|
Directed by: Sofia Coppola Starring: Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson I'm very "meh" about this movie, as I'm sure a lot of people are. Lost in Translation is a "meh" movie for me because it doesn't really do much to inspire appreciation or hatred from me. It's just there. I know that it's intentional, but still. It's a hard movie to review because it's intentionally minimal (or, I guess for some people this makes it easy to review -- "IT SUCKS." For me it's hard because I do occasionally enjoy minimal, simple movies). There's a lot of love/hate, and honestly -- I understand the hate more than the love. The majority of the backlash against LiT is that it is insanely over-rated, especially Bill Murray's performance. It's great, but I think the majority of acclaim comes from the fact that he's playing a non-comedy role. And you shouldn't receive Oscar nominations just because you do something different than what you normally do. I liked the directing, the movie is visually appealing for the most part. Thank god, cause if it wasn't, I probably would've been asleep. There's scraps of good dialouge here and there but plenty of scenes where I was twiddling my thumbs. When the characters are given something to do, they shine -- Murray promoting the whiskey comes to mind. There's parts of this movie that are truely great, and I found myself kind of going "yes, that's the stuff! keep doing that, please!" after some good scenes. Things do happen in the film, despite the usual complaint of "NOTHING HAPPENS", but most of the major happenings are internal to the characters. Nearly everything outside the dialouge is just a means to help build the relationship. The upside is that when some strong emotional scenes do turn up, they are very effective, since we've spent so much time with the characters. I'll be honest, I was glad it was over, and would never watch it again. I admire what I think Coppola was trying to do, I guess, but it really comes down to whether or not I was 1) entertained 2) impacted, and the answer is "occasionally". Every time I hear someone defend the movie by claiming people just dont "get it" I'm tempted to rate it another star lower. I can understand that argument for movies like Mulholland Drive, where there is actually some somewhat hidden story to it, but it doesn't fly here. You'd have to be retarded to watch LiT and not "get" what it was about. Everyone gets it. Some people just don't like it. RATING: 3.0 PROS: Writing and directing are for the most part above average CONS: Boring, minimal ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0335266/ Bloated Pussy fucked around with this message at 22:57 on Jun 21, 2004 |
#
?
Jun 21, 2004 22:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
I've seen this movie twice, and I have to say it's one of my favorite movies in a long time. To me it's not really about "getting it", I'm not even sure there's anything to get, it's more that after seeing this movie I just feel great. The general mood of the movie is so perfect that it just rubs off on me every time and I'm left feeling all fuzzy and nice inside. Also, Bill Murray is awesome in this and he should've gotten the Oscar. 5/5
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 00:14
|
|
|
5, excellent movie. Classic example of how a movie doesn't need be "about" anything to be good. Like The Big Lebowski.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 00:50
|
|
|
Good acting and directing, however, this movie was exceedingly boring. I'm not small minded and can watch movies without car chases and explosions, however, this film just takes it too far...nothing happens the whole time, I couldn't have been more bored. And I'm not going to jump on the psuedo-intellectual bandwagon and say it was good, not for this, way too boring. Good score however because of acting/directing. 2.5/5
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 02:44
|
|
|
quote:Pilsner came out of the closet to say: This movie is boring, poorly executed (Japanese people do not mix up R's and L's, they can only say R's), and trying to be more than it is. I don't want to watch two people meet each other when that poo poo happens every day and is just as mundane. Voted a generous 2.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 04:15
|
|
|
I think a person's enjoyment depends on whether he or she can appreciate a more character-oriented film more than a strictly story-oriented film. Not to be all pretentious and say that someone who didn't like this didn't "get it", or any of that poo poo, but that's just something I thought up. That being said, I enjoyed this movie a hell of a lot. Tremendous character development throughout, some truly funny scenes, a loving incredible soundtrack, and so much more. I would not have been devastated too much if this won Best Picture over LOTR. 5/5
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 05:13
|
|
|
I agree with Squall that LiT is very character-oriented and should be thought of thusly. I love this movie so much, it is wonderful in scenery, music, and dialogue. There aren't any life-changing events or exciting plot twists, but it's so ordinary and real that it feels like a very different, refreshing type of movie. The story of two adults struggling with the idea of where their lives are headed from two completely different perspectives isn't reinventing the wheel but it's not the same old movie, and I'm always down for new movie plots of any kind. If you're into good quotes and really connecting with a couple of characters, it's great to watch with a bf/gf. One of my favorite movies ever, easily. 5/5
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 08:27
|
|
|
I know this was supposed to be a character study or something, but there was virtually nothing that happened in this movie. The cinematography was great, but it took over 30 minutes until there was any dialogue between the 2 main characters. If you cut the shots of the characters moping around out of the movie, the movie would be 10 minutes long. I wish I could be sophisticated enough to like this movie, but there wasn't even enough dialogue to keep me interested. 2.0/5
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 14:15
|
|
|
This movie can in no way be compared to The Big Lebowski. I personally thought its only redeeming quality was a shred of good directing in key scenes. Otherwise, the movie only served to bore me to death and put me to sleep on airplanes the 3 times they played it. For me, most of the movie was trite and meaningless, with a few hilarious minutes shoved into the mix. If Lost In Translation had won Best Picture over LOTR 3, I might have to give up hope on the film industry and trash my tv/vcr/dvd player. I give it a 1. The reason it has fallen to such a low level is I had no choice but to watch it 3 times and that only built my hatred for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 16:06
|
|
|
quote:lord funk came out of the closet to say:
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 20:18
|
|
|
I personally thought it to be boring. Not that I was expecting a movie full of explosions, gunfire and international intrigue, but even for a character study I thought it plodded along at an agonizing pace. The only scenes I did like were where only a musical track played as the characters watched the world of Tokyo fly them by (car ride from the airport, walking through Buddhist temples, etc.) 2/5
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2004 21:44
|
|
|
I think this movie's defining characteristic is its subtle nature. Coppola didnt seem interested in spelling out the every emotion or spoon feeding the viewer the story. I think this is why so many people found it boring or drawn out. I think instead of being a film about showing a director's interperatation of a story through direct demonstration it was done more through inferance. The story and characters were defined and constructed by a series of simple yet powerfull scenes. This style of storytelling utilized in the film avoids suffocating the broad emotions being communicated. One of my favorite examples of this was the scene in the strip club. Long steady shots of Bill Murray sitting against the wall with the dancer slowly contorting herself with the "suckin' on my titties" song playing seemed to shout uncomfortability. I think its an awesome alternative to the simple voice over thought track or gimmicky camera shots of steriotypical emotionally descriptive actions (something like a grimace on the actor's face or a close up of the actor playing with their hands) Scarlett Johansson's and Bill Murray's performances were spectacular. Bill Murray executed his character flawlessly. I can only assume he related to the character on some personal level. I thought the movie was spectacular because of its different approach and polished feel. It strikes me as a true piece of art. 5
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2004 01:49
|
|
|
Excellent movie. Great characters, performances, writing, the whole deal. It was a very nice change of pace when it first came out, and when it hit theatres again around Oscar time. Bill Murray's performance was spectacular, and he definitely deserved the Oscar more than Sean Penn, at least. Anyone who can like a movie being about ordinary people instead of explosions should enjoy it. 5
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2004 01:28
|
|
|
I enjoyed it, although it was very over-rated. 3.5
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2004 12:29
|
|
|
LiT is the cinematic equivalent of a lovely rambling E/N post: I found it to be self-indulgent, angsty, and whiny. And for a character study, it sure has unlikeable characters. Johanssen comes off as a spoilt brat: here is a gorgeous girl with her life in front of her on a vacation in one of the most vibrant cities on earth, and she mopes around the hotel room because nobody understands her. Bill Murray's perpetual hangdog expression grows tiresome after about 5 frames. The minor characters are portrayed by Coppola with a smug, holier-than-thou condescension (see the lame broadsides directed at the vapid Hollywood actress and the witless husband character) that I found extremely alienating. When a plotless mood piece fails to engage me with it's characters it is pushing poo poo uphill to gain my favour. This is not the fault of the actors though: Johanssen and Murray do nice work with a script that is really quite woeful. For a film that is hailed as being understated, the dialogue seems crashingly obvious: "I don't know what I'm supposed to be!" - thanks for the insight. "I'm lost!" - Hint: we're not talking about carpet samples any more. And then come the Jap jokes. They speak funny! They are short! I kept waiting for a buck-toothed guy in thick glasses to pop up and say "Me rike ee velly much". I would have thought, given her pedigree, that Sophia would have seen The Godfather, The Conversation and Apocalypse Now enough times to get a decent grasp on how pacing, story and character are essential to a film: you can't just put 2 hours of navel-gazing on the screen and expect audiences to be engaged. But no: almost every scene is dragged on interminably as the already thin script is stretched beyond it's elastic limit. And then she cuts to yet another shot of them staring off into space. And hey, I'm all for ambiguity, but the brain-dead final scene of Murray mumbling inaudibly just screamed of Coppola's yearning for indie cred. A few points save the film from being a complete write-off: nice cinemetography, decent soundtrack, and the work of the leads. Hardly enough though to outweigh the film's crashing failures just about everywhere else. 1.5/5 legstump fucked around with this message at 12:35 on Jun 27, 2004 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2004 12:30
|
|
|
I loved it. I didn't mind the pacing because the film was so drat beautiful. I smiled the whole way through. Everything worked. 4.5/5
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2004 11:42
|
|
|
This film was totally not what I expected. In fact I was a bit frustrated by the end `cause I'd been told there was one particular bit that was side-splittingly hilarious, but after watching the film I had no idea which bit that was meant to be. That said, I did enjoy it a lot. A bigger budget and better use of the Tokyo setting would really have helped (they didn't have a license for filming in the street apparently). I thought the script got the balance of wryness and banality absolutely spot on though. Was considering being mean and voting 3.5, but it gets 4 because Scarlet Johanssen is so heart-explodingly voluptuous. (I don't care if that's shallow, it's my vote!)
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2004 14:13
|
|
|
I hated this movie. HATE HATE HATE HATE! Which pissed me off, as I LOVE Bill Murray. To be so bored by this movie was a painful shock that made me reevaluate my life. I can't understand the critical acclaim this movie got. As others have said there is basically no plot. The plot, as far as I can tell is the movie is about a leach and a famous actor who seems bored with life. Scarlet Johanssen plays the leach who is basically living off her boyfriend and whines that she is bored. Frankly, I just can't get any sympathy behind such a whiny character as that. I heard that character was based off Coppola's life. So I'm a bit surprised the subject of nepotism didn't come up. But hey, Sofia has a big ego with the digs at the ditzy friend of her boyfriend. Perhaps she should be taking a dig at herself and her privledged life where she is allowed to direct such awful pointless movies and recieve critical claim because of her family name. And god her boyfriend screamed out indie snob. The kind you want to kick in the face for being a douchebag. Anyone who dates scum like that deserves instant death. Bill Murray plays his role to perfection. The problem is, his character is boring that you want him to spice up the role a bit. A fine acting job, as the script clearly called for a boring character but geez. If you like boring movies you'll love this movie. I, however, like the movie to have some sort of point. I want characters that I can like. None of the characters in this movie I'd want to socialize with. If I don't want to socialize with these people why do I want to watch a movie about their lives? In a movie that is clearly a character study you want the audience to actually like the characters. 1 Only because I am loyal to Bill Murray.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2004 16:04
|
|
|
I loved this movie, everything about it just worked for me. 4.5/5
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2004 22:16
|
|
|
i have already argued about this movie enough i feel, but i saw it here and wanted to comment that this is definitely one of the best student films i have seen in a while. a big part of that was because it was so well funded, but it was a very nice student effort. as a film major, i see a lot of student work, and there are a lot of flaws that students tend to make over and over again as we learn the filmmaking craft, and this film was filled with them. the biggest of these is having a film that is either too big or too small for your script. more often than not students try to make much longer films than they have material for. this is th case with "lost in translation" i feel, as coppola had too much for a short (although i think it would have made an absolutely lovely short), but not nearly enough for a feature length film. what was most frustrating to me was her desire to cram stuff down the audience's throat (such as eight repeated scenes of scarlet johansen being "lonely," and what seemed like a half hour of loving kareoke). the audience gets that scarlet is lonely in the first five minutes of the film, but we have to watch it for about twenty five. the acting was good, and it is fine that nothing happens in the film of course, but there really wasn't anything substantive to the film at all. there needs to be substance in a film somewhere, but i feel like she was just very undercommitted to what was happening, especially in the second half of the film. also i couldn't empathize with scarlet johannsen's character because she just seemed like such an ungrateful bitch. what was she, 26? and in japan for ONE loving WEEK and she is complaining about not being able to feel anything at the loving temple? i felt like yelling "oh christ, you're not loving budhist, you're just loving emo, get over it! you're twenty six and in loving japan! your husband doesn't have time for you because he is working! working so you can be halfway around the world for a nice week off!" bill murray's character had great motivation, but scarlet's was really underdeveloped and obvious. it felt a lot like sophia was just emulating herself a lot ("it's so hard to be a woman filmmaker. i mean, sure i haven't ever really had to prove myself with anything, and daddy certainly does help me out a lot, and i've somehow managed to land this position of oscar-nominated director despite my performance in godfather three and most likeley as a result of my relationships with the like of spike jonze - but drat! things are hard!") that last bit was a low blow at her, ignore it. anyway, if you like "lost in translation," you should probably go out and see the film that sophia basically copied it from, fellini's "la dolce vita." she is also a total arrogant priss for having the balls to actually show a clip of "la dolce vita" in her film (i assumed that she figured american audiences wouldn't recognize it and therefore it would be her little joke, but that's just because i kind of hate sophia coppola). manic shampoo knows what's going on. and why was everyone so excited about murray's role in this? yeah he was great, but come on a lot of what he did was comedy! and when did everyone forget his amazing performance in "rushmore?" that was equal parts drama and comedy, very similar to his performance in "lost in translation." i give it a 2.5/5 - i hated a lot of the film, hate sophia coppola and feel this was the most overrated schlock of the year, but i didn't despise sitting through it, and if it weren't for all the ridiculous hype, i probably would have gone a little easier on it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2004 17:14
|
|
|
voted 5. unfortunatley i'm too busy at work to type my comments on the movie, but simply put, i think murray's performance was seminal. great dialogue and photography. the whole thing was ironic, subtley hilarious, and uplifting (to me) in a nonchalant way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2004 21:43
|
|
|
I didn't get it because I'm stupid. I just thought nothing much happened and couldn't get past that fact. 1/5 because I thought it sucked and hell I'm entitled to enjoy whatever kind of film I want to! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2004 12:24
|
|
|
This movie captured several feelings beautifully. The alienation of being alone, even though you are surrounded by people. Scarlett being ignored by her husband, while Murray is having doubts with his marriage, they turn to each other. If Murray was younger or more willing to get in the way of Scarlett's new marriage it would have been the same as every other love story. This was captured perfectly in the movie, with the slowing of time, dreamy feeling of being in love without crossing the line. Having been in this type of situation might be essential to appreciating the movie. If you haven't had that kind of experience think Harold & Maude, or Homer's business trip where he almost cheats on Marge. I appreciated the comedic uses of Japanese culture more after talking to a Japanese friend. Like the scene with the translator giving much shorter directions. The director(young, male) is being abusive and impolite, the translator(older, female) is unable to be disrespectful so tries to be as polite as possible. Yes, very few people will ever know that, but it's reality and why I liked it. So a little bit of explanation and some life experience makes this one a 5/5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2004 19:30
|
|
|
This is from the dead, but oh well. I'm a huge whore for all kinds of minimalism. Be it music, literature, or movies, I love it. The way the film captures emotions without being blatant or obtrusive about it is pulled off wonderfully. Beautiful cinematography, excellent acting and interesting plot make this one a keeper. Oh, and when Bob has sex with the singer from the bar, it's heartbreaking but touching at the same time...he cares about Charlotte enough to spare her her marriage and any guilt. 4.5/5
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2004 09:25
|
|
|
Shallow movie that relies on racist points to keep the plot moving. I agree with what Orson Scott Card said of the movie: "This is pure undergraduate filmmaking -- as so many independent movies are -- in which a general air of superiority and ennui is meant to be taken for intelligence and deep insights. I've seen enough of these (and enough of this kind of storytelling) to know that what we're really seeing is the filmmaker's soul. The people of Japan aren't shallow. Writer/director Sofia Coppola is. If she went to Japan and this is all she saw, then shame on her." Wong Kar Wai does this poo poo a million times better, and without reducing all asian people to bumbling, one-dimensional clowns. 1/5 notation fucked around with this message at 10:39 on Aug 11, 2004 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2004 10:30
|
|
|
This movie was just sublime. That's the best word for it. The end result was greater than the sum of it's parts. It was definitely minimalist but after the movie was over, I just felt very satisfied. It was sort of the way you feel after getting out of a jacuzzi after awhile. Relaxed, content, and just.... sublime. 4.5/5
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2004 15:46
|
|
|
4/5 I liked it...what did he say? He said something in her ear..wha..what did he say?! There's no whispering allowed?! Not for 9.50$/per movie!
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2004 16:30
|
|
|
I enjoyed this movie. It was such a refreshing departure from most Hollywood rehashes. It wasn’t incredibly mind bending, or twisted or action packed. It was however a nice story of how two people with no interest or no real connection to each other can form a bond that doesn’t have to be all about mindless sex or what have you. It was one of the few movies I liked better than my wife.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2004 19:54
|
|
|
Funny how it got bumped along with the appearance in some... other forum. 2.5 -.5 for Bill's good moments -.5 for Scarlett just being AMAZINGLY HOT -1.5 for cinimatography, really does a great job of setting the mood. It's eye candy on a way deeper level than an SFX action flick. Scarlett is helped immensely because, while hot, she comes off as almost ethereal at times. But then there's the bad parts. First off, it's very "artistic" in a "modern art" way. Yes, there are lots of people who greatly enjoy modern art; that's good for them. The problem here is people hyping this as great without qualification that it's centered on how much you enjoy the presentation and characters. Well, I enjoyed the presentation... and well, there's no plot, there's little humor (and VERY VERY VERY VERY dry humor at that), the dialogue is either cliched or made out to be deep when it's not, and Scarlett's character is just horrible. Having a feeling of abandonment leading to a personal connection as the center of the movie is one thing, but we have no reason to feel sympathy besides seeing them endlessly mope. There's no sense of perspective for real problems and real abandonment; it's a brute-force "they're sad and their spouses aren't psychic, so they spend time together and voila they're meant for each other" deal. We're supposed to infer a depth that isn't in the plot, script, or characters. And then there's the side-characters, who have at most a dimension and a half between them. If you like your movies artsy and small, here you go. If you're not sure, don't hold your breath on loving this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2004 06:33
|
|
|
Greatly enjoyed it, personally. I especially enjoyed how unpretentious it was - it was just people just acting like people. My favorite scene was Bill Murray belting bad Elvis Costello into a karaoke Mike, just having a fun time, because it almost felt like I was in the room with them. People who think the movie was artsy fartsy are nuts...I didn't get that at all. The movie is about as un-artsy-fartsy as you can get, and works well for that reason. With this simple but effective start to found her career on, I greatly look forward to Sofia Coppola's future film efforts. 4/5
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2004 09:47
|
|
|
Beating a dead thread but hey. This is one of those movies that brings out the, "you're just into explosions so you don't understand it, shut up and die," arguments. Which are pretty worthless. My points in no particular order: -Sophia didn't deserve an Oscar nod for writing. A lot of the best scenes were ad libbed (Bill Murray doing the commercial or on the tread mill). -Sophia has a rich and famous dad. So what? Welcome to Hollywood. If you removed nepotism from the industry, there is no industry. It is run based off of personal contacts and that's not likely to change--in fact it's getting worse now that everyone and their mother is buying a digital camera and saying they are a director. -I've heard this movie described as the most racist movie ever. But that almost always happens when any race is displayed outside-in and not 100% favorable. I think Bill is around 6'. If he walked into a standard Tokyo elevator he'd be tall. That's not racist. Now if he pointed his finger around and said, "drat you gooks are some short fucks," then that would be racist. -The characters. I didn't think the husband was distant or shallow or whatever. He was working. In a foreign country and was stressed. Scarlett's character seems like the poster girl for someone who got married too early. I think many of us know the type. And to be a newly-married person who is already uneasy and throw her into another country where no one speaks the same language and add jet lag, it's pretty understandable. I think anyone who has travelled, gone to a bar, you find yourself able to open up like that because you're never going to see this person again and it's impromptu therapy. For whatever reasons, I liked the movie a lot. Scenes that linger on nothing like so many French movies almost always drive me insane. WHY ARE WE WATCHING THE SMOKE IN FRONT OF THE WINDOW FOR 2 MINUTES?!? It just felt authentic here. It was different. I mean, if Hollywood really made this movie, they would have had the two screw. Or a fight with the husband. Or a car chase where they screw and godzilla steps on the Hollywood actress. I'm glad it came out the way it did. Rating: 4.5
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2004 17:36
|
|
|
2/5 I really wanted to like this movie. Really. Unfortunately, there are 2 egregious faults that I can not overlook: 1) The romantic tension between Bob and Charlotte is unconvincing. It's shallow and contrived. 2) The film is riddled with forced scenes - a bunch of scenes and ideas loosely connected. Like a collage. Also very contrived. Other than that, this director is surely one to look out for. Still relatively young as a director, her style is powerfully emotional/emotionally powerful...but much like Quentin Tarantino, Sofia Coppola relies more on style than on substance, which isn't necessarily bad, but when the substance is poorly done (i.e. ends up being "fatty" rather than "lean"), it is better if there is no substance at all. Despite my low rating, much respect to Miss Coppola. She's young and still learning, and when matured, she is a force to be reckoned with. AFK fucked around with this message at 09:14 on Aug 24, 2004 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2004 09:07
|
|
|
quote:Manic Shampoo came out of the closet to say: .5 of 5
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2004 12:26
|
|
|
The movie was slow, nerve-wracking, disappointing, and ultimately aggravating. None of those are a bad thing. The slowness was a nice break from the usual pacing of a Hollywood film. The other 3 are directly connected to an emotional response to the characters, which is what this film is about. Never before has a film made me scream at the screen, "What the gently caress is wrong with you dude! Oh jesus CHRIST!" I felt very emotionally involved with the characters. Also Scarlett was cute as hell after he had carried her to her room, and she was falling asleep. The whisper bothered me, and it still bothers me. In the end I think the point is that the movie was driven by body-language, so it seems only right that body language be the climax. Voted 5.5.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2004 10:17
|
|
|
I loved this movie, it just got me in a wonderful mood, plus Johansson is hot as hell. As stated earlier this isn't a movie that is about "getting it", to me it's just a charming tale of jet-lag and soulmates. 4.5/5
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2004 18:52
|
|
|
I really enjoyed this movie. I didn't even know Murray was in it until I saw it at the video store, and I rented it based on that fact, having heard nothing about it. Of course I was expecting a full-on comedy, but was pleasantly surprised. The only thing that bothered me was the whisper at the end. That whole scene made me want to cry, I just wish I knew what he said. 4.5
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2004 11:19
|
|
|
quote:olhado came out of the closet to say:  My girlfriend and I rented this movie when it first came out on DVD, because of all the hype it got. That, and her sister, a theatre major at Illinois State University said it was one of the best movies she had ever experienced. So, we sit down and watch it.To me the best scene in the whole movie was Bill Murray doing the whiskey commercial. The combination of the director spitting out long strings of directions and the translator only saying a few words, Bill Murray doing what was being told but just not doing what the director wanted, and Bill obviously just wanting to get the hell out of there. The rest of the movie, to me, was just boring. I agree with everyone who said that Scarlet came off as a little spoiled e/n bitch. You are young and in Tokyo...if you can't get over being bored and lonely, then you need some professional help! I absolutlely loved the cinematography, as well. But, in the end I was just bored. I was glad it ended. I was grateful my girlfriend thought the same way, because I didn't have the energy to have a discussion of why I didn't like this film. Anyways...to get back to why I laughed in the beginning. Her sister was home from school and came down and watched the last half hour with us. When all was said and done we looked over at her and she said, "Now wasn't that a good movie?" My girlfriend and I both shook our heads and pretty much said, "No...it was not," at the same time. She got pissed and I tried my best to explain why I didn't like it. Her only response was, "You guys aren't theatre majors...you just don't GET IT." P.S. quote:notation came out of the closet to say: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0400403/
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2004 17:20
|
|
|
Honestly, I love this movie and I don't get the hate. When it came out there was nothing of any value at yer average multiplex for a really long time, and when it was over I just felt like I had really eaten a good meal. Just very satisfied and pleased for a long time. I wish there were a lot more movies like it. This is definitely going in my collection, one of my favorite movies ever. 5.0
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2004 12:41
|
|
|
I watched this expecting a whole lot more. The movie was interesting, and I enjoyed the overall mood of the movie, but it almost seemed artsy for art's sake. When the movie ended I kinda blinked a couple times because I didn't see it coming. I thought to myself "surely this isn't the end, right?" But it was. 2.5/5
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2004 00:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
My most favorite movie. For me its charm is in how identifiable it is to be in a strange land alone, a point that has been mentioned before. I found a quote while looking for reviews online that pretty much sums it up: "When you go to a foreign country there is a major shock of consciousness that comes on you when you really see that, oh God it's just me now. No neighbours, no friends, no phone calls - just room service." -Bill Murray 5/5
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2004 05:55
|
|
