|Lost in Translation - Redux.
||[Feb. 5th, 2004|03:21 pm]
|[||In the Moment
|||||The Detroit Experiment - Enterluud||]|
The Oscars approach us.
Back on September 25th, 2003, I had enjoyed it the first time.
I went to re-read from IMDB the information on Breakfast at Tiffany's. The movies are not the same, but the films are quite similar in construction.
On an awards check for Tiffany's, they only won Best Music awards. The 1962 Best Acress nod to Audrey Hepburn was only a nod . . . they gave it to Sophia Loren for La Ciociara.
On February 29th, 2004, I hope there's a different story.
Lost in Translation is up for Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Director, and Best Original Screenplay.
Now's the time to get caught up with the Oscars. All the films up for awards should be re-screening somewhere if you're around a city. Many may be close or out on DVD.
Anyone who hasn't watched this film, when you finally do, if you love romantic comedies, then this is #1 of the year in that genre, folks.
If you're a fan of movies, however, anyone who has watched their share, or even a handful of films, I suggest this website if you're unfamiliar:
The database holds information on all movies, documentaries, TV shows, video games, and more.
Membership is not necessary. However, it's free to join. With a membership, you can rate the movies you've watched, and you can comment on the films. The database keeps track of your votes and comments.
As for myself, I'm going to try to re-watch some of these films. The competition is always fierce. Who knows if they'll give it all to the Hobbits. They didn't for LOTR 2.
Lost in Translation was great. The acting was superb - the way they made you see this odd sort of connection developing between two very different people - and the crazy setting just added to the flavor. I don't think it can be classified as a "romantic comedy" though. That makes people think "When Harry Met Sally" and the like, but this was entirely different. Mostly about life, in general, or so I thought, than romance. Perhaps just a little about peculiarities of attraction and love. *shrugs*
You gotta agree though, Peter Jackson deserves Best Director. No contest. I don't care if that's the only award LOTR wins, but it's got to be that...
Star Wars is as different from 2001: A Space Odyssey, and they are both classified as Science Fiction.
I dunno about Best Director. They haven't given it to Jackson on the last two attempts, correct? He's had some stiff competition, and I love his work as director. He truly is a master of the craft, and someday we should see him receive a Lifetime Achievement award, especially for Meet The Feebles.
As for Breakfast at Tiffany's, I've seen the ending several times. However, I've never watched the movie from start to finish. I am going to watch all of it eventually. It has some good moments, and if you loved Lost in Translation, you should enjoy Tiffany's too.
2004-02-06 01:35 am (UTC)
Well, let's hope they'll give it to him this time, as in - for all three films. Oh, and most definitely for Meet the Feebles. XD
I still think Lost in Translation should just be left to stand alone. Same as In America. There's something I don't like about classifying certain films as "romantic comedies"... the expression's too often used as dismissive, "chick flick" type thing.
Well, I hate the song Breakfast at Tiffany's. Can't stand... the silliness... argh. It makes me think of "wake up, Maggie, I thought about somphn to say to you.." and "I feel pretty, oh so pretty..." Ugh. It the movie comparable?
Never mind the song. The movie is better than that.
2004-02-06 02:40 am (UTC)
Wait, I thought I had more in the response . . .
It got cut off !!!
I completely understand that thought on de-classifying the movies. They're only good in movie stores in order to find the movie faster.
I feel the same way about music. Today, it's very confusing to figure out where movies and music are classified. So many cross-genres are out there, it's best to just mention it specifically outside of the 'genre.'
Well, "chick flicks" are sometimes as such because it's all about women, all women characters, dealing with primarily female issues. I'd probably not watch something like that.
Whereas there are all-male movies like Surviving The Game that are probably not hot sellers with the ladies.
By the way, if you're familiar with the story, The Most Dangerous Game, I think the short story's called . . . that's actually a lot like the movie, Surviving The Game. The movie is Ice-T's finest hours of performance!
2004-02-06 02:45 pm (UTC)
The problem with the LOTRR movies is that they are all essentially the same. It was basically one huge movie split into 3. They were filmed together and there was not much improvement technologically from one to the next. It would be kinda dumb to keep giving them oscars for the same resons every year.
I have yet to see Lost in Translation, but I've been meaning to for almost a month now. I'm afraid that by the time I get off my ass, it won't be showing any more.
They already released it in the States on DVD.
That's possibly a better option. I get hermit-like when I have a normal-schedule.
Lost in Translation was pretty amazing, but so was the last LOTR. I'd be happy if either won over, say , Seabiscuit.
I didn't think Seabiscuit was that bad, in fact, it was quite good . . . just a looooooooong time ago on the screens.