The truth about this ethnocentric BRIEF ENCOUNTER

Rating: Null/10 (20 July 2007)

The truth about this one is that the title makes the film. It has a couple moments thanks to Bill Murray and the architecture of Toyko, both the social architecture and the cultural misunderstandings. Sofia's films have become guilty pleasures for me, where I expect to see lovely, thoughtful women peering in wonder out of moving vehicles, where Kirsten Dunst with fireworks in super 8 somehow becomes cinematic. (Doesn't everything in super 8 look pretty though?)
LOSTR IN TRANSLATION is quite overrated. I'm afraid this is no more than an ethnocentric, weak BRIEF ENCOUNTER (David Lean, 1945). This is yet another unextraordinary film by a mediocre director in a cinematic setting. Sofia's characters depict Americans as ethnocentric, questioning individuals, self-consumed and undeservedly smug, who bond over not understanding a culture instead of exploring what life in it may be about, rather they choose to romp about and play in it. How did she get away with it? What about excellent, sensitive filmmakers like Debra Granik (DOWN TO THE BONE, 2003).
This comedy sadly relies on old stereotypes of the Japanese, and what is cinematic about it should be credited to Tokyo's character, which lends the film a certain style. Scarlet becomes a beautiful anomaly amidst an fascinating culture, wandering about Japanese architecture, photographed as if she were in a fashion spread. She plays the character thoughtfully. Although Sofia admits she was influenced by Wong Kar Wai, her treatment of Tokyo nightlife has been depicted in Naruse's films, such as WHEN A WOMAN ASCENDS THE STAIRCASE (1960). When Sofia stepped up to accept her award, she claimed Godard, Antonioni, and Kar Wai as part of her film education and in an interview, admitted she was inspired by IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE(2000). I'm afraid I don't see any of such influences in her work. Judging by the lack of sensitivity she showed toward the Japanese people, Toho's involvement in MARIE is a wonder.
The comedy is made up of cheap shots, heavily reliant on misunderstandings of cultural differences. The highlight was seeing a clip from one of my favorite scenes in LA DOLCE VITA (1960), which she may have well just thrown in out of context in order to show some good taste. I'm afraid I would give have to give any award to the cinematic setting of the film. How could anyone lose with My Bloody Valentine or the Jesus and Mary Chain? It's nearly impossible. There is little sign of auteur worthy talent. Ao how did she get nominated again? We all thought about the politics. Where there slim picking among those recognized by the board that year? Speak out. There are some Oscar worthy female directors out there who have done outstanding work and not received a nomination. It really made Hollywood look bad.