Just finished my first viewing. I really liked the relationship between Murray and Johanson but it was too slow paced. Anyone else feel this way?
>>69114135
I thought it was beautifully shot, but had sort of a hollow feel to it. Part of that's probably intentional. I really need to watch it again at some point.
bumping cause I want to hear opinions
Is it a problem for a film to be slower paced?
>>69114443
Yeah because it's fucking boring. It doesn't need to be Mad Max 100% of the time either but films like Lost in Translation are sleep inducing. Why make something go for so long when nothing happens.
>inb4 muh cinematography
I'm watching a movie, not exploring a photo gallery kids. To me Lost In translation in the definition of boring, pretentious film making where you have to pretend there's something there when there really isn't. Really don't understand why people are stupid enough to gobble this stuff up.
I love this film
>>69114548
OP here, agree with you. Parts of it were too artsy. I think they were trying to build up the relationship/ illustrate how boring it was.
>>69114743
Boring in the sense that both Bill Murray and Scar Jo are bored in Tokyo
>too slow paced
Literally every pleb's critique of every film that's not PLOT EVENT HAPPENING EVERY 2 SECONDS
>>69114548
>>69114743
That's stupid.
>>69114548
Eh it's not a spectacular film but it's super comfy and I often put it on when I'm falling asleep.
I love scarjo's little belly
>>69114548
holy shit this attitude makes me sad
>>69114135
stick to superheros and GoT tbqh
>>69114548
>you share a board with people like this
Let that sink in
>>69115225
>not expecting this on post 2012 /tv/
>>69115225
>>69115308
this site is why im so cynical
>>69115225
>>69115291
Not him but let's discuss this through shall we
Does length always add to the movie? If you put more scenes and made it 20 minutes longer, would that version be better? If it was released like that and someone said "nah it's too slow paced it could be 20 minutes shorter" would you react the same way?
it is an idie move made by conpetent people
it is still show sometimes that it is indie
still a 10/10 for me since I don't mind the pacing in it at all
>>69115632
Length can either take away or add to your film it depends on the context.
>>69114548
so you're a pleb
got it
LiT is only 1 hr 45 min long. I don't really get the too long/too slow complaints unless you've never watched anything but blockbusters before. It's got so many fun little scenes, and eye candy, and great music to keep you focused even if for some reason you find it slow.
I'd hate to see how you'd react to the Wong Kar-Wai movies that inspired this
>>69115632
Pacing and length aren't necessarily synonyms. The Godfather is nearly 3 hours long, but that never seems to get brought up because it's packed begin to end with plot and memorable scenes. The pacing is perfect to tell the story in detail.
Your question about imaginary alternate cuts is way too vague to actually answer.
>>69114891
Why? I think people who actually like shit like Lost In Translation are stupid for being entertained by boring shit.
>>69114899
Comfy doesn't mean anything. Just because you find something "comfy" doesn't make it good.
>>69115225
Why? I get sad that people actually get sucked in to thinking shit like Lost In Translation is deep and artful when it's literally just a poor excuse for a plot padded by vapid photography shots.
>>69116114
How am I a pleb? Because I refuse to get sucked into the whole "it's slow and artsy so it must be good" meme? No, I just don't feel the need to praise a film that lacks so much content that people feel the need to give it meaning when in reality it's just a slow, boring, empty movie. If anything you're a pleb because you still think shit like Lost In Translation is good just because you want people to think you're cultured and deep. Go
>>69114548
>>69114135
Lmao watch this
>>69116406
You're a dense one.
In no way is it meant to be deep and artful.
It's about a relationship that ends before it starts. That's it.
>>69114135
>it was too slow paced
go back to capeshit then
>>69116406
>>69116452
What do you think of this film, mr capeshit redditor? I'd say it's my favorite, next to Satantango, which has a running time of 8 hours. :^)
>>69114548
>>69114743
you both are fucking plebs. maybe when you're out of high school you'll get some fucking taste
>>69116550
This...like, holy shit dude, LOST IN TRANSLATION is too slow for you? It's a very mainstream film. When I was your age (I'm guessing you're 15 - 16) I was already on Jarmusch and Brakhage, step it up.
It wasn't boring for me. It's also the comfiest film I've ever watched.
>>69116526
Dunno, never watched it. Looks gay though
>>69116469
Then why is it so fucking boring? There's romance movies that consist of more than just long extended scenes of no dialogue where people do normal shit as well as random shots of stuff for no reason. It's literally like all they wrote was the premise and then just filled in the gaps as they went along just to fill time. It's not a good film and it exemplifies everything wrong with pretentious film makers who think a shot of some mundane shit is somehow poignant and meaningful.
>>69114443
It is if you are a teenager or have adhd
>>69116618
>>69116550
OP again. I don't know I couldn't nail it down why it was slow paced for me. But I said I liked it you fags so calm down.
Her was better than LiT.
>>69116708
I really cannot tell if you're trolling or really this prideful and ignorant.
Did it occur to you that their relationship only consisted of "just long extended scenes of no dialogue where people do normal shit" (which isn't even accurate) because they have no real connection, they're just both lonely at the same time and place?
>>69114135
painfully slow imo
>>69114548
>pretentious film making
I can see why people don't like a slower pace in films, but calling Lost in Translation pretentious is ridiculous.
The themes of the film are very clear and down to earth.
>>69116735
Maybe if you want to watch something that is actually entertaining and not watch paint dry for 20 hours? Literally everyone I know IRL agrees with me btw so don't pretend like anybody but fedora tipping pseudo-intellectuals and vapid tumblr teenagers actually like this film.
>oh wow a love story set in a foreign location how interesting!
>oh wow they meet and talk and nothing happens for 2 hours how interesting!
>oh wow look at this extended shot of something completely unrelated to the story how interesting!
I find that people who are impressed with this kind of stuff are very impressionable, gullible people.
>>69116969
Funny because everyone I know IRL agrees that it's a great film and the only people that'd hate it here are the niggers that like basket-ball or the white people that like capeshit movies
>>69116708
>BASED capeshit can't stump the trump xD JUST FUCK MY SHIT UP SENPAI!! I LOVE REDDIT!!!
this was once an art board
>>69116708
Differentfag here but to me the long stretches of time they spend doing things alone (exercising, checking out sights) just amplified the loneliness both of them feel in their relationships. Everything in the film is about communicating their isolation and loneliness. For example, most of the time they were more or less surrounded by people but rarely interacted with them. It's even set in a country and culture that is foreign to both of them.
All the things Coppola did made them seem isolated from the surrounding world, which then in turn made the connection they found in each other even more meaningful.
>random shots of stuff for no reason
Really nigga?
>>69116801
Yeah but mundane boring shit like that doesn't make for a good film buddy. There's better ways to convey loneliness than a minute long shot of clouds or two people staring into eachother's eyes and laughing constantly.
>>69117135
That's completely subjective.
>>69117135
Like what? Saying "golly gee, I'm lonely!" you fucking mouth breather? Are you incapable of intimate moments in real life? Must everything be spelled out to you? Have you ever been in a relationship?
>>69117135
Like what? Saying "I'm lonely" and ending the movie there? What is loneliness but long periods of doing nothing and having vapid encounters with other people?
>>69117210
He wants everything to be spelled out for him because he's a big, fat baby spoiled by Hollywood's hackneyed writing.
He probably considers game of thrones a better example of literature than Ulysses cause it's PRETENSHUUUS!!
>>69117180
Yes in fact I asked my girlfriend what she thought about the movie and she said it was boring too so you're wrong lmao
Also no, I mean something with an actual plot that consist more of extended shots of mundane shit, endless scenes of the two characters doing normal shit together without any tension or drama or anything to give the movie some balls, or you know, just something of substance to drive the film instead of this half-assed love story that just happens without any reason. Sorry, it's not a good film just because it's different.
>>69117124
>I only watch real films that are deep and artsy because I'm such a refined gentleman but still a virgin because women don't appreciate how cultures I am hmph xD
Two can play at this game.
>>69117364
This.
/tv/ is going full autist right now.
>>69114548
>>69114743
"Pretentious" has lost all fucking meaning at this point.
Lost In Translation is the furthest thing from pretentious.
Stop watching films like you're a consumer.
>>69117262
Sorry that I don't force myself to enjoy boring shit because of some arbitrary value its assigned by faggots who think they're better than everyone else. You sound like the kind of person who listens to classical music and drinks red wine on the weekend because you're told in makes you intellectually superior and want to appear like you have more depth than the puddle you really are.
>>69117489
As if. That is the most poshlost thing you can do. I'm an authentic soul, you fucking plebeian capeshit faggot.
>>69117489
You're also not responding to decent posts made in defense of the film. Or posts that show you're plain wrong about something.
You're either bait or a dumbass. Either way, nobody should be wasting their time in this thread.
>>69116969
>Literally everyone I know IRL agrees with me
Because people surround themselves with people like them. Youre living in an echo chamber. The point of the film was to express the dullness of these fling relationships in a foreign, exotic land.
Your friends agree with you because theyre boring, shallow and predictable too. Go maintain the status quo somewhere like /b/ instead.
>>69117489
Ah, so it's an inferiority complex then.
>>69117489
I've honestly never been so upset by someone on 4chan in my life
please just tell me you're from /v/, it'll give me the closure needed to exit this tab
It doesn't feel slow paced to me when watching it, but in retrospect it should have been boring as fuck. I actually remember my parents renting it years ago and I thought it was garbage.
But I just love looking at it and spacing out a bit, it's one of my favourite movies. The navel gazing it brings out in me and the soundtrack make it immersive also. It helps that I'm a 20-something nothing like Charlotte who likes Japan and I very rarely make meaningful connections.
>>69117471
>artsy shots of mundane shit that linger on for far too long
>story that essential goes nowhere for 95% of the movie
>back to back scenes of normal people doing normal shit in silence or so the viewer thinks it's "artistic" and "profound"
>boring dialogue that tries to be "realistic" but amounts to nothing
>no real drama or tension throughout the whole film, everything just happens at a snails pace and you're supposed to create an emotional connection and put great emphasis on trivial shit that's supposed to be really impactful but would just be completey insignificant and normal in any other film
It's the literal definition of pretentious but you probably don't realise that because you're too high off your own farts to see how much you project onto this film vs whats actually there.
>>69114135
>but it was too slow paced
I'm done with this capeshit infested board.
>>69117783
but cape shit is the best shit ;)
>>69117738
I direct you to these posts:
>>69117132
>>69116930
>>69116469
>>69116351
>>69114801
And of course:
>>69116114
>>69117680
So you're impressed by the aesthetics more than the film itself? You like the way things look, not how they function, just again proving my point at how superficial the autists who jerk off to this film really are. They ignore every one of its massive flaws just because it gives them "muh feels" because of the weeb setting and their >tfw no gf bullshit. They project their own feelings onto the film to make it seem like a great piece of art when it's just a vapid, boring, hollow movie. People like that are literally the biggest plebs of all because they're only impressed by the most superficial parts of the film. It's like a four year old wanting to watch a movie solely because it has talking animals in it or whatever. Really sad to see this kind of infantile impressionism drive peoples taste into adulthood.
>>69117738
You are lashing out again at those that enjoy the movie because you're clearly insecure. It's not enough for you to say you didn't enjoy it, explain why, and leave it at that, you start making presumptions about people that do enjoy it to invalidate their opinions in your own head. You're uncomfortable with others not subscribing to the gospel according to you. So far you've had a go at people that like this movie, people that listen to classical music and people that drink red wine (?).
I felt that scenes occasionally went on a bit too long, but other than that it was great.
>>69117946
Hey dude, what about
>>69117833
It's almost like you're dodging those sensible arguments there, champ.
>>69114135
Since it took place in Japan, the main character should have been Japanese. A more blatant racist white washing I have not seen since.
>>69117946
I'm not one of those people, but why are criticising people for projecting themselves onto art? Art is effective when it reflects something back at its viewer. The movie stirring emotion with viewers is a really weird problem for you to have with it and is kind of counter productive to your argument.
I love the film and usually watch it at least twice a year. Top quality feels, soundtrack is great and there are some beautiful shots. Bill Murray really nails the character too.
If there was ever an argument as to why we need a /film/ board, this thread would be it. I seriously don't even know why I come here anymore.
>>69118325
Yeah but it won't work. The ratio of bad to good posters is too great now.
Look at the catalog. I don't care what anyone says, it was never this bad a couple years ago.
>>69117946
The aesthetics are the film, that's how it functions you dope. You not being able to find anything in it is fine but you should realise every film is superficial and vapid when not given meaning by whoever is viewing it.
>>69117738
>art has to have a plot
Your opinion is trash
>>69117738
No one is this retarded, you cannot be serious my man. And if you somehow are giving us your genuine opinions and reasonings, kys :3
Fuck this board
>>69117738
Haha, this opinion is amusing but I respect your view that you didn't like the movie but there are lots of people out there who appreciate the "nothingness" that is being a big city and the feeling of being alone whilst being surrounded. Plus, as many have said, art doesn't need a plot. It's about how it makes you feel. I imagine you're not keen on street photography or possibly landscape photography either.
Hell, I've driven through the night listening to completely awful music and sang away like it was the best thing in the world. That made me feel great. I've also sat back, headphones on and listened to Bach and that also made me feel great. Art and the appreciation of these things changes depending on your mood, and where you are in life. That's why it's infinitely revisitable and I think you should probably rewatch it when you're feeling down, tired, or just thinking that the world should slow down a little. You might appreciate it more.
.
..
.....I also drink red wine
