What does Bob say at the end of the film?

Discuss the fabulous movie Lost In Translation!

Moderator: Bob

Message
Author
User avatar
52FM
Inactive/Deleted user
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 3:49 pm

#61 Post by 52FM » Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:43 am

"Then the question is: is this acknowledgement by Bob enough to make her happy as she clearly is as they part and she disappears into the crowd? It's possible, and yet I don't know what someone could say in ten seconds to mollify the heart of someone who really felt a strong attraction."

Whatever it was, it was closure. That was clearly missing. She was thinking "here is this wonderful man who I will always remember, and we never had a proper goodby. Did it mean as much to him as it does to me?" The whisper was confirmation that it did - and she could go on content with that knowledge.

Regarding your comment about Bob forgetting his son's b-day: that part always seemed contradictory to me too. Here he is, talking about how wonderful it is to have kids - and he forgets his son's birthday? I agree totally that having kids is wonderful (I have three that are each 19 or older) and it being wonderful defintitely starts with remembering vividly the birth of each - and their excitement at birthdays as they realized they were growing.

I chalk it up simply to a bit of inexperience in Sofia's script writing. I think there are a few moments taken together that don't add up; it's just an oversight - she wanted to make a point of Lydia's dry annoyance of Bob not being around - and she maybe shoudl have thought of another way to do it.

UNLESS - I suppose it could have been a subtle was of saying that despite Bob's supposed wisdom to Charlotte - he was really kididng himself too. To some extent, we all talk a better game than we actually play. He believes that the kids are wondeful; and yet his actions aren't quite consistent with that belief. In other words - he's human.
"Willoughby. Next stop is Willoughby."

User avatar
burgundy
Ikebana Fan
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 3:03 pm
Location: Toronto

#62 Post by burgundy » Fri Sep 08, 2006 10:46 am

Good points, all.

On the question of talking a better game, I wonder if part of Bob was looking for the best side of marriage and kids to tell Charlotte. He was protecting her, trying to give her the best version of his life, or of any grown up life.

So it's back to the theme of Bob as wiser, older man with real feelings for Charlotte but responsible enough to not go too far and create too many complications for her.
With intensity.

Pockets
Suntory Time
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:38 pm
Location: In a blue state

Re: I see I have to do this AGAIN! ;)

#63 Post by Pockets » Thu Jan 25, 2007 6:55 pm

johnmonkey wrote: And Scarlett Johansson's from Tribute TV in Canada.
INTERVIEWER. Because a lot of people I talked to, you know, did want them to get together, but I --

Miss JOHANSSON. Ew, no --

INTERVIEWER. Yes.

Miss JOHANSSON. -- why?

INTERVIEWER. I agree.

Miss JOHANSSON. No. But she loves her husband, the husband is -- and it would have ruined everything they had, and, and and and and, and she loves her husband, and she's so cute, and they're just in a bad spot, and there's hope for them, you know? It would have been awful if they had consumated that love for one another. It would have been a different movie, really.
This interview makes Scarlett Johansson seem like a very shallow girl and a complete idiot (all that "but she loves her husband" stuff), which is probably what she is in real life. I still like Charlotte as a character, but don't care at all for Scarlett in real life. As a brunette, I tend not to think very highly of blondes, female or male.... lol

User avatar
LostCalls
Lounge Singer
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:34 am

#64 Post by LostCalls » Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:25 pm

52FM wrote:"
UNLESS - I suppose it could have been a subtle was of saying that despite Bob's supposed wisdom to Charlotte - he was really kididng himself too. To some extent, we all talk a better game than we actually play. He believes that the kids are wondeful; and yet his actions aren't quite consistent with that belief. In other words - he's human.
This is kind of in line with what I think. To me, it seems as if Bob's forgetting his son's birthday is endemic of his emotional state at the start of the film--that is "lost." But for Bob and Charlotte alike, their interaction begins to revive their senses of where and who they are...of what they value in each other, in themselves, and, perhaps by extension, in their own marriages. Therefore, maybe Bob's statements about how wonderful it is to have kids (which certainly come off as deeply sincere) reveal him asserting these things to himself. In other words, in Charlotte's presence and thanks to their relation during the week, Bob is able to remember the profound significance of having children. It's one of these subtle moments in which Bob is able to speak as if from the position of age and wisdom (which he technically has), but his comfort in this position perhaps only comes out around a relatively younger, sensitive person such as Charlotte. In that sense, their differences become complementary.

User avatar
52FM
Inactive/Deleted user
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 3:49 pm

#65 Post by 52FM » Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:46 pm

Pockets - I don't care much for Scarlett either. It's a shame she hasn't been able to really take off in a career that seemed so promising after LiT and "Pearl Earing". Her roles have been less than impressive in my opinion.

LostCalls - your comments are quite accurate. I know I can find myself saying the "right" thing to people (especially younger people) that doesn't quite match with how I live. But to be fair to myslef, I don't (usually) consider that hypocritcal - just an example that we don't always lead the life we believe we should.

Pockets
Suntory Time
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:38 pm
Location: In a blue state

#66 Post by Pockets » Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:34 pm

52FM wrote:Pockets - I don't care much for Scarlett either. It's a shame she hasn't been able to really take off in a career that seemed so promising after LiT and "Pearl Earring". Her roles have been less than impressive in my opinion.
She's young and maybe will mature into an actor with a greater range. It must be very difficult for any actor to find a good film project. Even the best actors have ended up in some bad films. Making a good film is not a sure thing. It's not just the storyline, but the actors, director and editing room and soundtrack. Then there is how the film is marketed.

On the other hand, Scarlett is probably having the time of her life with all of her friends, including Justin Timberlake.

And there are a few other actresses that could have been a good Charlotte...

And a whole other topic for discussion could be the burdens that come with being so beautiful on the outside that one isn't encouraged to work on their smarts or personality.
52FM wrote:LostCalls - your comments are quite accurate. I know I can find myself saying the "right" thing to people (especially younger people) that doesn't quite match with how I live. But to be fair to myslef, I don't (usually) consider that hypocritcal - just an example that we don't always lead the life we believe we should.
I know what you mean. Even though my life isn't perfect (by my parent's standards), I feel that I can give decent advice to others. It's easier to be objective with someone else's life and hindsight is always 20/20.

tsooml
Inactive/Deleted user
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Re: I see I have to do this AGAIN! ;)

#67 Post by tsooml » Sat Jan 27, 2007 8:48 am

[quote='Pockets']This interview makes Scarlett Johansson seem like a very shallow girl and a complete idiot (all that "but she loves her husband" stuff), which is probably what she is in real life.[/quote]She doesn't seem that way to me from the interview.
Last edited by tsooml on Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Pockets
Suntory Time
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:38 pm
Location: In a blue state

#68 Post by Pockets » Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:52 am

johnmonkey wrote: And Scarlett Johansson's from Tribute TV in Canada.
INTERVIEWER. Because a lot of people I talked to, you know, did want them to get together, but I --

Miss JOHANSSON. Ew, no --
I think that she's shallow (and didn't learn anything from the movie) because of her reaction to the thought of Charlotte and Bob getting together later on. What's with the "ew" interjected then? I use "ew" when I am repulsed by something, what about you?

Shallow is because she couldn't herself ever go out (in her twenties) in real life with a man like Bob. Instead, her idea of the perfect man is Justin Timberlake or some other trendy young hot guy. Scarlott in real life could never have a physical relationship with Bob.

Most of you men are attracted to Scarlett Johansen based on her looks and age. Men are by nature visually stimulated and therefore shallow. Later on, when maturity sets in and your bodies aren't perfect anymore, and you've had some bad experiences with self-centered nonfunctioning hot women, then you may finally begin to appreciate the other qualities like inner beauty... intelligence, kindness and commonsense, which are much better qualities in a mate than just surface hotness and perfection.

If you want to see some amazing acting with depth, check out The Theory of Flight (1998) with Helena Bonham Carter and Kenneth Branaugh. Now THAT is an amazing actress. No way that Ms Johansson could have pulled that movie off.

LiT is a wonderful movie as a whole, but please don't confuse Charlotte's character with the real life SJ.

User avatar
52FM
Inactive/Deleted user
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 3:49 pm

#69 Post by 52FM » Sat Jan 27, 2007 3:39 pm

Actually, you'll get some debate on "EW". I frankly thought their relationship was more "platonic love". I think a 50-something man with a 20-something woman is not ideal. Certainly their are exceptions. But Scarlett (who was all of 17 when she made the movie) would naturally think of Bob/Bill as a father figure - not romantic. The "ew" was her teenage way of saying that.

Pockets
Suntory Time
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:38 pm
Location: In a blue state

#70 Post by Pockets » Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:30 pm

But how old was Charlotte supposed to be in the movie? Mid-twenties?

tsooml
Inactive/Deleted user
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:32 pm

#71 Post by tsooml » Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:13 pm

"Ah, she's shallow because she thinks Charlotte leaving her husband to bang Bob is a repulsive idea.

Color me shallow too."
Last edited by tsooml on Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Pockets
Suntory Time
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:38 pm
Location: In a blue state

#72 Post by Pockets » Sun Jan 28, 2007 1:12 am

thesoundofonemanlaughing wrote:Ah, she's shallow because she thinks Charlotte leaving her husband to bang Bob is a repulsive idea.

Color me shallow too.
Okay, so I've colored you shallow. But then you've both lost a big part of the wonderfulness of this movie imo. And yes, Scarlett is young, but this interview came after the movie was finished, so all that directorial input from Sophia as each scene was setup and shot was completely lost or forgotten by Scarlett then.

And... if all they were in the movie were platonic friends (which is okay with me) but then why the buildup to the last goodbye? If they were just platonic friends, then they could have parted easily at the elevators and hotel lobby exchanging phone numbers and email addresses. Bob's a movie star, so his wife would expect him to have a lot of friends and fans corresponding with him. Charlotte had friends in Tokyo, her husband's a professional photographer, so why can't she have a movie star as a friend or penpal in the normal course of events?

tsooml
Inactive/Deleted user
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:32 pm

#73 Post by tsooml » Sun Jan 28, 2007 2:30 pm

"Who ever said it was platonic?

Who said you can't commit yourself to another person, and then later find someone who you think you could maybe have (had) just a good a relationship with?

I'm married a year and change, and very happy in it and I don't see getting out of it -- but it would be ridiculous to think that I'll never be attracted to someone else, very attracted to someone else. (Not being a megastar, I won't be rich with a lot of free time, so I probably won't need the mature discipline that Bob Harris needed.)

Bob and Charlotte have their marriage, and they enjoyed a nice, refreshing diversion, but now they'll continue with their "real" lives."
Last edited by tsooml on Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
52FM
Inactive/Deleted user
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 3:49 pm

#74 Post by 52FM » Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:47 pm

I said it was platonic love - not platonic friends (which is redundant).

I had a very complicated relationship like that once - and I handled it poorly unlike Bob. But beleive me - it was purely platonic. Saying goodbye was literally impossible for me - which is where the problems emminated from.

I have experienced (female) friendships in other situations that were very meaningful to me but not at all romantic. Again - the eventual ending was near-traumatic to me. It's how I'm made. (I feel a serious depression at the end of our family vacations too. I want things to go on forever.)

I don't see anything (other than natural male/female sexual urges) to indicate that Bob/Charlotte really wanted to have a romantic or sexual relationship. I think they were both literally blown away with how meaningful they were to each other - in a way that was far deeper than they ever expereinced before.

It happens - and when it does it's amazingg. I didn't lose anything in this movie. I may have seen it differnetly that you, Pockets - but what I saw triggered sometihing that became literally life changing for me.

Pockets
Suntory Time
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:38 pm
Location: In a blue state

#75 Post by Pockets » Mon Jan 29, 2007 1:15 am

I think we digress and forget that the appeal of this film is that it's not the typical Hollywood film where the storyline is clearly spelled out for the audience and it finishes with a cookie-cutter happy ending. Everyone of us is touched by the movie and we all bring in our own relationship experiences to add more color and depth to the film. There is no set interpretation of Bob and Charlotte's relationship and where they might go with it. Each one of us would come up with a different sequel to LiT which would satisfy the author but clash with the rest of our visions of the couple.

And I still feel that Scarlett unappreciative of the wonderfulness of the LiT movie. Maybe in later years, she will feel differently and not go "ew" over the possibility of Bob and Charlotte becoming a real couple. Maybe if it wasn't Bill Murray playing Bob, but rather Hugh Laurie or some other older actor that she found attractive, her response to the interviewer would have been different.

Tonight, I watched the new BBC production of Jane Eyre. Rochester was about 15 years senior to Jane Eyre and the couple getting married at the end of the story seemed plausible to me. Jane Eyre and LiT had some similarities to me in that Rochester and Jane were from different backgrounds, but the two of them related better to each other than they did with the classes of people that they belonged to. And of course, I was happy that inner beauty and qualities won out over surface beauty and society norms and expectations. :)

User avatar
Pitman
Suntory Time
Posts: 411
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 9:12 am
Location: Toronto

#76 Post by Pitman » Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:52 am

Scarlett plays an older (probably early 20's) and more mature woman in LiT, so her remarks as herself are no surprise. Her personal feelings around the possible romantic development between the characters doesn't reflect the director's intentions. So, her opinion regarding the matter is a typical teenage response. No need to fault her for it.

For Charlotte, the possibility of a romantic hook-up is not so unthinkable given the circumstances. However, in the end they do not do the nasty. And in a twist of fate it was the lounge singer who steps into that role when Bob was at the bar probably hoping that Charlotte would walk in after her trip to Kyoto. Had it been Bob and Charlotte getting it on, they would probably not part friends.

User avatar
52FM
Inactive/Deleted user
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 3:49 pm

#77 Post by 52FM » Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:53 am

"And I still feel that Scarlett unappreciative of the wonderfulness of the LiT movie. "

Pockets - I agree with that completely, as I now view Scarlett.

Post Reply