Lost in Translation: an Interpretation [Archive]

kitty

02-18-2004, 05:56 AM

Well, part of the film is that they are trying to escape their homes...

Bob is trying to get away from his wife for a time, to rediscover why he loves her. She has stopped needing him, and raises the kids and works on her own. She calls him out of courtesy more than anything else... and does stuff like sends him carpet samples for the house rennovation with a note about which one she likes best. He's using his trip to Japan to get a break from her...

and initially wants to leave asap, 'cuz of the culture clash, but can't because he has a job there that requires him to stay out the week.

Charlotte is married to a guy who's job is in Japan. She just graduated and has no job, so she doesn't have the finances to go back to the U.S. or any job to go back to. actually, I'm surprised Coppola is careful to include both these details about the characters. They are kind of forced tourists.

edit: thanks AB for fixing my posts. I keep forgetting that the main site makes posts in the forum!

TB4000

02-18-2004, 06:10 AM

Very impressive review. That's very cool that you were able to mirror some of the scenes with stuff that's happened to you. Think this one is deserving of its Oscar noms, even though on the surface it just looks like one of those fish out of water types?

kitty

02-18-2004, 08:00 AM

uhm, I'm not sure. I really enjoyed use of language and culture ... and I really identified with much of the loneliness and distance of the characters. For me, if it earns Best Picture, I won't be upset because the use of the film medium was very well done. However, I wouldn't say the acting was stellar (good, but not Best Actor good)... and the screenplay was okay but not that great. There's definitely something about the movie that was moving... but I think it was in the way it all came together, not in individual elements.

edit: and I definitely think the racial issues surrounding this movie might make me more hesitant in saying it deserves any Oscar wins. I do think that the Best Picture, Best Director and Best Screenplay noms were deserved tho.

Chester

02-18-2004, 11:18 AM

Haven't seen it yet but am curious. I suppose if the main characters are that despondent in foreign lands, they could just go home...? Instead, they choose to stay, wallow in their existence, use natives as props and background to tell their story...
Bill Murray's character is there to cash in on filming a commercial. He could leave, but he'd be losing out on a $2M paycheck, so, obviously he feels he needs to stay. The fact that he is willing to go through a process that is distasteful to him is part and parcel to his general malaise as a character.

Scarlet Johansson's character has to be there because she's travelling with her husband, who's also doing a short-term professional stint in Japan.

Faithless

02-22-2004, 09:27 PM

The movie, according to my dad, who rented it, had "lost its way".

He thought it viewed like an International Channel flick in a boring sort of way.

There was probably a chance to make a better film, a sort of coming-together of the cultures, but instead the cultures seemed to keep their distance.

kitty

02-22-2004, 09:31 PM

madmaxmedia

02-23-2004, 01:49 PM

But it's the way Japanese characters are represented
that gives the game away. There is no scene where the
Japanese are afforded a shred of dignity. The viewer
is sledgehammered into laughing at these small, yellow
people and their funny ways, desperately aping the
Western lifestyle without knowledge of its real
meaning.

Wow, the thought never crossed my mind when I watched this movie. I will think about it though.

I mean the movie was about the relationship between the 2 main characters, so whether there are other prominent characters I think is irrelevant. I didn't feel I was laughing at the Japanese characters, so much as the situations (typical miscommunication stuff). The only other significant characters onscreen were girl's husband, the ditzy actress, and the girl's Japanese friends.

I didn't think there was an preponderance of Japanese people aping American culture either. The Japanese photographer mentioned Roger Moore and Rat Pack, but I just saw that as him trying to give an American an example of what he wanted. They sang American songs in the karaoke bar, but is that such a big deal? Does it make it better that there's a Japanese song on the soundtrack? Or was it a token attempt by the filmmakers to assuage their film's racist underpinnings? I don't know.

I also don't see foreigners being misunderstood as being racist towards the country they are in. Meaning if there was a movie where Japanese visitors in the US were not understood by Americans, that (particular) aspect would not seem anti-US. If the movie was about how Japanese-Americans in the US couldn't speak English very well, etc., then that's a different issue.

I definitely understand the insulting nature of the 'short' jokes, that's pretty obvious. It is also pretty stupid that a 5-star hotel would have a showerhead that only goes up 5 feet or so.

I hope I don't get flamed here, just thinking aloud...

I thought it was a great movie, although I haven't made up my mind about these issues. I agree there is some insensitivity, but to go as far as to say anti-Japanese racism is the "spine" of the movie is too much (for me.)

madmaxmedia

02-23-2004, 03:30 PM

I loved the movie as well. Only afterwards did I read some of the complaints regarding anti-Japanese tone of the movie.

My personal opinion is that there are some insensitivities in the movie, and some scenes could've been done better (such as the short jokes). However, I think the movie as a whole was not racist or discriminatory, and that anti-Japanese racism was not the "spine" of the movie (the relationship between Bill Murray and Scarlet Johannsen was.) The difference in cultures was meant to emphasize/illustrate the character's loneliness in their personal lives, not bash Japanese culture for being different than American culture.

That being the case, the few more stereotypical jokes just didn't bother me when I watched the movie. Picked out and isolated though, I can see why there are complaints.

I thought Bill Murray's performance was excellent, his portrayal of his loneliness not because he's in Japan, but in terms of his relationship with his wife. The last scene was awesome too.

SunWuKong

02-23-2004, 08:31 PM

i fell asleep the first time i watched it.
to be fair to it, i watched it again.
i still thought it was boring.
bill murray pretty much played the same character that he plays in most of his movies.
*yawn*

Faithless

02-23-2004, 08:46 PM

well, the cultures come together in the sense that the american characters learn to adapt to the trip as an adventure... without trying to take over the culture or americanize it -- recognizing and accepting their roles as outsiders rather than turning themselves into insiders.

I woulda probably hated the movie if they had preached some cultures coming together stuff. It woulda been too sunday morning special feel-good... which I don't think is what coppola was going after.
Yeah, I can see what you're saying.

It just gets me that the movie ran like a boring docu-drama, as my pop retells it.

I think it would have been more amusing as an "Ugly American comes to his senses" type of plot.

kitty

02-23-2004, 08:51 PM

Yeah, I can see what you're saying.

It just gets me that the movie ran like a boring docu-drama, as my pop retells it.

I think it would have been more amusing as an "Ugly American comes to his senses" type of plot.

It was really slow, I'll give ya that. :) My bf fell asleep too. For me, I guess I liked it because I felt like I could really relate.

SunWuKong

02-23-2004, 08:58 PM

My bf fell asleep too.

he and i think alike.

For me, I guess I liked it because I felt like I could really relate.

eh. if you're going for loneliness and distance, watch a Wong Kar Wai film. nobody does it better.

Faithless

02-24-2004, 11:13 AM

It was really slow, I'll give ya that. :) My bf fell asleep too. For me, I guess I liked it because I felt like I could really relate.
Totally honest question:

Relate how? To whom?

kimpossible

02-24-2004, 11:30 AM

There was probably a chance to make a better film, a sort of coming-together of the cultures, but instead the cultures seemed to keep their distance.

I'm not sure what the point of the film was. Under no normal circumstances would I have paid to watch the film, but I was up in a plane and bored out of my mind so I watched bits and pieces but my husband gobbled it up.

Guess we were supposed to see more in the film, but all we saw was a nicely filmed version of what we've both already seen in real life: white Americans in Asia that have no clue about interacting with their surroundings, social or otherwise, and have no intentions about having to actually make efforts to do anything about it. In that respect, I think Sofia Coppola captured it perfectly, she wasn't afraid to make a statement that there are stupid white people in Japan.

Ugh. I just wanted to strangle that girl when she started crying.

kitty

02-24-2004, 11:53 AM

Totally honest question:

Relate how? To whom?

Well, I sort of alluded to this in my review. I felt like Coppola was taking the loneliness and isolation of being of one culture and being forcibly placed into another and depicting it onscreen. The circumstances of who the people are and what culture it is is incidental (though it has ramifications in the activist community that she chose to portray Japan as the representation of 'exotic culture').

However, I recognize myself as being Westernized and American, and when I travel to Asia, or other countries, I felt a simialar sort of outsider-ness. There were things I could not understand, could not relate to, and I was fundamentally different from those around me. Like, I remember looking at the signs as I drove through Beijing and Hong Kong, with much the same feelings as Bill Murray had when he drove through Tokyo -- an initial awe and even some excitement... and then a restlessness as I stayed longer in this culture that I was not a part of.

Small things like not understanding the humour, or in Johansson's case, not understanding the religious ramifications when she visited the temple, help to create a feeling of being utterly alone and different -- I actually didn't roll my eyes when her character started crying on the phone to her friend, because I think there is a similar feeling of missing something crucial when I go to another culture's religious ceremonies and can only appreciate everything on a superficial/aesthetic level, and cannot feel the importance of everything on a spiritual level.

Basically, I think the movie captured pretty well the idea of being isolated, even surrounded by people, merely because of a different in perception, way of thinking, and way of living. Murray and Johansson were not physically ever alone, but there was a barrier that was purely linguistic and cultural that they could not overcome. And it's obviously not restricted to stupid white people in Asia -- I'm sure that people from other cultures visiting America feel a similar isolation as is depicted.

Faithless

02-24-2004, 11:53 AM

I'm not sure what the point of the film was. Under no normal circumstances would I have paid to watch the film, but I was up in a plane and bored out of my mind so I watched bits and pieces but my husband gobbled it up.

Guess we were supposed to see more in the film, but all we saw was a nicely filmed version of what we've both already seen in real life: white Americans in Asia that have no clue about interacting with their surroundings, social or otherwise, and have no intentions about having to actually make efforts to do anything about it. In that respect, I think Sofia Coppola captured it perfectly, she wasn't afraid to make a statement that there are stupid white people in Japan.

Ugh. I just wanted to strangle that girl when she started crying.
I'm gonna have to get back to giving this karma when I can. (Have to pass around more.)

When I was discussing this with my pop, that was what I was trying to get out of him.

Sounds like the way some people bop around as tourists (in places that don't speak English) and take away nothing to enrich themselves.

My pop says there was one realistic aspect of the movie: the Japanese people don't speak English that well. Maybe that's a "no duh", but I think he may be referring to the levels where they interact with English speakers.

kitty

02-24-2004, 11:57 AM

I'm gonna have to get back to giving this karma when I can. (Have to pass around more.)

When I was discussing this with my pop, that was what I was trying to get out of him.

Sounds like the way some people bop around as tourists (in places that don't speak English) and take away nothing to enrich themselves.

the question is: can they?

Faithless

02-24-2004, 12:01 PM

Basically, I think the movie captured pretty well the idea of being isolated, even surrounded by people, merely because of a different in perception, way of thinking, and way of living. Murray and Johansson were not physically ever alone, but there was a barrier that was purely linguistic and cultural that they could not overcome. And it's obviously not restricted to stupid white people in Asia -- I'm sure that people from other cultures visiting America feel a similar isolation as is depicted.
On the one hand, I can see that. (By the way this is a good discussion.)

But I think from what I hear, Murray's character is stuck with a half-ass interpreter, and seems content with that. If that's true, that's sort of a forced-isolation.

.
the question is: can they?
Can they? Like take away something enriching from another place like J-pan.

If that was me IRL in Murray's position, I would say, yeah.

kitty

02-24-2004, 12:06 PM

On the one hand, I can see that. (By the way this is a good discussion.)

But I think from what I hear, Murray's character is stuck with a half-ass interpreter, and seems content with that. If that's true, that's sort of a forced-isolation.

uhm... I dunno where you heard that, because he doesn't have a translator most of the time, except for on his job. This is near the beginning of the movie -- and later on he has no translator because the movie focusses on his spare time with Scarlett Johansson's character.

In the main scene I can think of where he has an interpreter,

... a director gives him a lot of flamboyant directions on how to shoot the commercial for the whiskey he is promoting. The woman listens, then gives him a one line summary. Murray looks confused, a little exasperated, but proceeds to try and improvise as best he can.

My limited Japanese language skills told me that the director's stuff that he was spouting had to do with his frustration at the language barrier, and that he didn't have time to be screwing around with Murray.

I can't remember a scene where he was happy with his interpreter. But he didn't try to get a new one... ostensibly because these were the people who had hired him, and he originally just wanted to do the stuff and get out of Japan as fast as possible.

If you want to point to forced-isolation, it would be that he initially spends his nights in the hotel bar, around all the other Western businessmen, rather than exploring Tokyo. Later, when he meets Scarlett Johansson, they both become more adventurous and spend time exploring Tokyo and going to parties and clubs with some of Johansson's Japanese friends.

kimpossible

02-24-2004, 12:07 PM

After at least skimming the film the first thing I had a keen interest in was reading a review of the film from the perspective of a foreigner in Japan who was literate and who paid their dues in the form of hard work and overcoming social discomfort to live in a new society. Were they pissed that the film portrayed only foreigners who were clueless and stayed in their hotel room crying? Did it affect them at work? Did it reinforce stereotypes about foreigners in Japan?

I think the film would have benefitted greatly in depth if it had explored other characters in both Johanssen and Murray's places who had some measure of success due to making different choices. Only at the end of the film, to contrast that the those two are not the sole representatives of cross cultural interaction and that their choices made them lonely, not the impassible barrier of Japanese culture.

kitty

02-24-2004, 12:08 PM

Can they? Like take away something enriching from another place like J-pan.

If that was me IRL in Murray's position, I would say, yeah.

Well, my question stems from the idea of how can you take something enriching away from a place like Japan if you don't understand the culture? Like, I could go to a Buddhist temple, look around, and be like 'oooh, how pretty this temple is!' (which is about the extent of what I could understand given that I do not understand the Buddhist religion and theoretically could not communicate with those who are in the temple).

On many levels, I would count that more as exoticization than enriching.

Chester

02-24-2004, 03:29 PM

I think the film would have benefitted greatly in depth if it had explored other characters in both Johanssen and Murray's places who had some measure of success due to making different choices. Only at the end of the film, to contrast that the those two are not the sole representatives of cross cultural interaction and that their choices made them lonely, not the impassible barrier of Japanese culture.
To me, this point was made, in spades. The movie depicted their attitude but didn't endorse it. To me, it was just using their self-imposed cultural isolation as a metaphor for their largely self-imposed or self-wrought "spiritual" isolation, and how these two lonely souls found each other totally serendipitously, in very random circumstances.

The fact that they were in Japan and didn't want to be there only highlighted, in my opinion, the sort of alienation they probably felt when back "home" in the United States.

To me, the appeal of the movie lay in how "truthful" it was...how real it felt. "Real" in all the little moments that Coppolla captured in which the two actors hardly seemed to be acting at all.

BeTheReds

02-24-2004, 03:44 PM

For anyone that actually lives here, that movie does nothing and is totally uninteresting. All of my American friends here have said the same.

I doubt it will even be released here, because Japanese people probably wouldn't get most of it.

SunWuKong

02-24-2004, 03:59 PM

portraying cultural isolation and providing comic relief by pointing out how funny Japan and Japanese people are. two birds with one stone. how nice...

robotic

04-01-2004, 06:54 AM

i think japan created a good metaphor of a "foreign country" but there should have been more expressed in terms of the themes coppola was trying to present. there was a lot of things that could have been explored in the film; but it just wasn't enough. and then there are just so many scenes you could show of japanese people speaking in broken engrish, and to a foreigner (even asians who don't come from east asia), like sunwukong pointed out, japanese culture and the japanese are now even more apparent as something they are stereotypically showed as. and there shouldn't have been so many hotel room scenes!

robotic

05-17-2004, 03:53 AM

i think it all depends whether or not copolla was purposely trying to represent these stereotypes in her film. i think she's been to japan, and even lived there, but it all goes down to whether or not japanese culture is really clear in her mind. this article (http://www.dyske.com/default.asp?view_id=788) (written by dyske suematsu - of www.alllookthesame.com) was a bit thought-provoking and triggered a few of the ideas here.

SunWuKong

05-17-2004, 09:05 AM

Irezumi Kiss

05-18-2004, 12:35 PM

apparently some people are saying that she borrowed a lot from Wong Kar Wai. i personally don't see it. Wong Kar Wai certainly doesn't own a monopoly on using emotional isolation as a theme in a film.
Probably stylistically...there were quite a few of his "trademark" slo-mo handheld camera viewpoints...he's influenced a number of people who ape his style.

Kuchana

05-18-2004, 12:39 PM

rice cracker

05-18-2004, 12:46 PM

what's with the hoorah about it then? other than that sofia directed it.

The camera work is very good. It's a lovely film to just look at. The script...blaaaah.

kitty

05-18-2004, 01:25 PM

i liked the script. :) 'cept for the ending. the ending sucked major ass.

SunWuKong

05-18-2004, 04:37 PM

Probably stylistically...there were quite a few of his "trademark" slo-mo handheld camera viewpoints...he's influenced a number of people who ape his style.

i don't remember any slo-mo handheld camera viewpoints... she could have used a lot of handheld, but i don't recall any slo-mo.

but anyway, cinematography-wise, a lot of Wong Kar Wai's films should really be attributed to Christopher Doyle.

Faithless

05-27-2004, 09:34 AM

MSN article (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4287275/) that calls the movie bigotted:
Lost in Bigotry?

“Lost in Translation” translates into bigotry, some are charging.

The Oscar-nominated film has won critical acclaim for director and screenwriter Sofia Coppola, but critics are saying that the film mocks and stereotypes Japanese people.

“ ‘Lost In Translation’ provides a biased and offensive portrayal of the Japanese people and perpetuates negative stereotypes that are harmful to the Asian American community,” notes LostInRacism.org, which is appealing to members of the Academy of Motion pictures not to vote for the flick. “Had this film been set in Africa or Mexico, for example, we do not think Ms. Coppola would have given such an insensitive and racist portrayal of a people.”

“The Japanese are ‘funny,’ two-dimensional, cartoon-like characters who can’t pronounce English words correctly and often mix ‘L’ and ‘R’ sounds,” laments Yoko Akashi in an article in Japan Today. “The U.S. media traditionally dehumanizes Asians as a whole, making them an easy target for jokes or as a scapegoat. And that view is the norm for many Americans. But seeing it in this supposedly ‘intellectual’ and ‘artsy’ film was an unpleasant surprise.”

“I can see why people might think that but I know I’m not racist,” Coppola told the London Independent. “I think if everything’s based on truth you can make fun, have a little laugh, but also be respectful of a culture. I just love Tokyo and I’m not mean spirited. Even on our daily call sheets they would mix up the rs and the ls — all that was from experience, it’s not made up.”

kitty

05-27-2004, 10:04 AM

that's a terrible coppola quote.

SunWuKong

05-27-2004, 10:45 AM

fuck. she just doesn't get it. it never ceases to amaze me how utterly ignorant some white people can be about race.

robotic

05-27-2004, 11:39 AM

yes, ;_; how does that justify what she 'means'? does represent a bit of close-mindedness there. she loves the city, yet wishes to stereotype its citizens and inhabitants?

kimpossible

05-27-2004, 11:49 AM

I think if everything’s based on truth you can make fun, have a little laugh, but also be respectful of a culture. I just love Tokyo and I’m not mean spirited. Even on our daily call sheets they would mix up the rs and the ls — all that was from experience, it’s not made up.”

So she just loves how those funny little Tokyo people mix up their rs and ls and it's worthy of a laugh? Let's hear her Japanese then. CM, thanks for posting that quote. I otherwise might have never read it.

How the fuck is that funny?

Irezumi Kiss

05-27-2004, 12:10 PM

This shit is fucked up. I didn't find the movie to be offensive, yet a lot of people in Japan aren't feeling it at all, apparently. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel about it right now. I can see how one can READ "racist" elements into it, like how everyone wanted to read "Last Samurai" as a pandering White Male Period Pieced Asiaphile Epic, but...I dunno...

There are plenty of Asian films where Westerners are made out to be excluded background foil or idiots or whatever...even deliberately so. I thought this movie was supposed to be about two Americans connecting in some fashion in a foreign country that THEY couldn't understand. Hence the "lost in translation." If anyone's the joke, it's Murray and Johanssen's characters. Not every Japanese in the film comes across as a "L & R" unsyllabic goof, if at all. Like the doctor guy.

It's not a GRRREAT movie like it was blown up to be, but I'm not seeing the hate on it. I don't think Sophia Coppola is all THAT, either, but she's racist for making this?

I'm not exactly seeing the point. If someone wants to point something out that I'm missing, feel free to enlighten me. For myself, shit movies that have stereotypical Asian subcharacters (Sixteen Candles) are a thousand times more evil than whatever anyone thinks this movie is...

robotic

05-28-2004, 02:05 AM

I'm not exactly seeing the point.

if the film were to offer some sort of enlightment with the kind of alienation that society offers, it should be aimed at social, not cultural differences. the japanese were heavily stereotyped, and they always have been. not all japanese have difficulty pronouncing words, love street fashion etc. so on and so forth. unless you're able to understand and interpret the kind of effect that it causes (that have not met japanese/or asian people before); it's really not very easy. maybe lost in translation wasn't aiming for a racist-notion. but for some (or i'll say most) it was something to make fun of. something to degrade. the characters in the film refused to blend in with their surroundings, but simply looked at them from a perspective that however hard they 'tried', they could not be included.

SunWuKong

05-28-2004, 02:19 AM

honestly. putting a couple of Americans in a different culture and then making fun of that culture in order to portray isolation and alienation while offering frequent comic relief is not exactly very creative and it's kind of sophomoric in my opinion. i can't believe people would actually say that she was borrowing from WKW. she might try, but she failed miserably.

lena99

05-28-2004, 02:30 AM

So she just loves how those funny little Tokyo people mix up their rs and ls and it's worthy of a laugh? Let's hear her Japanese then. CM, thanks for posting that quote. I otherwise might have never read it.

How the fuck is that funny?

Likely, she speaks very little Japanese, if any at all.
I been here six years and and often mix up my Japanese grammar; so you don't see me mocking someone who mixes up an 'l' and an 'r'.
The whole theme of the movie is so overdone, it's embarrassing.
I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt, but then I saw her giving an interview on Japanese TV and she was so clueless I couldn't watch anymore.
Lena99

SunWuKong

05-28-2004, 07:12 AM

Likely, she speaks very little Japanese, if any at all.
I been here six years and and often mix up my Japanese grammar; so you don't see me mocking someone who mixes up an 'l' and an 'r'.
The whole theme of the movie is so overdone, it's embarrassing.
I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt, but then I saw her giving an interview on Japanese TV and she was so clueless I couldn't watch anymore.
Lena99

did she say she loves karate and zen like that ditzy actress character in her movie? that would be hilarious.

robotic

05-28-2004, 07:33 AM

T_T i hope that that is not all that some people can relate to when they think about japan.

Irezumi Kiss

05-28-2004, 02:29 PM

T_T i hope that that is not all that some people can relate to when they think about japan.
Unfortunately, most of anything shown about Japan here in the States has to be something that shows the extreme kooky side of the culture, enough to spark an interest that will turn a profit in the theaters. It's rare to see a stand-alone Asian film that has nothing to do with either period-pieced martial arts or "out there" sexual overtones to last more than a week in even the indie joints. I dunno why, the market is out there for many stories...

"Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter...And Spring," by Kim Ki-Duk, has been going strong for the better part of a month, but the Stateside advertising for it only focuses on the "summer" part where the main character has sex for the first time.

SunWuKong

08-12-2004, 09:19 AM

Faithless

08-12-2004, 09:25 AM

T_T i hope that that is not all that some people can relate to when they think about japan.
T_T when I think about Japan, I think about the Port of Kobe and what fun that was. :frown:

kitty

08-12-2004, 10:17 AM

thinking about this movie again reminds me of how annoyed i was with it.

cultural isolation??? try moving to a country where people don't even speak a word of your language. nevermind mixing up the consonants.

the movie wasn't trying to say that whites visiting japan had the same degree of cultural isolation as immigrants...

SunWuKong

08-12-2004, 04:25 PM

the movie wasn't trying to say that whites visiting japan had the same degree of cultural isolation as immigrants...

sure. but put into that perspective, it makes Bill and Scarlett's characters seem pretty petty and annoying.

nola

08-12-2004, 04:31 PM

they are. they are overprivileged.

Irezumi Kiss

08-12-2004, 04:40 PM

they are. they are overprivileged.
Which is why they were "lost," yes?

I didn't think it was all THAT, but I'm still trying to figure out why it was "bad" for some...no offense to your opinion, Sun Wu....

SunWuKong

08-12-2004, 04:44 PM

Which is why they were "lost," yes?

I didn't think it was all THAT, but I'm still trying to figure out why it was "bad" for some...no offense to your opinion, Sun Wu....

well, aside from the fact that it was poking fun of how "silly" those Japanese are, mostly i just found it boring. like i said, i fell asleep the first time i watched it. i even gave it a second chance because so many people were raving about it, but i still found it boring.

Irezumi Kiss

08-12-2004, 04:57 PM

well, aside from the fact that it was poking fun of how "silly" those Japanese are, mostly i just found it boring. like i said, i fell asleep the first time i watched it. i even gave it a second chance because so many people were raving about it, but i still found it boring.
I can hang with about half of that sentiment. I went, I was amused at certain moments and then I left. That was about it. When I was watching it I was fine with the pacing, but I thought that it wouldn't sell so big because I didn't feel like it would be for everyone. I was suprised it had the legs it did.

Far as the poking fun bit...well, any movie using the "fish out of water" theme is gonna pimp that aspect as much as possible. This movie just was maudlin about it. It could've been a lot more extreme, I think, like Chris Tucker in Hong Kong, but LIT was trying to be a dramedy with more weight on the drama side.

SunWuKong

08-12-2004, 04:59 PM

I can hang with about half of that sentiment. I went, I was amused at certain moments and then I left. That was about it. When I was watching it I was fine with the pacing, but I thought that it wouldn't sell so big because I didn't feel like it would be for everyone. I was suprised it had the legs it did.

i'm willing to bet that the Coppola name had a lot to do with how well it did in the mainstream.

mr. x

08-12-2004, 05:06 PM

i'm willing to bet that the Coppola name had a lot to do with how well it did in the mainstream.
that want a reason to love her, to REDEEM her for her godfather 3 sins

Irezumi Kiss

08-12-2004, 05:10 PM

mr. x

08-12-2004, 05:15 PM

Chester

08-12-2004, 05:23 PM

sure. but put into that perspective, it makes Bill and Scarlett's characters seem pretty petty and annoying. Well, yeah. But that's an inference that you're drawing -- it's not something implicit in the film and I don't think that Coppola is trying to get the audience to feel sorry for the two characters. To a large extent, I think a lot of what Coppola was trying to convey was that sense of ennui that only becomes possible through being, as Nola put it, overprivileged.
i'm willing to bet that the Coppola name had a lot to do with how well it did in the mainstream. I don't. I think its somewhat mainstream success came despite her lineage. After all, most people love to bag on Sophia Coppola for her part in Godfather 3, and it's not like name recognition helped get The Virgin Suicides into the mainstream. I almost wanted to dislike the movie, but ended up loving it.

The Thin Red Line, they managed to make a war movie beyond boring I disagree. I thought that was a fantastic film. Far better than the overhyped, oversimplistic Private Ryan.

SunWuKong

08-13-2004, 06:55 AM

no, no, no...if y'all think THIS is boring to look at, you'll have a GREAT night's sleep watching her first joint, "The Virgin Suicides."

Not that it was unwatchable, but I sure thought it'd be MORE to that flick...wasted some good eatin' money on that...

actually i liked that movie.

Well, yeah. But that's an inference that you're drawing -- it's not something implicit in the film and I don't think that Coppola is trying to get the audience to feel sorry for the two characters. To a large extent, I think a lot of what Coppola was trying to convey was that sense of ennui that only becomes possible through being, as Nola put it, overprivileged.

well, i don't know about the overprivilege part, but maybe because Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson's performances sucked? because i really don't see how this film is supposed to be so deep or powerful. i mean, Bill played the same character he plays in all his movies. i'd rather have watched Groundhog Day for that. and Scarlett conveyed about just a little more emotion than Keanu Reeves. i've seen plenty of movies that are very slow in rhythm and many of them captured my interest. but this movie was really just plain boring. if Coppola was trying to portray a sense of boredom by being in another culture, i think she failed miserably.

and it's not like name recognition helped get The Virgin Suicides into the mainstream.

did people even know who she was when Virgin Suicides came out? i certainly didn't, when i watched it.

mr. x

08-13-2004, 10:30 AM

I disagree. I thought that was a fantastic film. Far better than the overhyped, oversimplistic Private Ryan.

well they captured the pacific well but by the end i could care less about the guy and his wife or getting shot, meh guess thats what they were going for

Chester

08-13-2004, 11:05 AM

but this movie was really just plain boring. I could see how someone could feel that. To me, both performances were really powerful in a very quiet, subtle way, but I think you're pretty well entrenched in the opinion that they sucked. To each their own.
did people even know who she was when Virgin Suicides came out? i certainly didn't, when i watched it. Certainly can't speak for everyone, but everyone I knew and all the reviewers I read knew precisely who Sophia Coppola was when that came out. I didn't see a single review that didn't make note of who her father is.

SunWuKong

08-13-2004, 11:38 AM

I could see how someone could feel that. To me, both performances were really powerful in a very quiet, subtle way, but I think you're pretty well entrenched in the opinion that they sucked. To each their own.

well this is the first time i've seen Scarlett Johansson, but Bill Murray doesn't suck. i think he's very funny. like in Groundhog Day or Ghostbusters. but he kind of sucked for this particular movie in what his character was supposed to portray. i can even reserve my judgement of Scarlett Johansson's performance, but seriously, what did Bill Murray do other than play the same character that he plays in almost every single one of his movies?

Chester

08-13-2004, 11:59 AM

but seriously, what did Bill Murray do other than play the same character that he plays in almost every single one of his movies? I thought he was much less manic and because it was a more quiet performance, a lot of his performance was suggestion...more about what was going on internally with his character, rather than what goofy schtick he could perform for the camera.

But I'm not a fan of the classic Bill Murray -- the Murray from Caddyshack and Stripes. To me, he began turning the corner with stuff like Groundhog Day and truly began coming into his own with Rushmore. But even comparing his role in Rushmore to his role in LIT, I think the latter was more complex and nuanced -- more implying than emoting. And the difference between his role in LIT and his early, Caddyshack-era stuff is night and day, as far as I'm concerned.