Not a Movie, not really anything!

Rating: 6/10 (14 May 2005)

Let me start by reassuring you I am a very open minded guy, I guess when it comes to films I am becoming increasingly more cautious in my choices and perhaps a little cynical in my reactions with time, but remain open minded and prepared to let a film take me where it wants to go. When I think of where Lost in Translation took me I feel it was close to nowhere, but unlike a lot of the films that have this effect I feel the journey was somewhat worth while and I can extract some meaning and enjoyment from it all. Let me explain, this film to me was not what I would describe as a 'movie'. It was more like an attractive painting, more a common case of a movie becoming art instead of art within a movie. It was not even a particularly interesting painting. I will also point out at this point that I generally enjoy films that are subtle and I'm sensitive too so don't think the meaning of this film was lost on me. I also believe a film does not need action scenes or CGI violence to be great, however I prefer films when something happens in them. You see I feel if possible this was TOO subtle, it's deeper meaning became lost in the translation.
The film looks attractive if never spectacular, the story beneath it reaches a certain hight and it never really gets beyond it. I think it's mainly because the two protagonists are hardly the most engaging pair of characters your ever likely to come across. Murray as the washed up (as he's used to playing now) actor Bob Harris is likable at times though Murray's now tiresome deadpan wise ass act can become off-putting, you feel the character is somewhat shallow and lacking the required human traits to be anything other than just a cardboard cut out constantly upstaged and out performed by the backdrops and locals who give this film some much needed humour and something else, oh yeah, LIFE. Then Johansson's character is so utterly unlikeable you will probably, like she does, want to constantly roll your eyes too, she does improve but not nearly enough. What makes the film and it's two leads redeemable is the situation - 2 confused, withdrawn, somewhat hopeless strangers with more in common than you might expect finding each other amongst all the commotion and noise of Tokyo and the unique friendship that develops between them. Also this film is about finding solace and beauty amongst the mundane and inane, both of which are in plentiful supply here. Also the emotive and profound (but under developed)idea of a relationship that seems so right yet is unable to blossom because of situation and because the 2 characters are both at different stages in their lives. Murray tired and worn out, slipping (somewhat willingly) into a life of monotony and routine while Johonsson has her whole life ahead of her and is trying to work her way out of a mundane existence. This is the main driving force of the film.
The thing that made this film fall flat was the lack of real elements of interest, it had it's moments but they were few and far between. Bob's phone conversations with his wife were vaguely amusing, you had that and the karaoke scenes and the famous tights bit and that was about your lot really. While the relationship between Bob and Charolotte is sweet and innocent (almost childlike) there is a lack of impact and connection from this viewers POV, I didn't really feel for them. The film was a tad too drawn out and felt at times more depressing than engaging, I felt a burning desire for Coffee and Prozac at times. In fact I feel you can go out and about your nearest town and observe and meet REAL people and you will find a lot more interesting characters and relationships than the ones here. At times it was touching at others I couldn't help but think to myself "my god, what a boring pair of morons." The final scenes are what make the whole thing worth while, when Murray get's in the taxi, THAT is when the emotion finally shines through and I felt a genuine admiration for Murray there because he made that scene and thus the movie. You could see the emotion trying to burst out of the character, but he resisted because he had already long become desensitized by life and the world around him. That scene encompasses all that the film was about, a relationship, and the loss of it, and having to return to what's familiar and safe - like returning home from a great holiday, you feel glad for the experience but you accept life has to go on, as it was. That was a fantastic scene and Murray's rather patchy performance before hand was forgiven.
however after the film I felt, like I have with many a film recently, that I could see what the director was saying but they could have said it quite adequately in 20 minutes never mind 2 hours. In fact if you took out all the painful, overly long awkward silences and walking/eating/sitting you would probably only have about 10 minutes of film left! Another case of a director not having all that much to say but taking a whole lot of time to say it, at least other films that don't have many themes to explore throw in some events to put their characters through. This film was notable because of it's lack of any.
If you want a heavily overrated film that is just 2 hours of nothing happening (there are loads I assure you) you could do A LOT worse than this, at least this will engage the emotional part of your brain (if only slightly) even if it means putting the rest of your brain into auto pilot.