Lost In Translation

For the romantic one, this movie will have you questioning modern day romance, but that’s exactly what director Sofia Coppola intends. Lost In Translation beautifully paints a picture of two humans who are both physically and emotionally lost in their lives. If you can spare a little under two hours in the day, Lost In Translation is worth the watch.
Bob Harris (Bill Murray), a middle-aged actor, agrees to shoot a series of commercials for a whiskey company in Tokyo. The gig has him staying in the city for an extended period of time, and living out of a skyscraper hotel. In the same hotel, Charlotte (Scarlet Johansson) is staying with her husband of three years who is on an assignment as a photographer.
At first, it seems strange that the two characters wanted to come to Tokyo, but the audience soon realizes why. Harris is escaping his unhappy marriage and family regardless of how annoying the whiskey shoots are, while Charlotte is trying to search for meaning in her life.
The two characters randomly meet in the hotel bar on multiple occasions and decide to go on an adventure one night. The two connect on a variety of levels in spite of their slight age gap and different lives.
Bill Murray is known for comedy, so performing in a more serious role would be noticeable for those that know his work. Regardless, his portrayal of this character was balanced perfectly. Murray creates a man who finds romance with Charlotte without the sense of being an utterly unfaithful man to his wife. Even though this film is considered to be drama, it was easy to find humor in many of Murray’s scenes, which added a light note to the somewhat lost feeling this film gave throughout.
Johansson on the other hand was somewhat green with her acting. While she played the part well, it was easy to tell that Murray was a much more seasoned actor on the screen. Johansson played the character too depressingly for my personal taste.
The sense of being lost and finding romance in these situations rings loud throughout the entire film. The characters are in a strange city that makes no sense to them, they both have strange feelings about their marriages, both characters feel lost in their own lives entirely, and yet they manage to find romance between them. It’s a theme that seems to be more truthful to real life than what many modern day romance movies surmount to. This was a huge plus in my book.
The film seemed to drag in certain spots, although my attention was kept in the beginning even when it seemed slow. One reason is because it took a long time to lead up to when the two characters finally start interacting outside of the hotel bar. It is possible this was done to paint a better picture of each of their lives, but this caused me to lose focus occasionally.
One surprising addition to the film was Anna Farris, an actress known for playing bombshell blonde roles in farces. Farris played Kelly, which is a girl that seems to have a strange relationship with Carlotte’s husband. It surprised me that Anna Farris would be casted in a serious film with serious actors, but she played the part well for what it was worth.
To conclude, Lost in Translation is absolutely worth a watch if you are looking for something more real to life. It manages to capture the very real lifes of a middle aged, married man, and a younger woman who has just been married. Because of this, Lost in Translation speaks to a wide range of audiences. I would give this movie 2.9 out of 4 stars.

Comments

  1. Good lead. A nice summary of theme that would make a romantic (not me necessarily) want to continue reading. The plot summary is also nicely focused.

    You’ll want to watch your use of passive voice. Otherwise, well done and well organized.