In preparation for this discussion, I found a review of Lost in Translation (Coppola, 2003) that was written by Elvis Mitchell (2003) for the New York Times. After reading his review, I will discuss whether he likes the film, and how he supports his position. I will also discuss whether I agree with his opinion and supply supporting points.
In his review, Mitchell gives many reasons why he likes Lost in Translation. He describes the film as hilarious and sexy. He credits the abilities of the cinematographer, editor, and sound director. However, the majority of his adoration is reserved for Bill Murray’s portrayal of Bob Harris. Mitchell writes, “Here he supplies the kind of performance that seems so fully realized and effortless that it can easily be mistaken for not acting at all”. He also praises Coppola on
…show more content…
This time, I viewed it analytically, taking notes and paying close attention to details that I would normally miss. I agree with Mitchell’s positive assessment to some extent. Even though there is humor and romance present in the film, I would not describe it as hilarious or sexy, because the humor is subtle and romance is restrained. Furthermore, there are positive aspects of the film that Mitchell does not touch on. For example, I enjoy how Coppola uses cinematography and scene selection to convey the characters’ loneliness, isolation and disconnection. Scenes that show characters alone, staring out at the bleak grey city, or wandering empty hallways and streets, attempting to fill the time. These scenes contrast with the excitement and warmth that the characters emit when they meet and spend time together. I also appreciate how Coppola treats the final scene. Most romance films end neatly tied up, but here, she shows Murray whispering something inaudible into Johansson’s ear, leaving the viewer to decide what Murray might have said and how their story will
For my cultural activity, I watched a Spanish-language movie with English subtitles in order to better understand the film. The purpose of this paper is to express my reactions concerning the Puerto Rican film Casi Casi. In summary, Casi Casi is a high school romantic comedy about a boy who runs for Student Council President who is attracted to a girl who also decides to run against him. At the beginning of the film, my initial reaction was that the film was going to be very difficult to view and interpret due to the fact that it was produced in a foreign language that I am not fluent in.
The critically acclaimed 2003 movie "Lost in Translation" tells a story of two Americans in Tokyo, whose chance meeting in a hotel lounge leads to a development of a short but intimate connection. Bob Harris, a 55-year-old well-known, but lonely, American movie star is in Tokyo shooting a commercial for a brand of Japanese whiskey. Charlotte, a twenty-something, is a recent Yale philosophy major graduate who is accompanying her constantly busy photographer husband. Bored and jetlagged, both Bob and Charlotte attempt to deal with their culture shock by spending a great deal of their time at the hotel or by venturing out to only nearby locations. Although the two share their monotonous existence at the hotel for a couple of days, their paths do not cross for a considerable amount of time. One evening, Bob and Charlotte finally meet at the hotel lounge. After exchanging a short but pleasant conversation, they realize that they have a few things in common, including the current dissatisfaction with their lives as well as the lack of enjoyment in their visit to Japan. Their chance meeting in the hotel lounge soon
Response: Media producers create texts with an audience in mind, and while they try to remain entertaining and original in most of their films they also need to ensure that the audience is able to understand and engage with the text, and thus with the preferred meaning, by using conventions and generally accepted techniques. Tom Tykwer’s independent, and unmistakably avant-garde film, Run Lola Run in many ways, defies Hollywood cinematic convention, but must also conform with audience expectations in order to convey its intended themes. Tykver conveys a preferred reading to his target audience that
Adaptation between literary and visual media frequently involves the problematic notion of ‘fidelity’, or the degree of faithfulness with which a preceding work is reproduced. Conspicuous debates have been spouted among various scholars and critics concerning this prominent issue. In the screen adaptation of No Country for Old Men, filmmakers Joel and Ethan Coen utilize an audio-visual sign system of film in order to convey a new level of symbolism within the diegesis. As a result, the issue of ‘fidelity discourse’ is raised due to the elision of key dialogue from Cormac McCarthy’s precursor text.
Lost in Translation is about displacement, alienation, and loneliness. These themes are explored through two perspectives. Charlotte and Bob represent different stages of loneliness and dislocation. Charlotte is a recent Yale graduate, who is not sure of herself nor career path. Bob is at the end of his acting career. Both share a drift in their marriage. John, Charlotte's husband, does not sense her feelings nor notices that his wife is having problems. Bob's wife does not understand her husband's indifference and their relationship has become stagnant. Their spouses are completely unaware and it only contributes to Charlotte's and Bob's displacement. They both lack a person who is able to understand and bring them out of despair.
The interpreter started off strong. But as time went on he needed more and more help from the someone off to the side in the audience. The interpreter seemed to struggle mightily and lost a lot of the story. Much of the context of the stories was lost. Listening to the English version, Cardenal went to Spain before Columbia; listening to the Spanish version, Cardenal went to Columbia instead of Spain. The interpreter is barely getting in little clips of the story.
While I am not one to enjoy movies with any kind of blood and violence in them, I cannot say I did not enjoy this movie. Watching it from analytical point of view, I was able to gain a message from Maggie. Man or woman, it doesn’t matter where you come from or how anybody else feels, if you want something bad enough, you should never let anyone take that dream away from you. Like Scrap explained to Frankie Dunn, in the end you don’t want to be thinking I should have, you want to be thinking I did a damn good
It’s very aesthetically pleasing- shots pan over exquisite nature scenes, frame characters in interesting and captivating positions, and the background blossoms with color. Although some of the script is awkward and unrealistic, it’s delivered smoothly and seamlessly by a wonderful and well-rounded cast of characters just as unique as the premise of the movie.
Many aspects color how exactly a translator interprets a text, allowing for a great deal of variation to occur between different translator’s versions of the same text. This holds true for the Middle Eastern classic A Thousand and One Arabian Nights, as anyone can observe a multitude of differences between the extensive numbers of English translations that have been released over the past three centuries. Cultural beliefs and ideas play a large role in the variances, but do not account for all of the discrepancies, especially in terms of maturity level. A translation’s maturity level is based on more than just the translator’s cultural landscape.
The first few seconds of the film happen in a way that makes the audience think it will have a greater impact than it does. The male character (Tim Brown) is driving in his car on the way to meet the female character (Angela Stempel) but he gets held up. By the time he makes it to his date the female is already there and waiting. They make small talk for a few minutes and you really start getting the feel and tone of the piece. The scenes are a delight to watch. Not only for their neon color pallets, but because of what is illustrated while they are
The performances are decent, but since the characters are so idiotically written, the viewer is incapable to feel any sympathy towards them. Instead of the script having drawn dramatic and frightening performances, they became comical. Actually the film itself is a horror comedy by serendipity rather than the gothic romance it yearns to
But in all seriousness, it was extremely enjoyable. JamesMcAvoy gave a solid individual performance. A slow yet thrilling build up with some very dark themes... The third act did start off borderline laughable. But then something happens at the end that makes it all seem to work. I know, I'm being vague but don't want to spoil anything. Not the typical mnightshyamalan
It's a romantic comedy but a clever one (unlike the thousands we have been presented with over the year). The romance Spectrum of it is secondary and comedy takes over and dominates,unapologetically too. Ever tried renovations on your house or planning to, then an hour of this might lighten your
It grabs the audience from its mysterious beginning and keeps us held within its grasp all the way until its saddening end. We feel deeply for both of the main characters and go to bed dreaming of alternative endings, wishing that things could’ve been different. But we know in our hearts that they can’t be. The starman has come to earth, he has seen and felt and known the human world, and he’s loved it. He’s loved Jenny. And we all feel the intensity of its worth. The story unfolds beautifully as it goes by, much more beautiful than apple pie. Perhaps it’s just because I take to romantic stories personally, but I believe the writers simply knew what they were doing. They understood how to pull at the tenderness of our hearts, the part that inclines toward loving and caring. They played on a very basic human need, one of the most necessary parts of our existence-to love someone more than ourselves. In my opinion, this aspect of the film alone made it a success. I can only see it failing in maybe that the storyline progressed too fast and too choppy in some
“Lost In Translation” is one of those movies that seek to be something having something extra something that is more than a regular movie. Moreover, it does so effectively without being pretentious, all through the movie it does not seem like it is trying too hard to be something other than what is there. It is skillfully written, well directed and it boasts of a solid cast not very spectacular but full of good actors. Jointly, this eventually results in an enjoyable and interesting movie. The important thing is that it has a message to it. Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson play two individuals lost in the new and unfamiliar surroundings, restlessly moving around a Tokyo hotel in the middle of the night, who fall into