Lost in Translation

Plot synopsis:
Bob, a 55 year old, looking bored, oblivious, is a still famous actor who comes to Tokyo to shoot a commercial for $2 million. As soon he arrives and is greeted by a bunch of smiling overly friendly Japanese crew, he gets a fax from his wife Lydia, 45 years old, reminding him that he forgot his son's birthday. The next morning, he spots Charlotte, 25 years old, in the elevator full of expressionless Japanese people. Bob, feeling totally oblivious, shoots a whiskey commercial.Charlotte is accompanying her husband John, who is 30 years old and a constantly busy photographer, who doesn't pay much attention to her. He goes to Tokyo to shoot for a few days. She feels sad, lost and alone in a luxurious hotel.After a few days, Bob and Charlotte have a pleasant short conversation in a hotel bar. For the next few days they briefly meet, whether accidentally or on purpose. Their sympathy for one another grows.Charlotte invites Bob to join her and friends for a party. They all have a great time together. Their understanding of each other's feelings deepens. Charlotte reveals to him her fear of not knowing what to do with her life, he tells her about the scary and troubling parts of his marriage. After going back to his room, Bob tries to share his emotions about the party with his wife over phone, but she remains cold and talks about her daily routine.The next day, Charlotte travels to Kyoto and Bob appears as a guest in a popular but meaningless Japanese show. Still desperate about his appearance in that show, he finds himself again in the hotel bar. Charlotte is not there. The singer from a hotel approaches him and the two have a brief affair. Charlotte is disappointed about the affair the next day. They spend a terrible lunch together.The last evening he admits that he wishes to stay in Tokyo with her. They both know their wish is just a romantic fantasy. They stay without words, holding each other's hand, and kiss gently goodbye.Before he leaves the next morning, he calls to see her again. They say bye without a kiss, both embarrassed, not knowing exactly how to react. She walks away. On the way to the airport, he spots her from the car. He rushes toward her. They embrace warmly. He whispers to her. They kiss gently but passionately and say goodbye. He observes the city from the car, feeling happy.

Tags: boring, depressing, realism, atmospheric, satire, romantic, entertaining

Review:
That doesn't mean its the best movie ever made, in fact, I can name many that are technically better than this film, like the one I named before.
Both are great films, both are rated R in the U.S., but only one of them can carry along its story without brutal murders.So what can I say about Lost In Translation that hasn't been said a million times already?
Death in Vegas' spellbinding song "Girls" perfectly sets the tone for Sofia Coppola's second feature film, the bittersweet, intelligent, mature and absolutely wonderful Lost in Translation.
The basic story follows Bob Harris (Bill Murray) and Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson), a washed-up, depressed actor and an emotionally confused newlywed respectively, as they accidentally meet on Park Hyatt Hotel in Tokyo.
It's very touching to watch, in a refreshingly non-sappy way.The film isn't all mid-life-crisis slit-your-wrists drama, though - it is also hilarious at many points, mainly thanks to Bill Murray, who turns deadpan exasperation into an artform in a role specifically written for him.
Then again, maybe Sofia Coppola just wanted to hear Bill's awesome singing voice (he's actually really good!).Overall the film is just perfect.
We'd like to find someone to empathize with, embrace on a frequent basis, and know that somebody cares about us and our wayward ways and to reciprocate such feelings.With this, Sofia Coppola writes and directs a film about that search for human connection and what it can exactly amount to.
We are immediately introduced to Bob Harris (Bill Murray), an older American movie star who travels to Tokyo to film an advertisement for Suntory whiskey.
Coppola sits back and watches with a keen eye and a sense of mannered restraint how Bob and Charlotte get close over the course of their visit in Tokyo.Coppola's interest lies in Bob and Charlotte's situation moreso than the progression of their relationship, which is a difficult thing to pull off in film without working with more of an impressionistic style.
The translation lost is within the characters here, and that's sometimes scarier than not speaking the same language of the community.The only issue that arises from this is that we get the impression that Coppola either doesn't understand Japanese culture or simply doesn't want to, what with the abundance of cheap stereotypes and archetypal Japanese characters played for nothing but laughs here.
It reminds me of when a really artsy film wants to try and pander and connect with the audience when it thinks it has lot them, and, as shown here amidst others, the action has the opposite effect.However, Murray and Johansson craft wonderful, low-key chemistry here.
The lack of human connection and the feelings of hopelessness, regardless of short-term or long-term, are debilitating to a person, and this film goes on to show to reiterate my idea about life: if we didn't have at least one of these things - a passion, a good relationship with family, or close friends and people to connect with - we would jump out a window.Starring: Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson, Giovanna Ribisi, and Anna Faris.
Filmed in Tokyo, with Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson, one of the better movies I've seen in a while..
For anyone who wants a synopsis of this movie, the critics Ebert and Berardinelli have excellent, complete reviews of 'Lost in Translation', and they both give it their highest ratings.
Scarlett Johansson plays Charlotte, the young wife virtually abandoned in the city to do her own thing as her photographer husband (Ribisi) goes to various locations for shoots.What I liked most was the realistic feel.
Many of the negative comments about this movie relate to an impression that it is 'boring.' I'll put on my 'maturity hat' and state that anyone who thinks 'Lost In Translation' is boring simply was not able, at least while they watched it, appreciate the inner beauty of this movie.The scene that made the whole story come together for me was when they were in one of their hotel rooms (doesn't matter which), overhead shot, they were in bed talking, fully clothed, he is on his back staring at the ceiling, she is on her side, eyes probably closed, the tips of her feet barely touching the side of his leg, and he moves his hand and puts it on her feet.
I went through an array of emotions and expressions watching this film; most of them centred around how bizarre I thought it was, yet it was like a good book I simply couldn't put down even if the film itself lived up to its title at times.This is by far the best work Bill Murray has done, and it will be a pleasant surprise for many to see him find a new (to me, anyway) side to his ability as an actor.
In an age where Hollywood is trying (mostly unsuccessfully) to scare and shock us with something new at every turn, Sofia Coppola takes what should be the premise for a typical chick flick and turns it into something that anyone who has ever experienced an emotion of any description can watch and appreciate.A brilliant film in any language..
That is how I perceive lost in Translation, a cold, time stopping, gut wrenching moment in time where it is just between you and the water.But Lost In Translation itself wasn't cold or gut wrenching, it was an experience like no other in cinema, the movie hardly seems to move along; as if stopped in time and allows the 2 main characters to flow freely in this strange, unknown even daunting environment which is Tokyo.What makes this film work so well?
Charlotte and Bob are both complete strangers in Tokyo, thats what makes the relationship with them work so well, the essence of surprise when not knowing another individual makes the movie that much more better to watch, from one scene to the next rather than learning about Bob or Charlotte we view them learning about one another from their perspectives.By the end of the film both performances from Johansson and Murray were equaled and satisfying, both showing the glory this film set out to have, and to that, hats off to Sofia Coppola for making such a wonderful film that was driven by effortless timing and character driven emotion..
I was expecting a great film considering it's 8.0 ranking here at imdb, but for the life of me, I can't figure out how one person would think this movie is in any way good, let alone fifteen thousand.
Can I believe that a faded Hollywood star who is being paid 2 million dollars for a commercial would come to Tokyo absolutely alone, without even an aide of any kind?And most of all, can I call a film that does nothing more than follow these two hapless and uninteresting people around for several days without a trace of drama or art profound?I think not.
There is no such thing as a tired joke in this movie, some jokes are methodically inserted every 15 minutes.Actually, it's really worthwhile to watch Sofia Coppola deftly direct the profoundly subtle relationship between a 21-year-old yale philosophy major and a washed-up 55-year-old actor.
There's really no story to speak of -- only paper-thin basic with inanely banterous dialogue.There may be a merit in cinematography that raise the artistic value of this movie, but because the story is non-existent and the characters utterly unsympathetic & boring to watch, cinematography -- stationary in some scenes and moving in others -- somehow negate the enjoyability of the movie by focusing on the ludicrous aspect of tedium as if Sofia could bring back the element of silence inspired by silent films of the early 20th century.Lost in Translation (er, Sofia) abuse the silence element as the expression of meaning when it really add *nothing* of substance to the aesthetics of the movie, artistic or otherwise.
Sofia is being altruistic to the detriment of the audience when it comes to the vanity of the characters as portrayed Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson which generated zero empathy that makes the movie even less interesting to watch in a continuous manner without becoming fidgety or letting out relaxing yawn.
There's nothing of interest what happen to the main characters and why should the audience give a care.Sofia made the blunders in filming and keeping the scenes from the fate of being tossed into the cutting room trash bin that are particularly unintentionally humorous in being unabashedly pretentious or idiotically embarrassing.
Bill's acting is nothing special save comedy and Scarlett is moderately competent but technically bad in dramatic acting (which makes it a safe bet she'll never be nominated for Best Actress Oscar in her lifetime, UK's BAFTA Best Actress award clinch for subpar, vacant, minimalist acting style partially blamed on Sofia's tepid, fumbling directional style & a future hard-*** director demanding spectacular acting notwithstanding).Frankly, I do not know how Lost in Translation screenplay appealed to Scarlett and Bill Murray.
What a fraud.Now back to the multitude of clichés that are used throughout the movie, particularly to depict the Japanese, cultural and everyday Japan, but also show-business relationships, what happens after 20 years of marriage, expatriates, the shallow side of young and successful Americans, etc.
This movie plays like "American Beauty", if you took that film and sucked it dry of everything funny, weird or erotic.
The ending product is exactly what people must expect from someone like her.Tokyo Japan is an illustrious, breathtaking world class city with its very own character.
I only pitied Charlotte's husband, who actually had a direction in life and true passion, yet got married too soon; and Japanese people from around the world for being mocked in a film that gained subsequent accolades.The movie's concept is a great idea, but when you stick the main characters in a real city and treat it like Alientown, it doesn't work, and even seems borderline racist.
- Gee, aren't the Japanese quirky and strange - Gee, isn't it difficult when I am in another country and I can't speak the language - Gee, isn't it strange that I feel alienated when I am in another country and make no effort to genuinely appreciate the culture or people -  Gee, even shallow people can 'connect' when they meet other shallow people and decide to have a good whinge.The most insulting part of this whole mess is that it is currently rated, on this website, as the 175th best movie of all time.I weep for humanity..
Finding time to see only a few movies a year, I made a point to see Lost in Translation.
People who liked Lost In Translation must be chronically depressed for this movie to be such a highlight in their lives.
No, you stupid twit, not if you are going to hang around your hotel room all day in one of the most exciting cities in the entire world!Yes, this film has enough dichotomies to satisfy the art-house crowd, but the director only sets them up for display; she doesn't do anything with them.If you do see this movie on a date, sit in the back cuz you are going to get a lot of make-out time.
I would like to be moved by a film to cry, laugh, ponder, or cringe; I did none of these except wonder why this movie was made in the first place.
[And also has Scarlet Johansson, pouting in a very similar way.] And go watch Virgin Suicides for a better example of film making by Sofia.It would be wrong to say that this movie is awful, but it comes pretty close..
I would like my few hours back, because I could probably have an experience more worthwhile than Bill Murray's character had in this film in that time..
In fact, Faris should not be in this picture, but apparently Sofia Coppola felt we needed a little bit of her personal problems (shown in an extremely literal manner) on the screen.To sum it up, this one could've been a Cult Classic, one of the great off-beat Romance Films in Cinema History.
After about the 10th shot of Bill Murray looking bemused at a Japanese speaker I felt angry more than amused, I thought we'd left that ignorant brand of comedy back in the dark ages of cinema where it belongs.Ultimately, I left the cinema feeling that in the hands of a more accomplished writer/director this film *may* have worked but as it stands it couldn't be any wider of the mark..
He's made some real clinkers (Zissou, Where the Buffalo Roam, Quick Change, Charlie's Angels, Get Smart), but he seems to float above them, a cynical, comical everyman that nobody hates.If his "Lost in Translation" character had been played by anyone else—say, Kurt Russell or Michael Keaton or Jeff Bridges (they're all about the same age, and all have comic/dramatic range)-- I suspect critics would have treated "Lost in T" the way they treated, say, "3000 Miles to Graceland" or "Jack Frost" or "Nadine." In other words, they would have had the courage to say, This film is atrocious.The moral: If you've got a dull, callow screenplay and a name like Coppola that'll get you funding, hire Bill Murray.
Bob Harris Bill Murray's character in the movie is so shallow and uninterested in everyone and everything from talking to his family to pretty much all the Japanese people, to even the admiring Americans in the bar.
Then we have Scarlett Johansson's character, Charlotte who is just as bored and lonely as Bob, but is at least a little more likable, she is shot in her underwear throughout the movie, a cheap way to keep people interested in a otherwise borefest of a movie, she stares hopelessly out the window.
It's odd how some movies are so much better the second time around.This is a very, very low key film about loneliness and about being in a culture that is totally foreign to you where few people speak your language.
The former because you really get the feel of what it is like to be a non-Japanese speaking person in that country and what the customs of the people are in Japan, at least to some degree....and it's interesting.Murray is the star of the story and any plaudits he's received for his performance are well- deserved.
The only credit it deserves is as a nice first film done at a freshman level, with a note by the teacher saying there are some promising things in this movie to work with, but it has a long way to go before it should ever be nominated for any award much less an Oscar..
It's only saving graces are its perspective of Americans viewing Japanese culture and Ana Faris's acting, albeit her character was nerve-racking.The exposition of setting up each main character worked well, but bringing the two together was executed in far too convenient a manner, nor was the chemistry quite right.As with movies such as "A Thin Red Line," only one scene came across as viable and intellectually stimulating - the scene discussing life, marriage, and future.BAFTA awarding Murray and Johansson, and the Academy nominating the former, just seems purely inane, for neither actor's role carried much challenge or deep performance.
The only thing more ludicrous would be if she were to win the award for this pretensiously underwritten time-waster.This should have been called Bored in Japan -- just a tad more interesting than watching your Uncle Mike's vacation movies -- and even then, only if your Uncle Mike were not played by the ever-amazing Bill Murray.
sure, its artsy and pretentious, but it doesn't really prove anything except that the writer is uncreative, both in her subject matter (a vacation to Tokyo) and the way she spends her time (inane nothingness, rather than productivity).Much like Was Anderson, this film seems to revel in wasting Bill Murray.
So all-ready from the get-go this movie has a lot of great things going for it."Lost in Translation" would however not be what it is if it had not been for the very keen eye of Sofia Coppala.
Next time Ms Copolla directs a movie, I hope she will at least be more respectful to the culture her movie plays in and she will at least perform a tiny bit of research before packing and moving over there to tape meaningless scenes totally disconnected from reality.The funny (or sad) thing is that I've been to a lot of the place they've taped and have also stayed at the Park Hyatt hotel once but unlike Mr Murray and Ms Coppola, I didn't fill my days by drinking at the bar and staring aimlessly out the window like I've just been lobotomized.
I, along with those who didn't like the film, found the movie boring.
All the Japanese actors in the film do not have much prior acting experience I believe, but they fit in excellently.Now I must finish my comment mentioning Sofia Coppola's name, because she is the true person behind this movie.
So I'll try my best to translate the feelings the movie provokes from you...The acting was actually some of the best acting I've seen in a film, ever.
The strangest thing is that I didn't want the film to end, kind of like how the characters felt in the movie.
I mean all these movies show relationships in America, while sucking in all these American clichés, but the setting of Japan completes the film.
Wait, isn't that the same feeling the characters in the movie were pressured to?I could go on and on and on about how profound the film really is, but I'm going to make this straight and to the point: see it if you can understand the use of subtly and realize it's not going to be like anything you've seen before.