“Lost in Translation”

By Garrick Hoffman
Liberal Arts Major
“So what are you doing here?” Charlotte asks.
“Taking a break from my wife, forgetting my son’s birthday, and getting paid $2 million to endorse whiskey when I could be doing a play somewhere,” Bob responds. “But the good thing is the whiskey works.”
Sofia Coppolla’s Lost in Translation, released in 2003, features Bill Murray as Bob Harris and Scarlett Johansson as Charlotte. Bob and Charlotte have something in common: they’re both in a foreign land and are unsure how they feel about it and unsure about their lives as a whole. They question their purpose and muse on whether they’re just wandering in life. Charlotte is seen crying on the phone with her friend, who seems indifferent to Charlotte’s despondence and uncertainty. Bob is seen on the phone with his wife, who seems largely indifferent to his existence altogether, while Bob yearns for her affection, misses his children who can be heard in the background, and feels he is not receiving from his wife what he’d like to receive.
Charlotte is in Japan to accompany her boyfriend while Bob is in Japan to do whiskey commercials. Charlotte is young and beautiful; Bob is probably twice her age and, though a movie star, “ain’t no spring chicken.” They’re both adjusting to Tokyo life, and both of them have this somber cloud hovering over their heads at virtually all times, although they do an excellent job at masking this around strangers. Charlotte seems dissatisfied with her husband, and Bob is clearly not satisfied with how his wife reciprocates his affection. Perhaps because of these dynamics, when Bob and Charlotte meet, they realize that each other serves what they’ve been longing for from their significant others.
The title of the film proves to be multi-dimensional: they’re lost in language as English speakers in a Japanese culture, but they’re also both lost in their lives. Furthermore, despite their affection for each other (Bob’s being more apparent and Charlotte’s being chiefly enigmatic), they’re also unable to translate their feelings into words. This is because they’re both tied down to their respective husband and wife, they both are conscious of the impermanence of their stay in Tokyo, and even the age-attraction gap might be a catalyst as well. They come so close to stepping over the threshold of adultery and/or the professing of feelings, but always resist.
What Lost in Translation excels in is comic relief and generating sympathy for the characters. It’s tender and poignant, but the gravity of it all is alleviated by Murray’s character and the absurd moments that punctuate the film. It’s also sweet and fun, and it’s easy to smile fondly as we watch the two main characters get along so superbly and have fun in this strange environment. An intimacy is generated between them, and the relationship of Bob and Charlotte seems to be treading somewhere between friendship and romance. It almost immediately becomes clear that Bob harbors feelings for her, and when we see Charlotte react to a girl in Bob’s hotel room, there’s no longer any doubt that she shares the same feelings. Nonetheless, it’s never made verbally explicit, so Bob in particular is always left wondering.
Lost in Translation is a wonderful “dramedy” that tugs on our heartstrings while also painting a smile on our faces. Coppolla takes a consummate approach to maintaining tension and allowing problems to go unsolved between Bob and Charlotte that ultimately keep us engaged and keep us speculating. It never spills into the Land of Predictability, which no doubt would have hurt the film. Although the emotions are chiefly between our two main characters, we are choiceless in allowing ourselves to vicariously feel these same emotions. We want the characters to finally cross the line into the romance territory, because it’s what they want. But we do get what we want at the end, because Murray’s character is at least a little bit satisfied before he leaves Tokyo, and we cheer in celebration, but indubitably with an air of poignancy.