Talk:Lost in Translation (film)

References to use

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.

Books

• Ballinger, Alex (2004). "Lance Acord". New Cinematographers. Laurence King Publishing. ISBN 1856693341.
• Bolton, Lucy (2006). "The Camera as Speculum: Examining Female Consciousness in Lost in Translation, Using the Thought of Lucy Irigaray". In Renzi, Barbara Gabriella; Rainey, Stephen (eds.). From Plato's Cave to the Multiplex: Contemporary Philosophy and Film. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. pp. 87–97. ISBN 978-1-84718-013-1.
• Bolton, Lucy (2011). "Lost in Translation: The Potential of Becoming". Film and Female Consciousness: Irigaray, Cinema and Thinking Women. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 95–127. ISBN 978-0-230-27569-0.
• Cohen, David S. (2008). "'It's two people; nothing happens'". Screen Plays: How 25 Scripts Made It to a Theater Near You—for Better or Worse. It Books. pp. 67–78. ISBN 978-0-06-118919-7.
• Cronin, Michael (2008). "The long journey home: Lost in Translation to Babel". Translation goes to the Movies. Routledge. pp. 81–107. ISBN 978-0-415-42285-7.
• Darnell, Michelle R. (2011). "Films of situation: Being Lost in Translation". In Boule, Jean-Pierre; McCaffrey, Enda (eds.). Existentialism and Contemporary Cinema: A Sartrean Perspective. Berghahn Books. ISBN 978-0-85745-320-4.
• Kaplan, Michael A. (2010). "Liberalism, friendship, and the predicament of cybernetic sociality: Lost in Translation". Friendship Fictions: The Rhetoric of Citizenship in the Liberal Imaginary. University Alabama Press. ISBN 978-0-8173-1689-1.
• King, Geoff (2010). Lost in Translation. American Indies. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 978-0-7486-3746-1.
• King, Homay (2010). Lost in Translation: Orientalism, Cinema, and the Enigmatic Signifier. Duke University Press Books. pp. 3, 16–17, 138, 160–169. ISBN 978-0-8223-4759-0.
• Marciniak, Katarzyna (2006). "The dialects of exile: Resident alienhood and Lost in Translation". Alienhood: Citizenship, Exile, And The Logic Of Difference. University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 978-0-8166-4576-3.
• McKiernan, Derek (2008). "Globalization, Mobility and Community". Cinema and Community. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 140–166. ISBN 978-0-230-51761-5.

Articles

• Scarlett fever
• Sofia Coppola Talks About Lost In Translation, Her Love Story That’s Not “Nerdy”
• Q&A with Sofia Coppola
• Scarlett Fever (Newsweek)
• 'I know how to be sour'
• Talking Out Loud
• Sofia's Choice
• The Coppola Smart Mob

-some more articles to use.--J.D. (talk) 18:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

• Sophia Coppola on Lost in Translation
• Tokyo Story
• Behind-the-Scenes of Lost in Translation with Sofia Coppola

-more articles to use.--J.D. (talk) 13:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

reviews section

"Lost in Translation was boosted by universal critical acclaim...It has a rating of 95% "Certified Fresh" on Rotten Tomatoes..."

the 95% (as opposed to 100%) means "universal" can't be used re the critical acclaim, unless with a qualifier, like "near-universal". needs changing to avoid being logically contradictory. 63.142.146.194 (talk) 05:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Help me.

Ive tried to make an edit and its gone awry. Please help me. 81.156.136.199 (talk) 09:31, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Your edits are incorrect and unhelpful – as usual. This film is not a Japanese co-production as there are no Japanese companies involved in the production. It does not matter what AFI says, WP has its own standards for determining a film's nationality, and that means Japan must be left out. Please stop being repeatedly disruptive. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 13:25, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Then whats that then? http://www.bfi.org.uk/films-tv-people/4ce2b8999854e 81.156.136.199 (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Also this company distributed it. Tohokushinsha Film 81.156.136.199 (talk) 14:58, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Distribution is irrelevant. Lots of films are distributed by foreign companies, that does not mean the film is of said country. This film was produced by two US film studios, that is the end of the matter. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 18:08, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

To give another example, the Ghibli movies are distributed by Disney in the west. This does not make them American movies. Popcornduff (talk) 19:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Okay. But these 4 films are distributed by British companies but they are not British The Hudsucker Proxy, The Big Lebowski, Burn After Reading and Hail, Caesar!. And also these 2 are distributed by American companies but that doesnt mean they are American The World's End (film) and Grimsby (film). So can you please help me with these 6 pages? 81.156.167.221 (talk) 12:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

You are wrong. You have been corrected repeatedly but persist in pushing your opinion. I suggest you stop. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 13:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Can we continue this on my talkpage? 81.156.167.221 (talk) 13:29, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

No. A public discussion involving multiple editors should take place in a public place. Besides, changing the location of the discussion won't change the fact that you are wrong both in terms of your understanding of the facts and WP's policies. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 14:42, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Okay. But if you listen to me a bit more then you will realize that the edits I would like to make are actually not as "harmful" as you think. 81.156.167.221 (talk) 18:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Your edits go against the facts, policy, and logic – so, yes, I think they are very harmful. This is the last comment I will make to you on this subject. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 13:30, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Such an heated debate about the nationality of the film. Will we find the truth - or will it be Lost in the Trans...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.178 (talk) 20:10, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lost in Translation (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120216010832/http://www.screenwritersutopia.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=57 to http://www.screenwritersutopia.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=57
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120414022213/http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/issues/fall2003/features/tokyo_story.php to http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/issues/fall2003/features/tokyo_story.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:22, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

"Best film of the 2000s" comment

Can we remove the final sentence of the lede? Not only does it add much information to call a film as "often regarded as one of the best films", but it can't really be verified in any sense. How do you define "regarded as one of the best"? Box office sales? Critics reviews? Awards? It just seems like a weasel word here. ChunyangD (talk) 23:16, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, killed. Popcornduff (talk) 03:16, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

yes, agree too Tsmaster544 (talk) 10:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC)