February 11, 2004

Lost in Translation

i watched the movie lost in translation the other night despite enigma's less than stellar review. it was, afterall, a bill murray movie. the former SNL star played has-been actor bob harris who goes to japan to pick up some ad work. scarlett johansson plays charlotte -- a attractive, bright yale graduate (philosophy major) who is tagging along with here celebrity photographer husband. i personally found the characters to be realistic and personable and the movie to have an almost voyeuristic feel about it.

bob is feeling rather lost, an idea that comes up in repeated and shifting forms throughout the film. it's not just the language or his size, but his contacts with his family back in los angeles. they produce not yearning so much as weariness along with unarticulated questions. his wife faxes him notes such as noting he missed his son's birthday, demands a decision concerning the new carpet for his study (she prefers burgandy). in fact, she sends him swatches of carpet and upon opening they tumble to the floor as if he has no understanding of why they are even there. when he calls, she is always rushed, and in not so many words brushes him off.

charlotte on the other hand has a husband that fawns over her constantly, well, between work and sleep and celebrity friends, yet appears to have no notion of who she is or why they are married. the two run at different speeds and seemingly in different times. he collapses into bed late at night and stumbles off to work in the morning, occasionally leaving her alone for days at a time. she has a noticable need to feel recognized, special, and deserving.

Charlotte: I just don't know what I'm supposed to be.
Bob: You'll figure that out. The more you know who you are, and what you want, the less you let things upset you.

it's a common theme: she feels alientated; he is weary; both are lonely. they meet at the hotel bar, confess their inability to sleep to each other and before long they are sharing sarcastic glances and exploring the city together. their connection isn't fleeting and the movie doesn't pretend otherwise. it also doesn't show it as salvation or even resolution, but rather investigation, or perhaps contemplation. the two remain poised throughout, neither sure of where things are going to lead, but doing their best to enjoy the moment.

the film makes good use of song and background to help provide not only the lonely feel for the characters, but the fulfillment they find in each other during their moments together. bob and charlotte live with unarticulated loss and the movie doesn't fix that for them. they awkwardly try and fix it for themselves in the least of enviable situations, but then, like the movie (and perhaps life), it quietly ends. nothing resolved.

the romantic hiding inside of me gives the film a thumbs up.

Posted by ac at February 11, 2004 12:47 PM

Comments

Please explain to me how cheating (emotionally or physically & both occurred in this movie) on wives or husbands can be construed in any way, shape, or form as romantic? Is that the quality of love and the commitment level you desire in a relationship? Would you find it romantic if you found out your significant other was having an affair?

Posted by: XXX at February 11, 2004 02:28 PM

well you have the avg. or most popular view of this movie as evident by most that have seen it including critics.

i lacked something for me. there was nothing new in it for me. perhaps i expected more, but as i said i have been lost in translation many times (minus the extracuric) to care to see it in a movie.

Posted by: Enigma at February 11, 2004 06:18 PM

xxx: i never said that "cheating" was romantic; but that the romantic (what little there is) in me enjoyed the movie. and frankly, the idea of these two people crossing paths at an unlikely time and place and being capable of providing one another something the other lacked in their lives is quite romantic. it meets webster's definition as i know it. cheating and romance, imho, are mutally exclusive.

regarding your second question ... if by quality you mean having a romantic/emotional attachment, sure who wouldn't? as for the commitment level, i'm not sure what you mean. clearly neither bob nor charlotte were getting everything they needed from their mates and that is about all the information the movie provides. regardless, that doesn't excuse their indiscretion especially bob's with the redhead lounge singer.

as to your last question, no, i would not find that romantic; however, that does not mean it wouldn't feel (and from their perspective be) romantic to those involved.

that's my answer in a nutshell.

Posted by: ac at February 12, 2004 10:36 PM