Solid, but trivial

Rating: 6/10 (21 July 2005)

It is curious how some reviewers here deride those who did not like Lost in Translation, practically insulting them. Lost In Translation is not a movie for everyone, especially those with a decent knowledge of modern Japan. Nor is it a subtle masterpiece that only emotionless brutes are unable to enjoy. Western cinema must be in a sorry state indeed if an average film like LiT is lit up as the movie of a year because it dares take two steps away from standard formulas like the age-old love story or a clearly defined main character. Those two steps are not enough, they won't take a movie anywhere.
Coppola should be given some credit on creating a solid movie and directing an actor like Murray, but the film itself is too void of meaning and message to leave an impression. The main characters are not probed more than shallowly, which is a lost opportunity with an actor such as Bill Murray, and expected with a choice such as Scarlett Johansson, whose young age is so obvious as to harm the credibility of the film. Even with a setting like the futuristic Japan, the movie is not able portray anything which is not already old and rugged from repetition. All in all, if you are expecting an insightful or a masterly directed film, you could very well end up disappointed.