Good character study, but not as 'important' as it wanted to be

Rating: Null/10 (12 July 2004)

I liked Lost in Translation. I liked Bill Murray and Johansson was good (it's the first film I've seen her in). It realized it was a character study and got my expectations in line (I wonder how many bad reviews stem from the fact that people had different expectations - something more broad since it had Murray in a 'comedy'). I liked the location, I have little direct knowledge of Japan being an insular American 'Fat-head', I felt I got a cross section of the culture, as much as one can get in an hour and a half.
But the movie just wasn't as 'important' as it wanted to be. Perhaps something was 'lost in the translation' as I am a married man not quite yet gone to seed, as Murray has, and am definitely not a young, pouty lass, so I couldn't relate there. After watching I felt that one would have to be one or the other to appreciate the film fully, and so alienated a goodly part of the audience. I think a great film maker who has made a great movie can make the entire audience relate to the characters. I simply didn't care much about the Johansson character. I really felt like slapping her and telling her to grow up. Granted she is young, but if one is still this lost and pouty after the age of thirteen, something has not set right upstairs. I thought Murray did a good job with his character, and I can relate somewhat I guess. In the end, I didn't get a feeling of chemistry between the two actors, which is probably to be expected between a 60-ish year old and a 20 year old.
In the end, I thought the movie as a whole, with its location shots, and expository shots of 'little girl lost' wandering around Japan became cliche within its own context, and were liberally applied to lend gravity and meaning to the movie. They failed, and left the final product a little light in the end.
Overall 3.5 out of 5 for Murray and the travelogue of Japan.