The Mystery Behind Lost in Translation

[Neverending]

Does anyone here watch Ebert & Roeper? If you don't let me explain. Apparently the movie which was very well recieved in theater is getting horrible reactions from people who are seeing the movie for the first time on DVD. That is weird if you ask me. How can theater audiences love the movie, while DVD audiences hate it? Makes no sense.

Q. Re the Answer Man items on how people loved "Lost in Translation" in theaters and hated it on video. After being in the video industry for 20 years, I've noticed that nothing affects a person's view more than expectations. With "Lost in Translation," I saw a screener on video months before its release and loved the movie. By the time it was released on video, it had gone through the media hype of the Academy Awards, and viewers were expecting heights that could not be reached. Everyone had heard what a great movie it was, and the virgin experience that reviewers got was lost.

I remember years ago when "Ghostbusters" first came out; most video customers were very vocal in their dislike of it. It was one of the first video titles to go through a media frenzy, and like "Lost in Translation," nothing could live up to the hype. Since then it has, of course, moved on to become a video classic.

Brad Pilger, Edmonton, Alberta


A. The movie's reception on video has inspired a record number of messages to the Answer Man. Bob Riggs of Houston writes: "Some films are intended to be appealing and easily digested, while others try to explore difficult subjects in unique ways. By nature, humans enjoy simple repetition of pleasant experiences and shy away from the hard work involved with dealing with anything challenging.

"Thomas Kinkade and Britney Spears have made enormous amounts of money marketing to people for whom this instinct has become a way of life. I would suggest that the value of 'Lost in Translation' lies in its appeal to another part of human nature -- that which says, 'Get up off your butt and find out what's going on out there!' "

And J.C. Inglis of Toronto writes: "Why did you give in to the clods who disagreed with your statements on 'Lost in Translation'? At the end of your reply you wrote, 'You're not wrong just because you disagree with me.' Yes, they ARE wrong. Watching, enjoying and understanding movies is a skill and can be done poorly and wrongly. 'Getting' a movie is not the same as having an emotional response.

"One can still 'get' a movie even if one doesn't like it. Saying one doesn't 'get' a movie is like saying one doesn't 'get' a symphony. It proves that one has a stunted or undeveloped faculty of appreciation, or possibly that one is an idiot."

[equipe]

I've known a lot of people who loved and hated this film. Personally I think it should have won best picture last year. Quite a few of the people who I talked to who didn't like it simply put couldn't grasp at what Sophia Coppola was getting at. A lot of them just didn't think anything happens in the narrative, but they don't seem to have experianced alienation, loneliness and depression.

And then there are people who don't like Bill Murray. They are just crazy.

But to answer the question of why people seeing it for the first time on home video don't seem to like it, it that when a film is in a theater people who want to see a film and feel they might have some sort of 'connection' to it go to the theater. A lot of people who wait for the Home release aren't really interested in the subject, and are viewing it just for hypes sake.
That's my take, I could be wrong.

[Neverending]

I think you could be wrong because Lost in Translation is a low-budget movie that didn't get enough promotion to gain people's attention. You can't accuse those who didn't see the movie in theaters of not being interested. Many didn't even know the movie existed.

[equipe]

You have a point, I live in a very shallow world of film students and other culturally aware people. But to tell the truth I don't know anyone who didn't hear about the film when it can out.

But I guess I can't really talk about the 'average Joe'

[MDbum]

One possible explanation i would give is that it's theatrical lease was limited. I know here in baltimore, the only place i knew it played was at the Charles Theater, known for it's independent film showings and other such smaller projects. I never saw the film show up in any of the local movie multiplexes in baltimore county. I guess due to it's limited realease, it appealed more to the "intellectual" crowd if you will, or just people wanting to see an actual good film once in a while.

Then after all the hype subsided, the average zombie movie goer got their hands on this movie, expecting a sugar coated plot and spoon fed subject matter, yet got something much deeper, more than the average movie goer can appreciate nor comprehend.

When these everyday people watch films, they become passive and numb, refusing to engage into the film and explore. Several of my friends watched it on video and didn't like it at all but couldn't give any good reason except that "it was boring", yet then again, they'd rather watch a movie like "eurotrip". Whenever i hear anyone discredit the work of Lost in Translation without any insight, all i can give out is a hefty sigh. :(

[Sora Kahn]

I saw it. I delved into it. I listened to the dialogue. I understood what Coppola was trying to portray in the film. But in the end, I just didn't like or love the film. It wasn't a flawless film, it had a few flaws( like every movie created). Nothing against it I just didn't enjoy it as much as some. Hopefully Sophia will make another movie soon that's better.

[Rizor]

This is a rather interesting topic. I saw it on video and didn't have a problem liking it. I actually wonder whether I would have liked it more if I had seen it in a theater.

[rosncranz]

we got it in a nearby city, this city has a population of about 30-40 thousand people, thats quite small. i had to drive an hour to go see this, i saw it by myself, there were 4 people in the theater, myself included. my point is this, it is simply that there are many intelectuals, or people who love interesting thick, insightful, and challenging movies. movies that are art. these are the people that went and saw it when it came out (if they could) then after gaining amazing word of mouth, it got an even wider release, more people went to see it, still not many. by the time it was of the theater iit started gaining oscar buzz. many people do not really know what to go see because they are decieved by trailers and publicity so they have a hard time deciphering what is actually supposed to be good. now i work at a video store, and i used to work at a theater, when i worked at the theater i did not have a single person ask me if we were going to get LiT, now working at the video store people rent it constantley. the vast majority did not seem to like it. i think that it is as said before, those who really wanted to, see it because it just looked really good and artistic etc. saw it on the theater, those who didnt waited for video. i myself am one of the people who have done that, i decided to watch adaptation after all the oscar hooplah, and i hated it. i think it is simply that people who are really passionate about seeing a movie will go see it in theaters if able, those who wait for video a lot of times dont really care as said before. i do think that it is just a matter of the masses of atomaton's that create society dont like it because it isnt kill bill or jeepers creepers 3. simply put i dont think average people connect nor comprehend exactley what this movie is about. we just hear about the people who didnt like it as much, because those people arent the ones filling theaters and video stores for the box office hits. and anybody who comes in here saying that it was just boring and nothing happened etc. are proving that exactley: they didnt get it, they didnt connect with it.


also i am a coma splicing fiend!

[Jack Sparrow]

Eh I like the more artistic films as much as the next guy here, I'm more intelligent than most, I love bill murray, I got the plot, I've had my bouts with manic depression, and yet, I didn't like the movie.. if you're wondering how this could happen in a world, chalk it up to 'I'm not you'

[morpheus1987]

i liked this movie

[droidguy1119]

I saw it on DVD, after all the expecation, and loved it anyway. So did my friends, and they're even further steeped into Japanese culture, so the movie had even another layer of hype for them.

I hadn't heard about this phenomenon until it was brought up here.

And who hated Ghostbusters? Let me find them and change their minds for them. *smacks fist*

[PsYkOoOoO]

I didnt like it,but i didnt hate it.I watched both Kill Bill Volume 1 and Lost In Translation together.I disliked Kill Bill a little more.I liked everything in the beginning,i liked everything at the end.But not the centre portion of the movie.

[rosncranz]

Originally posted by droidguy1119
And who hated Ghostbusters? Let me find them and change their minds for them. *smacks fist*

i've got your back bro, we must bring this guy down!

[PsYkOoOoO]

Originally posted by rosncranz
i've got your back bro, we must bring this guy down!

Count me in.

[tedward]

Originally posted by equipe
But to tell the truth I don't know anyone who didn't hear about the film when it can out.



I agree anyone who says it wasn't mainstream is kidding themselves.

[Neverending]

You all make interesting points, but it will probably end up being a cult hit. A lot of film junkies loved it.