|
| quote: | Originally posted by k.k.d.
I still don't get how come so many people find Lost in Traqnslation "awesome".. It's a movie that portrays the "spleen" of normality, the "ennui", and ends up being a total bore itself. Yes, the movie can be called artistic, since it shows to the average americanized viewer ("you," or, in fact, "us") the certain aspect of "beauty" of modern Japan, under a sort of "mystic" light. Yet, did it ever occur to any of you that this is not necesserly an accurate portrayal of Nippon society, but rather a caricature created by well-established stereotypes? Maybe not, but that's how it seamed to me, as I watched this "amazing film".
But anyway, back to the movie... Two "wooden" bored out of themselves characters that just float around for 2 hours and do nothing, except expressing their ennui in every possible way (especially Bill Murray) make a chef-d'oeuvre? Not to me.. This is not my idea of great movie, really, but then (as we say in pseudo-liberalism) to each their own... The redeemable features of the movie could have been that it is "smart", but alas, it is not the case, since it lacks anything that remotely ressembles a plot. When we break down the movie, at the end we see that besides the pseudo-ambience, we only see standard people doing standard (non-exciting)things, and we can't help but to draw parallels with the boring normality of everyday's life.
In my humble opinion, just as the similarly acclaimed American Splendor, this movie is overrated. Either that, or I am missing something everybody else sees. |
Why do you say that the movie is not smart because it lacks a plot? That doesn't make any sense. In the literary/drama world, plot-driven formulas were declared anachronistic in the early 20th century with the emergence of existensialism and Freudian techniques that took over the art world after World War I. Pretty much after James Joyce's Ulysses the artistic narrative has been character-driven, and that can be observed in some of the most important novels in the century like 100 Years of Solitude and so on. Plots are always there, but not structurally imposed as the principal narrative. Now films have not been as character-driven as their literary counterparts, because the short attention span of the viewers that has been inculcated by Hollywood over the years demands the same formula. And that's why I think that some people dismiss Lost in Translation, because there is no formula attached to the narrative.
Yes, there are no dramatic or grandiose plot twists that would make the average viewer go  . But the characters are so real and so well elaborated, that you can't help but be fascinated by their blossoming relationship. If what they're doing is standard or not doesn't matter, that's not relevant for this kind of film. There is so much tension in their friendship throughout the film, tension that drives the whole movie in the dreamy ambiance portrayed by the director in Tokyo. I repeat that it is poetic and musical, because that was something about the film that struck me right away, its constant tone.
I don't know much about Japan, and frankly it's not that important to me. Whether there are many stereotypes or not, well, good riddance. What movie is not full of stereotypes to begin with? There's always some kind of bias present, no matter how you do it. Tokyo is simply a vehicle for the film, not its principal aspect.
Can you tell me what movie from 2003 is better than this?
|
