Lost in translation

blueranger12 said:Look, I get that everyone wants to talk about love, but honestly? It’s all just too thin—like some watered-down, tasteless broth.

🙏 😂

Even vegetarians wouldn't touch watered-down broth. 😬

P.S. I just remembered what I was getting at. Most movies work by cranking up everyday stuff and pushing it to the extreme just to keep people watching. That’s standard procedure—literally what they teach you in film school. If a car flips, you don't just dent the fender; you make it explode. If a character is terrified, you don't tell the actor to freeze up; you tell them to scream. If they're angry, you don't have them tapping their fingers; you have them smashing vases. If they're burning with passion, you don't go for a longing look; you have them diving into an embrace.

Well, someone decided to break the rules. See, Sofia 😁 proved that if you make a truly introverted film, it can absolutely blow up over the tiniest move from Murray: he whispers something to her and kisses her. No tongue involved. But the music is cranked to eleven, JUST LIKE HONEY!!! And hey, it's just a kiss. Whatever... 😁

Apply that logic to real life where all those goth, emo, introverted kids finally get their moment, and you've got a full-blown revolution. 😁

dustyscout53 said:Now blueranger12 is claiming people who don't like this movie just don't watch enough films. That’s where they're wrong. A huge part of modern art—not just movies—is about human alienation. But hey, Coppola turned it into a massive hit. Mostly because she only spent 4 million dollars on it, and because it captures that feeling of being totally alienated in some far-off, exotic land.

I take it back. I was generalizing way too much. That was just the moody, emo teenager in me talking.😬

Paradigm, huh? I guess what they mean is that most movies follow the exact same formula—you know, the predictable beats we’ve all seen a thousand times. People get used to that rhythm, it becomes background noise. Then along comes something that breaks the pattern. Something that actually hits different. It targets a completely different part of the brain.

Like I said before, I had a feeling the conversation would head in this direction... which is fine, I guess. But honestly, people haven't quite wrapped their heads around it yet. Even Aristotle understood that the "three-act structure" is basically the bedrock of literary work. That concept of "structure" you mentioned? It’s pretty much hardwired into us—it's baked into our perception, our cognitive processes, our entire nervous system. Generally speaking, any art form that relies on time—theater, movies, music, literature, even high fashion couture—can be broken down into three phases: the setup, the conflict, and the resolution. Of course, that only applies if the artist actually intends to communicate something. If they don't, then we're just dealing with something unfinished or incomplete. Though, looking at films like Lost in Translation, it isn't even really about being "incomplete." For something to truly feel unfinished, there has to be at least some indication that an intelligent attempt was made to say something meaningful in the first place.

I mean... I wouldn't exactly be against it. Actually, if anything, some of my favorite moments as a viewer happen when a movie leaves these intentional "gaps" in the narrative. You know, those expertly placed holes that aren't just mistakes, but rather calculated choices. It gives you room to fill them in with your own perspective, your own history, or just whatever vibe you're feeling at the moment. It lets the art become something uniquely yours. Those kinds of films are rare, though. And unfortunately, this one just isn't that kind of movie.

.s. I think I finally found my train of thought. Most movies just take everyday things and crank them up to eleven to actually keep an audience awake. It’s pretty standard stuff you learn in film school. If a car flips over, you don't just show the metal denting; you make the whole thing explode. If a character is terrified, you don't tell the actor to freeze up; you tell them to scream. If they're angry, you don't have them tapping their fingers impatiently; you have them smashing vases. If they're head over heels in love, you don't just give them a longing stare; you have them diving into each other's arms.

Well, you added that part later... so just a quick thought. You're pivoting toward dramaturgy here, and there’s really one rule to it: an event only "broadcasts" new information if something actually happens. If nothing moves, there's no info, which means boredom. Like in
Lost in Translation.
Since we're talking about this supposed isolation... calling this movie isolated feels a bit forced. I mean, whenever you visit a foreign country, you feel isolated. Where's the subtlety? Using that as the central theme for this film feels a little silly to me. That whole idea of feeling isolated in a foreign land 🙄 is just... wow, what a genius move. 😁

If you want a real movie about isolation, go watch the Assassination of Richard Nixon. Then come back and let me know so we can talk more about it.

Ugh, skipping the whole thread again... just tell me, is dustyscout53 obsessing over microphones yet?
thanks 😁😁

blueranger12 said:A short attention span, huh? 😢 Or maybe just a lack of cinematic appreciation? Look, it just takes practice...

Oh, give me a break! Just because I don't have some high-brow taste doesn't mean Lost in Translation wasn't boring as hell.
For me, a movie like "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" is actually terrifying, yet 70% of people probably fall asleep halfway through—so what?
It really is a lack of film appreciation. In my opinion, Bill is the only one worth watching in that movie.
And what kind of "cinematic expertise" are you even using to act so superior toward me?

Jeremy Flores10 said:Oh, come on, just cut it out!

Seriously! 😠
I watched The English Patient and thought it was great. You can definitely do better than that. 😠 😁

P.S. I already retracted that statement. It was inappropriate and totally uncalled for. 😳

Jose Miller17 said:Not reading through everything again... just tell me, is dustyscout53 bringing up microphones again?
thanks 😁😁

Seriously though, this is my chance to rethink my take on the mic. 😁 😁

I don't actually think it's bad anymore—I mean, the budget was only $4 million, right? I'll give it another look and see if I can find anything worthwhile.

Can't help but compare those quiet, introverted vibes to Carver's writing—especially stuff like *What We Talk About When We Talk About Love*. If he can pull off an atmosphere ten times heavier than some old folks out at a bingo hall (maybe even more than *Please Shut Up, Please*), then *Lost in Translation* really needs to be something much better to justify all this hype.

blueranger12 🙏

Watched the movie last night and honestly, loved it. Probably won't stick with me after a month, but it really hit right. Maybe it’s just about the mood you’re in when you watch it? I went in with zero expectations—I barely even knew what the plot was about.

The vibe was a solid five out of ten. That sleepy, slow-motion boredom vs. the absolute madness of the city. And the dialogue? Spot on. People actually spitting words at each other. All that small talk, mindless chatter, laughing at things that aren't even funny... how is that not realistic? We all act like that subconsciously when we're trying to impress someone we're into. The soundtrack, though... wow. And that tagline "everyone wants to be found"—that killed me.

I see people calling this a romance. I wouldn't go that far. It's more like mutual attraction playing a game, especially since they only escaped their own messy lives once they got the perspective that Japan provides.

Also, the ending bugged me. Sure, it’s Hollywood sweet—them meeting in a crowd, him whispering in her ear, the kiss before parting ways—but I would’ve preferred if it just ended at that goodbye at the hotel.

dustyscout53 said:Please, this is my chance to rethink my whole take on this movie. 😁 😁
I don't really think it's bad anymore, considering the budget was a measly $4 million. I'll give it another watch and see if I can actually find something worthwhile.
These quiet, introverted stories always make me compare them to Carver's writing, especially *What We Talk About When We Talk About Love*. Honestly, if he can create an atmosphere ten times more heavy than just some old folks hitting a raffle at a local fair (maybe that's what people meant by "Will you please shut up"), then *Lost in Translation* would HAVE to be even better to justify all this hype.

I bet it was that whole bit about the kid and the ocean that got to you... high expectations usually ruin the first impression.

Anyone else got a little one running around?

A tiny little prince?

northernfalcon30 said:Who’s read The Little Prince?

The Little Prince?

I mean, why do you think he's called "little" anyway? And why all that talk with the roses?

I don't know, I read it when I was just a kid, and everything felt so much bigger back then...

😕

Give me a break. What’s actually the point of making these massive, sweeping judgments like "this movie is good or bad" when everyone just twists the facts to suit their own narrative? Everyone’s taste is different, these debates go in circles endlessly because there’s such a massive spectrum of genres out there, and let’s face it—it's rare as hell for a film to land perfectly for everyone. To me, it seems much more logical to just say, "Okay, I watched it, and I liked it because X, or hated it because Y." 🙂

It’s honestly pretty idiotic to try and manufacture these arbitrary scoring systems in your head and then act like you're preaching the one absolute truth to everyone else. Truth is as subjective as we are—just let it be. We should be enriching our discussions and getting to know each other better by actually analyzing the work, rather than just shoving our opinions down people's throats. It would be a total nightmare if we all thought exactly the same way, seriously... 🤔

Personally, I actually get a kick out of reading all the wildly different perspectives on the exact same thing happening right in front of us. You eventually realize that no two experiences are actually the same, because that individual processing is what gives everyone their own unique final flare. The whole point might even be what shipka was getting at—some insight into general culture or whatever similar nonsense critics obsess over—but even that can be pretty deceptive...🙂

When I hate a movie that everyone else seems to love, I get worried. I don't just lose sleep. I toss and turn! Do I really lack enough life experience to find the references that make watching a meta-narrative actually satisfying? Or have I just lived too shallow a life?

I’m genuinely concerned. Take Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, for example. I was pretty much the only one here who didn't dig it. I was spitting mad, trying to philosophize my way through it, but a part of me started doubting myself. Everyone else here seems so sure of themselves, though. They're solid as Black Sten. "This is garbage," they say.

I find it much easier to deal with positive feedback than with negative criticism.

When I watch a movie and just... don't get it—especially when everyone else seems to be loving it—it honestly worries me. It’s not just a "meh" feeling. I can't sleep. I just lie there, tossing and turning. Is it me? Am I lacking enough life experience to actually find those deep, cinematic connections that make a movie feel like a mirror to one's own existence? Or have I just lived a particularly shallow life?

Man... honestly... you might have a problem 😁

Failing to hit the mainstream average should probably be seen as a sign of individuality.

Jessica Nguyen85 said:Struggling to reach mediocrity should actually be seen as a sign of individuality.

Being at peace with who you are without trying to improve? That's just being average. 😉

Plus, thinking your perspective on the world is the ultimate truth is just pure vanity. 😉 😉 😉 😉

You know what? We should just meet up on some frozen tundra and settle this whole Lost in Translation debate once and for all. 😁

Being at peace with who you are without trying to be "better" is just being average.

I guess what I meant was 😁

Thinking your perspective on the world is the ultimate truth is just pure vanity.

Look... just because someone holds an opinion doesn't mean they think it's the gospel truth. I don't know where this idea comes from. You won't find me—or anyone else here, really—claiming our takes are the absolute best. We just have thoughts. That’s it. It seems to be becoming a thing on this forum lately (not just in the Movies section)—just a few posts ago, Joseph Lee3 was busy lecturing everyone on how to be humble. But look, if my username is attached to a post, it's just my opinion, regardless of how I landed there. I dare anyone to find a single instance where I've added "AND THIS IS THE BEST AND SMARTEST TAKE EVER" to my posts. Btw... this would make a decent sig 😁

We should just meet up on some frozen tundra and settle this once and for all.

After we "settle it" out there on the ice, nothing's going to grow for at least a decade 😁 Honestly, that's just how long it takes for the ground to recover after someone spills twenty liters of beer everywhere. If you throw in some Ozujsko, make it fifteen years 😁

Jessica Nguyen85 said:- So, a few posts ago, Joseph Lee3 was busy playing the humble guy. Look, if my name is on a post, it’s my take, period—doesn't matter how I landed on it. I dare anyone to find where I added anything extra to suggest my opinion is somehow the ultimate truth. By the way... this would make a great sig 😁

So this is a lesson in fake modesty..😁...
but I wouldn't count on those empty promises from blueranger12.. he's already missed one showdown he swore he'd show up for...😁😁