“Lost in Translation“ is an interesting look at a foreigner’s prospective of Japan through the eyes of an actor and a wife of a photographer who are staying in the same Tokyo hotel.
The title plays an important role in understanding the meaning of the film. Ironically, the title got lost in translation, so to speak, in its foreign releases. Apparently the literal translation sounds more like a discussion on translation in other languages. As a result, the title ended up being something along the lines of “Lost in Tokyo”. That to me diminishes a large theme of the film: that many things can be lost in translation. Sofia Coppola chooses not to use subtitles for any of the foreign languages that appear in the film. That gives most viewers the feeling of Bob or Charlotte, who do not understand either. One of the best examples of that was in the hospital scene where an old Japanese man is trying to talk to Bob, who has no idea what the man is trying to say, and two Japanese ladies can be seen laughing at the two men’s ridiculous conversation. It is also apparent in the scene where the Japanese director is trying to instruct Bob in great detail, and the translator appears to water down the entire conversation to a simple word or sentence. The title, to me, gives the somewhat random plot, at times, some meaning. It framed it as sort of a satire on language/cultural barriers, and barriers in relationships as well. Without the title “Lost in Translation”, I would have struggled to find a meaning or purpose in the film. Otherwise, it would feel like an awkward romantic comedy of sorts between Bob and Charlotte.
To me, Sofia Coppola is a horrible actress (see Godfather Part III). This was my first experience with her writing/directing, and I was much more impressed by her attempts in these areas with “Lost in Translation”. She won an Oscar for original screenplay, and deservedly so. It is a very original/creative script, and I thought she had a cast and crew that brought it to life well. The story was written for Bill Murray (L.I.T. likely would not have been made had he declined the part), and I thought Scarlett Johansson complimented him well. Sofia, according to imdb.com, designed most of the shots for the film by shooting a series of photographs around Tokyo and then recreating them/using them as references while shooting the movie. I thought she did a great job setting the scene. Location was obviously an important element of the story, and the cinematography did an outstanding job showing Tokyo and visually embellishing the story. It needed to have some aesthetically pleasing elements because the plot moved somewhat slowly for a short feature film.
“Lost in Translation” had an independent film feel to it with a Hollywood name (Coppola) and cast (Murray/Johansson) behind it. It is a film that breaks the mold of a lot of recent films, and takes a lot of artistic risks in terms of plot. With about a $4 million budget, according to imdb.com, it was never meant to be a blockbuster. I liked that though because it allowed Sofia Coppola’s artistic vision to show through, and it was a genuine film that serves as a reminder for why movies are made. Too many modern studio films are marred by commercialism, but I thought this film resisted that trend, yet it was still rewarded with a profit at the box office and attention (as well as one win) from the Academy. I hope movies like this will continue to be made by the big studios, despite their minimal profits at the box office.
