I was really surprised that "Lost in Translation" topped so many reviewers' lists. Although, I was more surprised that "Russian Ark" made it onto a few local Top 10 lists -- at least two people fell asleep during the matinee I saw. Perhaps I would have enjoyed it more had their snoring not provided comic relief, but I doubt it. I'm more disappointed that so little attention has been given to "Raising Victor Vargas", which I thought was one of the year's best films. In fact, few of the actors were professionals, which enhanced the authentic feel of the film.

In response to F.Maxwell: Intelligent people touching down even briefly in a completely foreign environment will surely imagine a warmth and humanity behind the stereotypes. This slight, overly-lauded offering made no attempt to show that. It was a Japanese freak show all the way. As for the snoozers B. Jones refers to; any negative comments I heard about Russian Ark came from people shockingly ignorant of Russian and European history (never mind the film history the piece was making). Personally, I bought the DVD.

"Russian Ark" should be renamed to "Russian Wank." Dull, dull, dull. In its defense, at least it wasn't as wanky as Peter Greenaway's "Prospero's Books." That was a real handjob for English profs.

"Japan as strange" comes with a disclaimer. My take on Bob and Charlotte is that neither person is simply a foreigner set adrift in a culture they can't understand. There's more to it. Both are emotionally numb in regards to their own lives, and are seeing Japan filtered through that numbness, so that everything around them is exaggerated or heightened. It's as if everything is thrown into relief. Charlotte does explore some of the 'deeper' aspects of Japanese culture, but in such a short span of time, everything is pure observation, on the surface. Neither of them really want to be there, and that's not necessarily because the film hates Japan. Put them in San Fran, for example, and they'd likely be just as uncomfortable in their skin. The more important message in the film, in my opinion, is what remains elusive.

Emotionally numb? Perhaps. I can see his jadedness combined with a certain generational perspective being the culprit for the excess surface dwelling. But a 20-something university brat living in the 21st Century, well after Japan's wierdness was common knowledge and no doubt the subject of a million term papers? Tough sell. Anyone seen any English translations of Japanese reviews?

Well, FM, I have traveled alone--a solo month in Europe most recently. And yes, the article is my opinion. Who else's? Perhaps you're right about my betraying some antipathy for Sofia Coppola, which I agree isn't fair--but when you react badly to a writer/director's personal project, it's hard to avoid a personal element to the criticism. I will try harder in future, unless I decide that I really dislike the person. Maybe if there's evidence the director is a cat hater or something. Mel, your comments go back to the main arguments I have had with fans of the film--what is the film's attitude toward its main characters? Friends have argued as you do, that these are disoriented, detached people, and that their reaction to Japan is not the film's. But based on the rest of the script, I don't have enough faith in the film to believe that. Haven't seen Russian Ark. A good friend of mine raves over Raising Victor Vargas. having finally bought a DVD player, I'll rent it.

I think Burgess is off the mark with this one. True, the movie went too far a couple times in it's freaky portrayal of Japanese stereotypes, but - as I think anyone who's spent any time in Japan will attest - it's a wierd, wierd place for a westerner. It seems to me that Burgess suffers from a cultural hypersensitivity that automatically rejects any treatment of a foreign culture that's anything but adulatory. And by no means does this film go anywhere near the buffoonery of Peter Sellers' The Party. Many of the 'wacky Japan' elements touch on serious social issues - pornography and prostitution are ubiquitous under the staid Japanese surface. And Japanese television is so over the top that it's almost impossible to parody - that talk show looked pretty accurate to me. Furthermore, alienation in Japan seems to be par for the course for many westerners - a lot of Japanese people don't speak english, don't like gaijin and either ignore them or avoid contact. Given the huge cultural and language barrier, it's pretty natural for anglophones to stick together, and most do. It's not Europe. Burgess also overlooks the scenes of admiration for Japanese tradition and aesthetics - sure, they're superficial, but anyone visiting a foreign culture for a week is constrained to the superficial, and I thought the movie treated this perfectly. And I didn't get the sense that Bob and Charlotte hated Japan at all - didn't they want to stay at the end? Their early antipathy was mostly a projection of their unhappiness with their own lives. But then, I liked Wings of Desire too.

loved Lost in Translation, don't like S.B.'s whiney, bitchy reviews.

I felt the same way. Lost in translation is so arrogant and stupid that it made me wonder what is the big deal about an affair in a strange country, between two people that can't speak the language. They are just a reflection of the mechanized, programmed, consumeristic lives, most people in that economic class experience. Full of anxiety and bullshit. This is the first Murray film I disliked with passion. I hadn't been in a film theater since Urga. Then I went because it was Murray acting. How disappointing. How xenophobe!

Having lived solo in Shinjuku (the ward of Tokyo where the film is primarily set) for a year, I can say that Lost in Translation was overwhelmingly authentic. The hooker scene was the only thing that didn't ring true; the remainder of the film is the most accurate portrayal of modern Japanese urban life I've ever seen on screen. Like it or not, for the most part Japan is a culture of *types*, which is part of its appeal. At all times the film portrayed the compassion of the Japanese but also the strangeness of the customs, which is the first thing any gaijin in the country will see. The two foreigners displayed not hatred for Japan, but a culture shock with which I entirely sympathized. They were disconnected, in so many ways, from the people that surrounded them, and the film was meant to display that. It has nearly nothing to do with affairs and everything to do with the bonds people form under difficult circumstances. Spend a year living and working (not traveling) alone in Japan, and the film will likely take on new meaning for you.

Having lived in Japan for a year, I agree with some of Paul's points. I should add that while he may look like a caricature, the game show host is actually a real comedian in Japan. I was once an extra on a Japanese game show and he was one of the guests - wearing the same outfit that appeared in 'Lost in Translation'.

You will find Japanese tourists sticking together to insulate themselves from the culture shock on the American end as well. For me, that game show host is far less harmful or freakish than just about any of the American "Televangelists" who command equally large audiences.

I've been wanting to comment on this film for awhile, but haven't been able to see it for some time-sometimes the pirate DVDs aren't so prompt here in Viet Nam. Having lived and worked in Japan for more than 3 years, I would like to agree with Tom and Paul. Yes, "Matthew's Best Hit TV" IS a real show in Japan. Of course, Matthew is the comedian Fujii Takashi's character-most comedians there need a character, a buffoon. Even the great director Kitano 'Beat' Takeshi. It's a Japanese comedic convention. The version in the film may as well been on Japanese TV. Everything was the same. It was VERY authentic in its protrayal of (post)modern, urban Japan: the TV, the mix of traditional/hyper pop culture, the "counter"culture of the young(ish) surfers and clubbers, the neon. The hooker was, however, horrible. My wife, who is Japanese, kept saying "Americans will all think we're weirdos!". But, she also laughed her ass off...Go figure. I was also troubled by the cheap jokes at the expense of the not-so-accurate Japanese accents. It was so Jerry Lewis "Me so solly!". Beneath Murray. And the characters DID seem to have contempt for their surroundings, although at one point Murray does ask his wife to stop making pasta and make more Japanese food. He also clearly doesn't want to leave. Perhaps one of the themes of the film is that age-old nugget of getting out of our ruts, letting down our guards and truly living.

I agree with most of this review, except for the idea that the film makes fun of the Japanese. The only Japanese characters who are targets for fun are the incompetent translator at the filming of the Suntory ad, and the prostitute. Neither of these characters rings true. The translator would never have been employed in such a big-budget set-up, and the prostitute doesn't belong on this planet. All the rest is realistic, and if you laugh at it, then Ms. Coppola is probably secretly laughing at you, the way she laughs at her own characters. Example: At the sushi bar, Bob Harris observes that the chef is smiling. He then proceeds to make a joke about how in Japan, blackened toes are probably a delicacy. Then he looks at the chef and says, "why the straight face?" It never occurs to him that maybe the chef understands English. Who's the butt of this joke? The Japanese with their "weird" cuisine, or the Westerners with their insularity and insensitivity? There's a lot of this throughout the film. Such cleverness doesn't make it a good film, though, in my opinion. It just underlines a nasty, supercilious streak that runs through the whole film.

I can agree with the review in that the Japanese characters (a hooker, the talk show host,the television director, the party boys, the business types) may be "wacky, creepy, bizarre, or plastic", but is that because they are Japanese or because they are- a hooker, a talk show host, a television director, etc.? Why would anyone think the behavior of a prostitute is representative of the general public?

Didn't see the movie, but loved Steve's "Bitchey, whiney" review". Don't let the hostility get you down. Even if I end up liking "Lost in Translation" when I see it,I will still believe that you have made an articulate & witty case against it.

For once, an accurate and modern portrayal of urban Japan makes it to the silver screen, and all Japan-phile Steve Burgess can do is scream "hates Japan!". Give me a break. Anyone who knows Japan knows this movie rings true (mostly). Are the Americans boorish and alienated in their swanky Hilton hotel digs? Yes. That's the point! Are they shallow sometimes, and self-absorbed to the point of being annoying? Yes, and that too is the point. This movie eloquently contrasts our (American, Canadian) sad society with their (Japanese) sad society. It's a bittersweet comedy/romance/drama that is more human than any of the movies Burgess reviews favourably. Stop trying to curry favour with the Japanese girls on Robson Street, Steve, and give us an objective movie review. The last movie you trashed, American Beauty, won Best Picture Oscar and is considered an all-time classic. This time around, it seems, the point of this movie was "Lost in Translation" on Mr. Burgess.

Merci beaucoup, Steve, for summing up my opinion better than I could. I went to see this film to see what the hype was all about and both my female friend and I (aside from being bored, in spite of the fact we love languidly paced movies that most people find boring) spent the movie cringing, worried that Charlotte's character would end up having sex with Bill Murray's. At least they didn't, but how many bloody times have we seen the pairing of a young girl with an older man? Couldn't something new been explored? Why not a woman with a younger guy? Or better yet, why not an American girl who falls for a Japanese boy??? Though some of the characteristics about Japanese society that were shown may be accurate, it is inaccurate to cram the most freakish aspects of a country into a portrait while downplaying the less freakish characteristics. The scenes of traditional Japanese culture--such as when she visits a temple, etc--were passed over very briefly without any explanation or dialogue. The depiction of Japan was very unbalanced. More importantly, there were opportunities to have supporting Japanese characters on a more substantial level but instead they were relegated to bit parts. None of them had any impact on the story line, yet easily could have. Maybe it should've been called Lost Opportunities.

-in Tokyo 20 years. Yea, I like Bill Murray, but the film is boring. Most Japanese think it's boring too. A Japanese freak show it was not. Wanna see some real freaks? I'll send you a tape of hours of real Japanese TV!

Thanks for the great review. It's about time that people have the guts to be able to say that they don't like something that reflects something wrong in North American attitudes towards the "other". I'm sick and tired of hearing all the whiners who don't like living in other cultures and nations because "they're not like us". Look at your average ESL website like Dave's ESL cafe. When people continue to proliferate the chat spaces with diatribes about how they're just being "honest" when they call Vietnamese liars or the Japanese as shallow, it makes be yawn and wonder why the hell these people bother leaving home at all. Lost In Translation is simple-minded ethnocentric stupidity masquerading as a pretentious art film. Those who buy into it's views already have a ton of their own baggage and really should question whether it's the cutlure that they don't like, or if it's really their own limitations that are the issue.

It's easy to agree with an "accurate" portrayal of a cutlure when you don't like it yourself. Just to provide some balance to this unbalanced debate that living somewhere somehow makes you a fucking expert: I've lived in Japan for 20 years and the movie made me angry. To all of you who've "lived in Japan" for a measly five to ten years, would you say that a Jap who moved to Canada or the US could accurately and fairly sum it up in that short time? Well, of course not. Hell, I'd say that YOU couldn't even explain your own damned country to yourself. After living in the U.S. for years, I still don't know what to make of it. I am a white dude, and my Japanese wife and kids are not freaks. Nor are those we consider friends and colleagues. I resent how a silly, priviledged American kid's movie has become a pennant behind which so many culturally inept and enthnocentric people have rallied behind. It's a simplistic and dismissive way to ignore the real issues: that we all have our prejudices and we have to work to overcome them. It's not a one way street: if only they'd change, we would find them acceptable. Well, acceptable people are everywhere. You just have to have the openness and decency to look. Obviously, from the tone of many "I've lived there-so I know everything about the place" people, this isn't important. The only thing that matters is that you're better than everyone else. No wonder the world is fucked.

"Arrogance" is the operative word here. In "Lost in Translation," not a single attempt is made by Bob or Charlotte to communicate in Japanese. It's as if it were beneath Charlotte to respond with a simple "Konichiwa" when warmly welcomed by an ikebana matron. Worse yet are Bob's bursts of jokey invective directed in English at uncomprehending bystanders, whose only crime is their Japanese-ness. Sure, Americans aren't exposed to the same diversity found in polyglot Europe. But does that justify linguistic arrogance? Imagine French tourists in New York refusing to speak English, deriding waiters in French, and wondering amongst themselves, eyes rolling in disgust, why the few Americans who make efforts to speak their language make such idiots of themselves. No, even the French aren't that arrogant. This is behavior unique to the imperialist worldview. It's the linguistic equivalent to what one-time currency speculator George Soros recently observed about the current global power dynamic: "In the Roman Empire, only the Romans voted. In modern global capitalism, only Americans vote." "Lost in Translation" illustrates how Americans have made the peculiarly imperialist combination of ignorance and arrogance a national identity.

I stumbled across Mr Burgess' reviews whilst on google. I must admit, as a student studying Japanese language, and a freelance games journalist, I agree with everything he says about the film. I also have to agree with him about the "Lord of the rings" films. Dont even get me started. Well said sir, a breath of fresh air in an ocean of otherwise pretty insane films reviews. I won't try and add anything more worthwhile other than to say "well done and keep up the good style of thinking!"

The movie is not about Japan. If you think it's about Japan, you've missed the point.

I think it sould have pictrues

I think it sould have pictrues