[lbo-talk] lost in translation...not translating?

[Jeffrey Fisher]

i'm starting to think i'm one of two people in the world who liked this 
movie. i actually thought murray's performance was outstanding 
(reminded me of him in rushmore) and found coppola's direction superb. 
indeed, all the commentary i heard on this movie went on and on about 
its "politics" (it's anti-feminist, i guess) and none of them liked it, 
and the people i listened to coming out of the theater hated it, so 
maybe it *is* just me and my girlfriend who liked it.

j

On Monday, June 7, 2004, at 04:55 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:


> You're quite right.  The most remarkable thing about the movie is that
> someone managed to be put it about that it was good. The woman may one 
> day
> learn something about acting -- it's an open question -- but Murray, 
> who
> should know better, was in fact much better in Ethan Hawke's Hamlet. 
> --CGE
>
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, frank scott wrote:
>
>> " I just watched about one-half hour of Lost in Translation and do not
>> understand why this irritating, humdrum movie elicited such oohs and
>> ahs. Why exactly is the viewer supposed to be interested in the mild
>> world-weariness of the Bill Murray character, some clown who's earning
>> two million bucks for doing a few minutes' modeling work?"
>>
>>  an over-rated piece of crap, and what a relief to find someone else
>> so underwhelmed by it...
>>
>> fs
>>
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>