Simple, yes. Sensitive, maybe. Lost, definitely.

Rating: Null/10 (4 January 2004)

Having lived in Tokyo for a number of years, I was truly interested in seeing this movie.
I came out of the movie theater feeling that I had received nothing from this movie. I am usually a very lenient viewer and rarely have I had this happen, but it did.
**Possible General Spoiler**
Charlotte and Bob are feeling lonely and lost in their marriages, and being in an intimidating, foreign metropolis isn't helping too much. However, the problem that I had with Bob, and to a lesser extent, Charlotte, was that they do not seem to be exerting any real effort to communicate with their spouses. How can being "Lost in Translation" be blamed without any effort to communicate in the first place?
I can understand that Bob and Charlotte finding in each other a safe haven from what they are running away from/running into, but if they are sensitive enough to feel that from each other, I would feel that they would have been sensitive enough to address their communication difficulties with their spouses in the first place, and not have to have it come out in a deluxe hotel (how unfortunate!) in the middle of Tokyo.(Bob, you're the one who forgot the birthday!)
Next question- why was this taking place in Japan anyway and not say, Hong Kong or Shanghai or Bangkok? I would believe that the setting would be one the most important aspects of writing, and there should be a reason for the setting to be in Tokyo. However, from what I have seen in this movie, the only answer that I can guess is that Sophia Coppola wanted to show in her movie some of the sights that she was intrigued in when she had previously been sightseeing in Tokyo. I felt throughout the movie as if I were being forcefully being shown a relative's slideshow of their recent travels.
I have nothing against Tokyo or Japan or the Japanese People. This would be farthest from the truth. Conversely, I am actually quite sad for the way that Sophia Coppola only is able to show the superficial, culturally cliche, and sometimes, rude portrayal of Tokyo/ Japan/ Japanese People. Due to okay cinematography (I say okay and not good, as it really is Wong Kar-Wai/Christopher Doyle without the coolness and the rain), on the surface it looks as to be a decent portrayal of Tokyo, but underneath, Sophia Coppola isn't too far from Breakfast at Tiffany's and Mr. Yunioshi's portrayal by Mickey Rooney-funny, maybe, but quite rude and offensive if you really think about it.
Really,
a call girl asking to "lip" (trying to say "rip") her stockings-
The kinky bar with the nude lady doing calisthenics, yes, as common in Tokyo as common as the orgies in Eyes Wide Shut are found in New Jersey-
A doctor and a hospital in the middle of Tokyo where no English can be spoken by the staff- come on, this is not The Last Samurai, this is 2003!-
And, to be even more trivial for trivia buffs, the Kimono worn by the lady in the elevator is not worn correctly, or to be precise worn in a way that is done when you die and are being prepared for burial/ cremation - (More odd than it would be odd for you and I if we wore a tux in a movie where the buttons were on the left side and button holes are on the right side of the suit),
I have no doubt Sophia Coppola had been intrigued by Tokyo/ Japan/ Japanese People, but unfortunately also have to say that there is definitely a lack of true appreciation. If one truly appreciates a culture, one would not make these missteps and rely on cliches for a laugh.
I believe that Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson have done a good job in their respective roles, showing the subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) sways in their characters' emotions.
It is therefore unfortunate that the actors have been confined to the limits of the characters created and directed that way that they have been by Sophia Coppola.
Lost in Translation is not lost in translation; it was lost to begin with.