppola proves without a doubt that she is more than a one-shot wonder (with "The Virgin Suicides"). Hopefully we will have many more such films from her.