Lost in Translation

Started by AlguienEstolamiPantalones, September 07, 2003, 11:51:23 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

coffeebeetle

more than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. one path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. the other, to total extinction. let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.
woody allen (side effects - 1980)

Gold Trumpet

Quote from: Teen WolfYou're right, Golden Trumpet, in that Bill Murray, in real life, would never be offered that kind of commercial, as he is not debonaire. Watching him trying to be suave is funny, though, is it not?

You say that everything in the movie suggests that Bill Murray's character is an aging leading man and that is just not believable. That's fine, but I urge you to explore the possibility that maybe this, like everything else in the movie, is 'lost in translation.' Think of how the French idolized Jerry Lewis.

Good idea, but really doesn't fully explain at all because with his first meeting of exuberant fans of him as some great action hero star, it is with traveling Americans. In a bar, they talk about how they enjoyed him in a car chase in some old action movie and wondered if he really did drive and all. And at the end of the movie, an overly attractive white woman not of Asian culture is admittently smitten with Murrary and tries to approach him when if he was not who was seen by everyone to be, she wouldn't go near him. Then in all scenes of him in old movies, he could be seen as playing someone trying to resemble James Bond. All this actual evidence by fans not of Asian location. I would have indeed liked if his portrayal was in turn a Jerry Lewis situation and all personal acclaim was only Asian, but I don't think it really was.

~rougerum

ono

Spoilers possible.

I disagree, and say Murray was perfect for this role.  In it, Murray has again created a memorable character, and participated in another of the best films of all time (the first being Groundhog Day).  Thing is, I was reminded of Groundhog Day a lot, now, come to think of it.  Phil Connors and Bob Harris have a lot in common.  They're both tired, jaded men who have seem to lost the zeal for life.  And it is this type of man that Bill Murray has proven he can play perfectly.

Earlier I criticized the film a bit for not delving into Bob and Charlotte's relationship more.  But doing that is a catch-22.  One of the big charms of the film is how it says so much when the characters say so little.  It's a big compliment to Lance Acord who shot this thing, because it has been a very long time since the cinematography has spoken so well to the essence of what a film is trying to be about.  But when you think of LiT, you think of so many scenes where the cinematography does just that.

Then there's the priceless interaction between Bob and Charlotte.  As an audience we are always left wanting more, which is one of the reasons the film works so well, especially in the end.  We feel that want, that sense of longing, just like Bob and Charlotte do, meeting their soulmates, and then realizing that ... that's it.  It's over.  They'll probably never see each other again, because, well, life is like that.

godardian

Quote from: OnomatopoeiaSpoilers possible.

I disagree, and say Murray was perfect for this role.  In it, Murray has again created a memorable character, and participated in another of the best films of all time (the first being Groundhog Day).  Thing is, I was reminded of Groundhog Day a lot, now, come to think of it.  Phil Connors and Bob Harris have a lot in common.  They're both tired, jaded men who have seem to lost the zeal for life.  And it is this type of man that Bill Murray has proven he can play perfectly.

Earlier I criticized the film a bit for not delving into Bob and Charlotte's relationship more.  But doing that is a catch-22.  One of the big charms of the film is how it says so much when the characters say so little.  It's a big compliment to Lance Acord who shot this thing, because it has been a very long time since the cinematography has spoken so well to the essence of what a film is trying to be about.  But when you think of LiT, you think of so many scenes where the cinematography does just that.

Then there's the priceless interaction between Bob and Charlotte.  As an audience we are always left wanting more, which is one of the reasons the film works so well, especially in the end.  We feel that want, that sense of longing, just like Bob and Charlotte do, meeting their soulmates, and then realizing that ... that's it.  It's over.  They'll probably never see each other again, because, well, life is like that.

I think that shows some good insight into what the movie is about...
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

Squawks

Loved the film, but what was with all the boom shots?

coffeebeetle

Quote from: OnomatopoeiaSpoilers possible.

I disagree, and say Murray was perfect for this role.  In it, Murray has again created a memorable character, and participated in another of the best films of all time (the first being Groundhog Day).  Thing is, I was reminded of Groundhog Day a lot, now, come to think of it.  Phil Connors and Bob Harris have a lot in common.  They're both tired, jaded men who have seem to lost the zeal for life.  And it is this type of man that Bill Murray has proven he can play perfectly.

Earlier I criticized the film a bit for not delving into Bob and Charlotte's relationship more.  But doing that is a catch-22.  One of the big charms of the film is how it says so much when the characters say so little.  It's a big compliment to Lance Acord who shot this thing, because it has been a very long time since the cinematography has spoken so well to the essence of what a film is trying to be about.  But when you think of LiT, you think of so many scenes where the cinematography does just that.

Then there's the priceless interaction between Bob and Charlotte.  As an audience we are always left wanting more, which is one of the reasons the film works so well, especially in the end.  We feel that want, that sense of longing, just like Bob and Charlotte do, meeting their soulmates, and then realizing that ... that's it.  It's over.  They'll probably never see each other again, because, well, life is like that.

Well said indeed.  
I also noted that the cinematography was fantastic in this film.  I think it's one of the films strongest qualities, although it'd be difficult to not have a beautiful movie set in Tokyo, since it's such a gorgeous town.
more than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. one path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. the other, to total extinction. let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.
woody allen (side effects - 1980)

Gold Trumpet

Quote from: OnomatopoeiaSpoilers possible.

I disagree, and say Murray was perfect for this role.  In it, Murray has again created a memorable character, and participated in another of the best films of all time (the first being Groundhog Day).  Thing is, I was reminded of Groundhog Day a lot, now, come to think of it.  Phil Connors and Bob Harris have a lot in common.  They're both tired, jaded men who have seem to lost the zeal for life.  And it is this type of man that Bill Murray has proven he can play perfectly.

Earlier I criticized the film a bit for not delving into Bob and Charlotte's relationship more.  But doing that is a catch-22.  One of the big charms of the film is how it says so much when the characters say so little.  It's a big compliment to Lance Acord who shot this thing, because it has been a very long time since the cinematography has spoken so well to the essence of what a film is trying to be about.  But when you think of LiT, you think of so many scenes where the cinematography does just that.

Then there's the priceless interaction between Bob and Charlotte.  As an audience we are always left wanting more, which is one of the reasons the film works so well, especially in the end.  We feel that want, that sense of longing, just like Bob and Charlotte do, meeting their soulmates, and then realizing that ... that's it.  It's over.  They'll probably never see each other again, because, well, life is like that.

To respond, I in ways agree with this, with exception of Bill Muarry being right for the role. He was right for Groundhog Day, but that suggested something more according to his physical presence. Though the film is nice in capturing the little moments of the relationship without and delving and allowing us to long for their relationship after its over, the scene of frustation for them in according to own life and Asian culture are so repititive of the same ideas being repeated and repeated over again that the effect of the former was lost. I was tired through the movie and hoping it would find a narrative in which to keep interest instead of just repeating the same thing over and over again. Even though this did say the things it wanted to in relation to their characters, it wasn't really moving the material forward at all. With a maybe tougher movie to watch, as L'Avventura, I find myself more involved because things are progressing in the story even if personal hope for characters is dismal from beginning to start.

~rougerum

SoNowThen

Quote from: OnomatopoeiaEarlier I criticized the film a bit for not delving into Bob and Charlotte's relationship more.  But doing that is a catch-22.  One of the big charms of the film is how it says so much when the characters say so little.  It's a big compliment to Lance Acord who shot this thing, because it has been a very long time since the cinematography has spoken so well to the essence of what a film is trying to be about.  But when you think of LiT, you think of so many scenes where the cinematography does just that.

Then there's the priceless interaction between Bob and Charlotte.  As an audience we are always left wanting more, which is one of the reasons the film works so well, especially in the end.  We feel that want, that sense of longing, just like Bob and Charlotte do, meeting their soulmates, and then realizing that ... that's it.  It's over.

I personally don't like being left wanting more. I like coming away from my films feeling full to the brim. A trailer should leave me wanting more, not a film.

And I found the cinematography to be distracting in its slight hand-held-ness, and thought that locked off, sharply framed shots would have served the story better, pehaps -- as GT mentioned -- more a L'Avventura approach...

Of course, very imo. Lots of folks thought the shots were perfect for the story.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

edison

Quote from: SquawksLoved the film, but what was with all the boom shots?

Go back to the theater and kick the projectionists ass.

Ravi

I liked the mood of the movie.  The pace is leisurely and many of the shots take place at night and convey a sense of loneliness.  My friend put it aptly when he said it captured the "hotelness" of the lives of Bob and Charlotte.  Their experience in the hotel is strange and isolated.

I didn't think too many of the jokes were about the oddity of Japan through the eyes of the protagonists.  I'm sure I would have had the same reactions if I walked through that video game parlor.

Bill Murray's performance was very good, but I agree with GT that he is not believable as a former action star.  He just does not have that presence.  If he was a famous character actor in the 70s, that would have been fine.  But his being an action star is not the crux of the film, so I can forgive that flaw.  I wouldn't have minded seeing Harrison Ford in the role.  Scarlett Johannson is probably one of the most natural young actors currently working, though I don't know if I want to see her in that SAT movie.

I don't know if I absolutely loved the film, but I was intrigued enough by it that I want to see it again.

xerxes

i've seen it three times so far and it only gets better with every viewing. bill murray's performance was simply amazing. i can't think of anyone that could have played the role any better. i haven't liked a movie this much in years. everything about it is just about perfect.

mr_boz

Quote from: Onomatopoeia

Then there's the priceless interaction between Bob and Charlotte.  As an audience we are always left wanting more, which is one of the reasons the film works so well, especially in the end.  We feel that want, that sense of longing, just like Bob and Charlotte do, meeting their soulmates, and then realizing that ... that's it.  It's over.  They'll probably never see each other again, because, well, life is like that.

this is really well said - thanks for that.  whether you like this kind of movie or not, i agree that this is a very appropriate way to tell this story.  i left LiT with a tremendous sense of longing, and i actually enjoyed it.  it made the level of engagement i experienced during the film very high.
- ccb

tpfkabi

well, it looks like i will never get to see it for it has come nowhere close to where i live.

any talk of a DVD release yet?
I am Torgo. I take care of the place while the Master is away.

SHAFTR

Well, I FINALLY saw this.

I just have a few thoughts on this film...random...

1.)  That opening shot.  That was strange but lovely.

2.)  Bill Murray was good, but not as good as everyone is claiming.

3.)  Scarlett Johanson is amazing beautiful and I can't put my finger on why.  She also can act, wow.

4.)  I thought it was beautiful and the pace perfect except for the party montage up until they sing karaoke.  That didn't sit well, I couldn't see her hanging out with those guys.

5.)  The ending, wow.  I love it when films end and you are unsure on how you should feel, much like the characters themselves.

6.)  Perfect example of an art film.  Sofia maybe can't act, but she can direct/write.
"Talking shit about a pretty sunset
Blanketing opinions that i'll probably regret soon"

abuck1220

Quote from: meatballWell... I am probably one of the few who came out of the movie disappointed. It wasn't as funny as I thought it could be, or as dramatic. I really don't know how to describe my feelings on it, but I felt like it fell short of my expectations.  :cry:

agreed. i kept feeling it was on the verge of being funny/moving/sad, but it just never got there (for me). it felt like it kept pulling back...weird. anyway, it was one of the most disappointing film experiences i've had in a long time.