PDA

View Full Version : Lost In Translation


Rongi
Jan 31st, 2004, 10:50 PM
Not a bad movie by any means, but I didn't really like it and I didn't really see why it won so many awards. I think it's because the girl who made it has mafia connections :/.

FartinMowler
Jan 31st, 2004, 11:17 PM
I am so looking forward to seeing this out this Tuesday...I enjoyed Rushmore.

Drew Katsikas
Feb 1st, 2004, 12:07 AM
Connection?

Jixby Phillips
Feb 1st, 2004, 12:11 AM
I think I'll like this, I loved Meatballs.

Rongi
Feb 1st, 2004, 12:28 AM
Like I said, not a bad film. Just not my cup of tea.

Command Prompt
Feb 1st, 2004, 01:31 AM
OSmosis Jones >:

Mockery
Feb 1st, 2004, 01:38 AM
Saw it tonight. I liked it a lot. It's definitely a bit depressing, but I expected that going in. Definitely worth seeing, and I love watching Bill Murray in less comedic roles like this. I always thought he was a great actor who should be given the chance to work in other movies like this.

Jixby Phillips
Feb 1st, 2004, 01:56 AM
I cried at this because I am turning more and more into a girl :( fuck

Anonymous
Feb 1st, 2004, 02:04 AM
You got SERVED

Rongi
Feb 1st, 2004, 02:16 AM
I cried at this because I am turning more and more into a girl :( fuck

I got teary at the ending :(

I find it weird that sometimes I get on the verge of tears at some movies even when I don't like them :(

Ghost of Fraiser
Feb 1st, 2004, 02:39 AM
Anything set in japan already has it's plus points.

I enjoyed it alot, coming from a guy who usually is into one too many crime dramas.

Jixby Phillips
Feb 1st, 2004, 02:46 AM
I just got teary at the ending but I know if I were by myself I would have been crying so yeah lets call that crying >:

Rongi
Feb 1st, 2004, 02:58 AM
Jersey Girl looks like shit, by the way >:

Studio8
Feb 1st, 2004, 04:12 AM
I liked watching the actors and all, but this movie was a bit too drawn out for me. Way too much stock footage.

The best part was in the hospital when Bill Murray was sitting next to that weird Japanese Kid-Dude-Adult-Thing. The extra's in the back were not maintaining.

soundtest
Feb 1st, 2004, 05:22 AM
i saw this awhile ago and i liked it... it's very subtle... bill murray is great and i liked the humour because it's not done in a condescending WTF THEY ARE DIFFERENT LOL way

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 1st, 2004, 01:01 PM
This was easily the best film of last year. I loved it, amazingly beautiful and poignant performances from both leads. Really touching and fun, while retaining a very dream-like quality (probably due to the Kevin Shields music). Sophia Coppola's talent is astounding; the Virgin Suicides and LiT are both masterpieces.

Anonymous
Feb 1st, 2004, 01:29 PM
I heard there's a guy playing Pop'nmusic in it. That's what makes me want to see it :<

Mockery
Feb 1st, 2004, 01:46 PM
i saw this awhile ago and i liked it... it's very subtle... bill murray is great and i liked the humour because it's not done in a condescending WTF THEY ARE DIFFERENT LOL way

Exactly, they could've had Bill Murray making all sorts of comments about the people he encountered (like the hyper talk show host) but they didn't. It was definitely handled nicely.

For those of you who've seen it, we're not supposed to hear what he says to her at the end, correct? I thought I heard some of it...

Jixby Phillips
Feb 1st, 2004, 01:58 PM
He says "Good teenagers, take off your clothes"

This is from the imdb.com message boards:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0335266/board/nest/5832340

OK, do you REALLY want to know?

Here are the facts.

First of all, you can find rumors on the web of some projectionist who claims to have cranked up the volume and deciphered the speech, and he is positive that Bob says "I'm so glad to have met you. I'll miss you. Don't cry, OK?". Nice try, but it's bullsh!t.

The dialogue was scripted, and what Bill Murray says was indeed written. However, in the looping sessions (where anything between 50 and 100% of the dialogue is re-recorded in post production), they replaced his lines with incoherent mumbling that is clearly not in sync with the picture. To further investigate this, I isolated a snippet of the sound track and pulled it into WaveLab where I used a restoration plugin and noise reduction to strip away as much of the background noise as possible. And he says absolutely nothing, it's not even words. It's "mshdu s fphllpbt ff whfffh w uffwlgg, OK?". They were clever enough to make it waterproof, so that not even audio doctors would be able to dissect the sound and extract the dialogue.

And since his mouth is half hidden behind Charlotte's face, it's impossible to read his lips. You can however tell that he's not saying what you're hearing on the soundtrack.

In interviews, Sofia has categorically refused to reveal what Bob says.

In conclusion: We will never know. Happy?

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 1st, 2004, 02:01 PM
Why would you want to know what he says? It was a moment between them, not anyone else. Plus, it would have either been cheesy or just dissappointing.

Studio8
Feb 2nd, 2004, 04:25 AM
The movie was filled with moments between them. Your wanting to give them privacy seems sweet and all, but the whole point of film is to see and hear and feel what the characters we are investing time and money are seeing, hearing, and feeling.

I like the ending a lot. I was really hoping it wouldn't be an all-out love fest and would just stay low-key and mysterious.

Ghost of Fraiser
Feb 2nd, 2004, 08:57 AM
I thought what he says in the end was supposed to be Lost in Translation :(

FartinMowler
Feb 5th, 2004, 04:46 PM
I agree with Rongi that it does't make sense that this movie is getting so much attention. I am half way throught it this afternoon and the pace is just too slow. I'm enjoying watching Bill Murray but that's all.

soundtest
Feb 5th, 2004, 05:23 PM
don't give up yet the car chase is about to come up

FartinMowler
Feb 5th, 2004, 07:00 PM
BAd :( Rushmore was a much better movie and it wasn't great.

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 5th, 2004, 08:48 PM
"The best part was in the hospital when Bill Murray was sitting next to that weird Japanese Kid-Dude-Adult-Thing. The extra's in the back were not maintaining."

They were supposed to be laughing. The comments he are making to Murray are obviously humourous, yet he, and we, can not understand them.

Studio8
Feb 5th, 2004, 10:34 PM
No, that scene was improvised and those ladies were extra's who couldn't control their laughter. Seriously.

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 6th, 2004, 12:42 AM
Well, obviously Coppola wanted them to be laughing in the final cut of the film or she would have shot it until they weren't. It worked, therefore it was supposed to be in the film, and they are doing nothing wrong.

pjalne
Feb 6th, 2004, 05:39 AM
I saw it yesterday, and I really liked it.

Thought you all might like to know.

Studio8
Feb 7th, 2004, 04:08 AM
Dude, I never said they were doing anything wrong.

FartinMowler
Feb 7th, 2004, 11:40 AM
Little snippets of funny do not make a great movie. I would like to hear why people thought this movie was good. It's full of cliche's and there is absolutely no sexual tension between Bill Murray's Character and the girl and in the end... what are we suppose to asume?

Protoclown
Feb 7th, 2004, 12:34 PM
That was a fucking beautiful movie. I loved it.

Rongi
Feb 7th, 2004, 11:30 PM
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005JMJ4/103-1686621-7465469

What the fuck???

FartinMowler
Feb 8th, 2004, 11:54 AM
Coppola - who directed this with an intriguing focus on environment - has a great movie on her hands. She has little more than a hotel and two characters to work with--

It took place in Japan :/ I know because they kept looking out the window for half the movie >:

O71394658
Feb 8th, 2004, 12:31 PM
I got it today, and thought it was great. Very cool movie.

Scarlett :love

Hugh_Bristic
Feb 8th, 2004, 11:53 PM
I think perhaps I was expecting too much out of this film; somewhere along the line of reviews, I thought it would be... I don't know, good. I'm not necessarily saying it was a bad film, but certainly not something I'd watch more than once or would feel the need to have a conversation about (save this one right here, right now).

If Coppola's objective was to make the viewer feel dismal in the sense that they identified with... weariness or mediocrity, or that sick, empty feeling, then she easily accomplished that feat. But it could easily be said that the film was essentially just that: vacuous. It's like identifying with depressing nonsensical lyrics because they somehow apply to your life at that point. The only way, that I can humbly conceive, someone would find this a good film is if they identified with that despondent nothingness and/or looking for “something” (read: one’s place in life). Does that make sense?

P.S. Responses are welcome, except for those of Tenenbaum. On behalf of AT&T, thank you for calling.

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 9th, 2004, 09:56 AM
"Does that make sense?"

No, because the film does have substance, yet you were just to ignorant to understand it. You wanted a message rammed down your throat, so when the film didn't present itself clearly on one viewing you immediately assumed it was bad. In reality, it is you who is bad.

FartinMowler
Feb 9th, 2004, 10:20 AM
Thank god for ignorance if it means that I don't have to watch this twice. Better film to watch is "The Professional" with Jean Reno/Natalie Portman and the brilliant Gary Oldman. [/quote]

Bennett
Feb 9th, 2004, 01:59 PM
YEAH THAT MOVIE HAS GUNS!


fucking twit

Rongi
Feb 9th, 2004, 04:07 PM
Thank god for ignorance if it means that I don't have to watch this twice. Better film to watch is "The Professional" with Jean Reno/Natalie Portman and the brilliant Gary Oldman.

Fucking idiot

FartinMowler
Feb 9th, 2004, 09:14 PM
Rongi will be speaking at conferences this week that will include his thought's on episode 3 and 6 of Futurama and why he is a big homo.

Rongi
Feb 9th, 2004, 09:15 PM
Oh snap.

Studio8
Feb 10th, 2004, 01:44 AM
Tenebaum, you are the kind of snob that most people hate discussing film with because you like to label people as close-minded when it's really you is being close-minded. Just because someone has to watch a movie twice to absorb everything can mean many things - not always that they are an idiot or "bad."

FartinMowler = 1
Rongi = 0

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 10th, 2004, 10:55 AM
Just because someone has to watch a movie twice to absorb everything can mean many things - not always that they are an idiot or "bad."

I agree, the problem is the closeminded idiots that label it crap before giving it another chance. I often watch films that I didn't like on the first viewing because I believe it will have more to offer. For example, the first time I saw Punch-Drunk Love I thought it was fairly medicore, the next time I watched it I realized it was indeed a minor masterpiece.

pjalne
Feb 10th, 2004, 11:31 AM
While Royal is a bit snobbish, I usually agree with him. I don't think films should be dumbed down for everyone to understand them the first time around. If you try to appeal to everyone, you're losing the audience members you want to reach.

I'm noticing I'm getting more and more picky when it comes to films, and one of the things that usually put me off is the underlining of every fucking point. I've experienced far too often that a film is about to touch upon something brilliant and understated, only to hammer it in at the last second. This is one of the reasons Lost in Translation appealed to me, a lot was left hanging and unsaid, and you could still connect the dots by looking at the slight shift in a camera angle, a glance from a character or the timing of a cut. You know, instead of having bill Murray just say "I am kind of attracted to you, but I'm married and so are you, but I'll hang around with you anyway because I like your company and because I'm completely lost on my own. In addition to this, I am more than a bit too old for you. We'll see how things work out." If that's what you want, watch a damned Sandra Bullock movie.

There are still times when I need to watch a movie a second time to appreciate it, but at least I have the common sense to realize it's not necessarily the movie's fault I didn't get much out of it. Perhaps I was in the wrong mood that day, perhaps I wasn't well enough aquainted with the genre to pick up all the information I needed, perhaps the people around me distracted me. Like when I first watched Magnolia. I was tired, I expected a completely different film, someone had given away the ending earlier that day, and the girl next to me in the theater really hated it and kept moaning and muttering until she finally walked out. Of course I didn't get anything out of that. But at least I gave the film another shot later. I liked it a lot that time around.

Bennett
Feb 10th, 2004, 11:55 AM
:love

:posh well played pj

well played.

FartinMowler
Feb 10th, 2004, 12:25 PM
I understand your points and this is why they have alternative festivals that create buzz and hopefully good film filters through and we get to see it. I have sat through many subtle beautiful films that the mass audience have rejected and I understand your point that it is subjective but I get really tired of being subjected to "Rave review's" of films like Lost in Translation and Punch drunk love and being let down.

Bennett
Feb 10th, 2004, 12:28 PM
go see "you got served"

FartinMowler
Feb 10th, 2004, 12:36 PM
Boston Globe, Wesley Morris
"You Got Served is part soap opera and part thriller, and it has the unique characteristic of being both undeveloped and overwritten." more... C
Cincinnati Enquirer, Margaret A. McGurk
"Though only and hour and a half long, the movie feels like a long, hard slog when the music stops." more... C+
E! Online,
"...inept..." more... C-
filmcritic.com, Pete Croatto
"...this is a pretty awful movie." more...


:/

Esuohlim
Feb 10th, 2004, 12:38 PM
I'M SORRY FARTINMOWLER, YOUR PREVIOUS POST WAS LOST IN TRANSLATION. :lol

Rongi
Feb 10th, 2004, 12:45 PM
The reason Lost In Translation wasn't my cup of tea is because it got depressing towards the end and right now I'm going through some shit and the film kinda brought me down a lil.

If I had watched this film maybe a few years ago, when I was fairly content with my life, I would have loved every minute of it.

FartinMowler
Feb 10th, 2004, 12:47 PM
What Bill Murry really said in her ear at the end of the film...

"Youhavesomethinginyourearomisoluosism"

Esuohlim
Feb 10th, 2004, 04:03 PM
LOL! Omisoluosism! What are we going to do with you, FartinMowler? :lol

Hugh_Bristic
Feb 10th, 2004, 05:57 PM
What’s with all this “you didn’t get the movie and that’s why you didn’t enjoy it” business? I got it. And admittedly, I’m a little annoyed that because I stand by my belief (that it’s not a good/great movie), you automatically – and dangerously – assume I don’t have the mental capacity to wrap my tiny brain around the concept.

I realise that much, if not all, of what I say, will be disregarded (something that makes me cautious about even replying), because, let’s face it, it’s nearly impossible to talk to people who either 1.) always, always, always think they’re right or 2.) fail parlously at being objective.

If you’re saying that the movie is aces because you identified with it, that’s perfectly okay. But a second viewing, a billionth viewing, won’t turn it into a good movie if it’s not. The excuse that we who didn’t think it was tops, are idiots, unable to connect the dots you cinematic reviewing geniuses seem so easily and adept to doing, is crap. The film isn’t supposed to appeal to everyone? On some level, don’t you think that truly good/great films do just that? They break and transcend barriers so that everyone can enjoy them?

The crux of all this is: Be objective about things you’re so quick to call good or masterful. Analyse them, put them through scrutiny. If they fail the test, then don’t use such colourful adjectives.

FartinMowler
Feb 10th, 2004, 06:43 PM
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0385319444/ref=sib_rdr_bc/102-4207181-1409728?%5Fencoding=UTF8&p=S0AQ#reader-link

The crappy paper back looks more interesting. Teh story is some what different :/

O71394658
Feb 10th, 2004, 07:06 PM
Hugh, there are always those movies which meet or stray from our personal tastes. I'm sure we all have movies in which we can't understand why other people like them. Movies that are considered "Classics" that we find boring and lame. There are also movies that everyone else seems to hate that we think are pretty good. It's a matter of taste, really. But you got a lecture from Tenenbaum and PJ because of your statement:

If Coppola's objective was to make the viewer feel dismal in the sense that they identified with... weariness or mediocrity, or that sick, empty feeling, then she easily accomplished that feat.

When you said this, it probably registered that you didn't appreciate the movie because you didn't understand it. It isn't an attack or a stab at your intelligence, just that they didn't see in it what you saw in it. Personal preference, really.

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 10th, 2004, 08:49 PM
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0385319444/ref=sib_rdr_bc/102-4207181-1409728?%5Fencoding=UTF8&p=S0AQ#reader-link

The crappy paper back looks more interesting. Teh story is some what different :/

You have to be joking; there is no way you are that stupid.

FartinMowler
Feb 11th, 2004, 12:01 AM
It has been fun flogging this dead horse :/

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 11th, 2004, 09:57 AM
ps. the book and movie have nothing to do with each other, except the name. the film is not based on the book, you fucking moron.

FartinMowler
Feb 11th, 2004, 12:28 PM
PS. I knew that when I found that out yesterday when I looked up "Lost in translation book" and found a dozen books with that name... >: Oh, and I like Wilco so, piss off.

Esuohlim
Feb 11th, 2004, 12:38 PM
You could say that they were going to make the movie from the book, but the whole thing was Lost in Translation :lol :lol

FartinMowler
Feb 11th, 2004, 01:49 PM
Royal did you really get this film? Edit out all the garbage: The pool scene, going to the hospital, karoake with her friends, the exercise machine and many other scenes that "I" thought where fill and if they where edited out this would not have been a movie. The phone conversation's with Bill Murray's film wife where so fake to lull the watcher into thinking "oh, this is why he is so lonely" "Oh this is why he ends up screwing a crappy bar singer instead of a young girl 30 years his juniour" Gimme a fucking break >:

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 11th, 2004, 04:01 PM
those parts were not garbage. they developed character and set pace. just fuck off already.

FartinMowler
Feb 11th, 2004, 05:02 PM
:loo Pace? OOh lip... Lip my stalkings :/ EDIT >:

http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2003-09-18/film.html/1/index.html

Bennett
Feb 11th, 2004, 05:20 PM
The only thing worth looking at in your link was the personal ad of the day: "A young Farrah Fawcett" :lol

FartinMowler
Feb 11th, 2004, 05:35 PM
http://services.springstreetnetworks.com/Services/Pod/Images/mysticspirit.jpg

Celebrity I resemble most: "A 1970s Farrah Fawcett?"


:die

Geggy
Feb 12th, 2004, 05:47 PM
just because a person thought a movie of some sort sucked doesnt neccessarily mean he didnt understand it. just because a person didn't understand the movie shouldnt make him think the movie sucked. how would the person know if the movie sucked if he never understood it in the first place anyway?

PonchtheJedi
Feb 23rd, 2004, 11:43 AM
I just saw this film this weekend, and I have but one question :

What was up with the gun guy at the party? They are having a good time, then some guy comes out with some cool gun that shoots glow in the dark bullets, and then everybody runs off and he chases them and then throws a beer at the guy. What happened? Did I miss something? And more importantly, what kind of gun did that guy have and where can I get one?

FartinMowler
Feb 23rd, 2004, 12:23 PM
That was another brilliant piece of crap moment that could have been edited out. I think Tropical is the guy to ask about weapons.

Jixby Phillips
Mar 2nd, 2004, 04:03 AM
I just got teary at the ending but I know if I were by myself I would have been crying so yeah lets call that crying >:

UPDATE: I watched it by myself for the first time (I bought it on DVD like a month ago and haven't watched it untill now) and I fucking cried like a fag for at least 10 minutes straight.

I'm watching the cut scenes with Cameron Farris and I'm all cracking up and stuff :eek

PS: I didn't like this movie nearly as much as I do now, after seeing it twice. I want to hug this movie :(

Royal Tenenbaum
Mar 2nd, 2004, 10:54 AM
Yeah, I loved it after the seconding viewing. It's way better because you really connect with the characters and pick up all the subtleness. I've watched it 4 times and it just gets better.

pjalne
Mar 2nd, 2004, 11:06 AM
I remember I wanted to watch it again the minute it was over, but I told myself to fuck off and wait until it arrived at Norwegian cinemas so I could watch it on the big screen instead. I hope I'll experience the same thing you did. Not the faggy part, but the part about liking it better.