I just re-watched "Lost in Translation" (one of my Christmas gifts [smile]). I couldn't help wondering if Steve and Ryan have seen it and, if so, what you guys thought of it's Japanese aspects. Personally, I love it; there's simply no way in hell that "The Return of the King" is a better film. There's just no justice in Oscar. At least Sofia Copola got best director. And remember, "For relaxing times, make it Santori time. " (By the way, I'm in love with Scarlett Johansson.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Hrrmmmm. We are doomed to extreme opposite viewpoints on every count, Coye. I really loathed that movie. I will grant that it's well put together as a film, which counts for something these days, but apart from that I do believe I could almost smell that movie as I watched it. Rotten Rotten Rotten. It struck me as a picture of a rotting life in a rotting country with a rotten no place to go. I do think it works alright as a documentary of certain bizzare and perverse aspects of Japanese culture for those who aren't already aware of them, which group I certainly belonged to before coming to live here. I knew _nothing_. So I can see people liking the movie because it shows them Japan for the first time. But I really don't know what else there is to like about the movie. What do you see in it, Coye? I wonder too what others of you who have seen it have to say.
BTW I didn't think much of The Return of the King as a film either.
and BTW again I like Suntory Whiskey. Mmmmm. Firewater.
After mentioning that you are in love with Scarlett Johansson for the second time...I really do believe you!
Nice job, Dusty. I deserved that.
Have you seen Girl with the Pearl Earing, Coye? It's another movie that puts Scarlett Johansson in another culture. It wasn't bad. The set designs and costume work were very well done.
I liked that movie too, Strauss!
I'm going to have to agree with Ryan here.
In addition, I think you could make a movie about ANY country or culture or situation or belief system, and make it look bizarre and stupid and naive simply by having Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson walking around in a depressed daze, pointing at things and smirking listlessly. (and don't tell me that wasn't part of what Sofia Coppola was trying to communicate specifically about Japan).
BTW, since seeing "Lost in Translation" in America, I saw that show with the hyper/wierd blonde Japanese host who makes his hands into the shape of a heart. His name is Matthew. I didn't think it was a real show until I saw it for myself. It's stupid, but admittedly a little funny.
We'll, Ryan wanted to know what I see in this (fantastic) film, so I'll give it a shot:
The first thing we must recognize is that LiT is not primarily about Japan: the film is about a profound sense of loneliness (and a few related themes), and the Japanese setting is accidental (though not unimportant). I don't believe that it is either the intent or the effect of the film to "make [Japan] look bizarre and stupid and naive." The foreignness of Japanese culture to a Western interloper does work to heighten the isolation of the Murray and Johansson characters (as does the insomnia of jetlag), but it does not force us into making judgments about the value of Japanese culture. I have a couple of other thoughts about why Japan makes a good setting, but I'll save them for later.
As I said, this film is primarily about profound loneliness and isolation. Murray's character is emotionally separated from his wife of decades, is in a different country than his children (who never come to the phone when he wants to talk to them), is cut off from his agent and his normal career, and is even disconnected from the everyday surroundings of his own culture and language. Johannson's character is essentially isolated from everyone she knows: her husband is never present, he talks more with the blonde chick than with his wife whenever he is around, she calls home to express these feelings (including "I don't even know who I married") and her interlocutor is too busy doing something else to listen to her. Even her present Japanese friends sort of abandon her in a strip club. She also experiences some cultural and linguistic the isolation, but she seems to be more adaptable than the Murray character. At one point she visits what I believe to be a shinto temple (a beautifully filmed sequence, by the way), but during the above mentioned phone call, she expresses concern that she couldn't feel anything while she was there: the fault is not with the temple but with her isolation from spirituality. Then we have to add in the fact that it is 20-30 minutes into the film before these characters have any sort of real interaction. Isolation and loneliness.
I have to keep the rest of this shorter. I think the other major theme of this film is the plastic nature of affection: human affections can sometimes rather easily slip from one form to another. Neither of these characters is looking for a romantic affair. In the early stages of their interaction (I would say up until the karaoke scene), their relationship is safely characterized as a platonic friendship. Each character has found someone they can connect with (in large part because of their shared afflictions of insomnia and loneliness). Even when their relationship turns romantic, it is never sexual. This is laudable simply for its originality in contemporary screenplays, but I think it has more importance than that. What happens when two people find themselves unwillingly entangled in a romantic relationship? There are incredible tensions between their old friendship, their changed affections and their committed love for their spouses. This is fantastic subject matter for a film.
You can also add that the acting is supurb and the cinematography fantastic. And I'm in love with Scarlett Johannson.
I was going to say something about the hyper/weird blonde talk show host, but I'll save it for another time. Whew!
And yes, Strauss, I have seen Girl with the Pearl Earring. The acting was very commendable, and I thought the movie was pretty good overall. It's just that I have this problem with Dutch people...
I'm not personally offended since I am not Dutch, but what is wrong with Dutch people?
"Jordan VanOort": do I need to say anything else?
Is that really how you spell Jordan's last name? Cah-razy. No wonder nobody likes the Dutch.
Wait a minute, I like Dutch spelling. The aa's oo's, ie's, ei's, and ij's are fun vowels that always get butchered by Americans who know nothing about the language.
What a stupid bunch of vowels for a stupid language spoken by the stupid Dutch.
"Throw the horse over the fence some hay." (as my stupid Dutch roommate used to say)
Post a Comment