I finally saw Lost in Translation a few weeks ago. I liked the movie very much.
One of the most obvious points for me was that the alienation Charlotte and to a lesser extent Bob felt from the Japanese people and culture around them was mostly a metaphor.
I don’t think the movie was intended to be a travelogue saying “Look how strange those funny Japanese people are”. Instead it was making a point about alienation from modern society and alienation from those around us in general. Bob and Charlotte could have been stuck in a hotel in almost any big city in the world and the movie would have been substantially the same. Japan was chosen as a location in part I suppose to maximize this effect on the North American audience.
Do you agree or disagree that the alienation was meant to be taken more in a broader metaphorical sense?
A secondary question. I was discussing this movie with someone recently and he said that he thought that “she” (the director, Sophie Coppolla) had obviously had trouble with men in her life because overall they weren’t portrayed sympathetically in the film.
I grant that Charlotte’s husband the celebrity photographer is a self centered jerk, and Bob (Bill Murray) is unfaithful to his wife. But I don’t think the women really come off much better. Charlotte herself comes across as petulant and not nearly as deep as she would like to be…I mean, come on woman, learn to speak some Japanese or something! One review I read said Bob’s wife is a passive agressive controller type, which I guess I agree with in hindsight.
So the secondary question is, do you think the portrayal of men in this movie is overall less sympathetic than the portrayal of women?
I don’t think its a metaphor for anything. I think that it was a character movie about specific people who, back home, would never have come into contact or done anything together. But away from home, they sort of connect and have a relationship - a friendship - that lets them connect to the world around them in a way they were formerly unable to.
Back home, they are undoubtedly very outgoing and fit in fine. Here, they can’t communicate and the whole world seems strange. Its not a metaphor for alienation in modern society, though. Its just the backdrop. If there’s any room for metaphor, it’ll be found in the fact that they couldn’t figure out this crazy place without a friend coming along.
Good to see someone who understood this fine film. Yep, it’s pretty much all metaphor. Look up alternate meanings of “translation” in a dictionary. Japan is purely a mirror-like backdrop.
It doesn’t matter where they are, they will feel the same loneliness and isolation. Even back in the US. But setting it in Japan highlights this. It’s not where, it’s when. They are both at transition points in their lives (where things aren’t looking so good along their current paths).
I don’t think of Bob as being a bad person. He is just more flawed than Charlotte because he’s older, etc. Ergo, he makes one big mistake.
All the notable characters have flaws. Look at the lounge singer and the brainless actress, too. It’s hardly an anti-male film.
It’s widely acknowledged (although I don’t think absolutely confirmed by the lady herself) that the character of Charlotte’s husband John was based on Spike Jonze, Sofia Coppola’s ex-husband. She cited “irreconcilable differences” on filing the divorce papers. Probably explains why John is the way he is in the movie, if that’s all true.
Yes, a metaphor for the protagonists’ alienation from their partners. In both cases it’s made clear the couples are far apart and drifting farther.
And yes, the word is that it was based on an episode in Sophia Coppola’s marriage to Spike Jonze. How much of the detail is congruent, who knows.
I think Lagomorph is correct that the alienation wasn’t anything specific to Japan or about how weird the Japanese are; the story could have happened the same way in Africa or Spain or wherever. It’s not a metaphor exactly, it’s more of a backdrop; it illustrates what’s going on.
I’m not sure who you are responding to. No one claimed Tokyo symbolized a foreign city. AndrewT I think you have a slightly different take on it than I do but I think your interpretation is valid as well.
You did. “Alienation from Japanese culture as metaphor for…?” and then wondering if it isn’t a metaphor… well, for more alienation. Which is why it’s not a metaphor at all, but synecdoche.