I would like to say that I hated Lost in Translation... But it just wasn't even good enough to elicit that emotion from me.

Bored to tears by a plot-less piece of crap. How the hell did this win any awards?

Even by Fark standards, this article is shiat. I mean he criticizes a movie he admits he hasn't even seen? Who does he thing he is, Leonard Maltin?

I've only ever seen Lost in Translation, and I absolutely hated it.

MrEricSir: Even by Fark my standards, this article is shiat.

Yeah, it was.

I think the writer asked Sophia on date and she politely turned him down.

As for the GW references?
Farking allah, moron, give it up. You write like a farking idiot.

At least she was awesome in the best of the Godfather movies.

jackiepaper: People still read Vice? They were annoying hipsters before the word "hipsters" made its way to the modern vernacular

Excuse me, but hipsters are people that shop at Abercrombie and Fitch, drive pontoon boats, and enjoy tacos. If you read Fark more often, you would clearly understand the stereotype.

/I know it's not
//I don't care

I liked Lost in Translation

What I didn't like was seeing it a second and third time as Marie Antoinette and Somehwere.

farkingismybusiness: At least she was awesome in the best of the Godfather movies.

1/10.

'Lost' is a decent movie because Bill Murray saved her ass.
He is the only spark in that movie.

The Virgin Suicides was nice enough. I'm not sure if I'm a hipster because of that. According to Fark, everyone is a hipster for something or other. You people are all over the place.

wiwille: farkingismybusiness: At least she was awesome in the best of the Godfather movies.

1/10.

You're being too generous.

I'm surprised none of Spike Jonze's creativity rubbed off on her during their marriage, and I can see why they divorced.

Rod Flanders: I liked Lost in Translation

As did I. It was not ENTERTAINMENT!, but I liked it for what it was.

Also saw and liked The Virgin Suicides. More enjoyable than Lost in Translation, probably.

Did not see and have no interest in the other two.

Mugato: Yeah, nepotism rules Hollywood and politics. Holy shiat, someone discovered something new!



It's not nepotism if you change your name.

At first glance, the public life of Sofia Coppola looks like a straightforward G.W. Bush scenario-a clear-cut case of nepotism gone wild, on steroids, and then additionally on crack.

Umm.. ok. I think when most people start cataloging W's traits, they don't immediately leap to "nepotism," but fine, let's go with it.

Bush and Coppola both prove that even the most incompetent of humans can be greased up and gently nudged into humanity's collective poop chute.

Wut?

Here's the thing, though. Bush was an amateur at dabbling. His sole pre-presidency fling, co-owning the Texas Rangers, was an entirely rational pursuit for a rich, white, MBA-holding Texan man.

"Sole fling?" I guess owning an oil company and being, you know, Governor of Texas doesn't really count?

And after his 8-year fling of flinging feces at the human race, he definitely seemed to recognize the limits of nepotism. He never, for example, attempted to be Pope, or UN General Secretary, or any sort of intergalactic envoy.

No, he's followed the standard career path of any modern ex-president. What does this have to do with Sofia Coppola?

[wtfamireading.jpg]

Seen all her movies, liked all of them. Lost in Translation is definitely my favorite by a pretty large margin. I liked Somewhere, but it really felt like she made it for people who complained that Lost in Translation had too much going on. Bored during LiT? Run screaming away from Somewhere.

Uzzah: At first glance, the public life of Sofia Coppola looks like a straightforward G.W. Bush scenario-a clear-cut case of nepotism gone wild, on steroids, and then additionally on crack.

Umm.. ok. I think when most people start cataloging W's traits, they don't immediately leap to "nepotism," but fine, let's go with it.

I think "brand recognition" is a better term than nepotism. He never would have even been governor if his last name wasn't Bush, but that's not technically nepotism.

Sofia Coppola never lied to get me to see one of her movies then charged me trillions of dollars for popcorn.

Umm, no. GWB represents about The Asylum level of directorial ability. I thought that Lost In Translation was a solid effort, but it's a farkin' masterpiece compared to that shiat.

Everyone knows Michael Cimino is the GWB of cinema.

farkingismybusiness: At least she was awesome in the best of the Godfather movies.

Was she in the first one or the second one?



(Actually, IIRC correctly, she's the baby Corelone in the baptism scene).

Fark picks the worst article on Vice and greenlights it.

Jesus Christ, who runs this dump? Who is the person who actually subjects us to this? A real prime cut of weirdo.

Just day after day.

Whatever you think of her or her movies, that was a horribly written article. not that I'm surprised, given that it's Vice. They basically just gloss over ever the movies before slamming them and admit to not having seen her last one, and slamming it anyway, which was actually pretty good.

jackiepaper: People still read Vice? They were annoying hipsters before the word "hipsters" made its way to the modern vernacular

I've known many hipsters, none of which are going to arms black markets in Pakistan, interviewing warlords in Liberia or sneaking into North Korea.

The original article was quite right ... LiT was the only movie Sofia Coppola made that was even halfway decent, and if not for her last name it probably never makes gets picked up for Indie Distribution, much less gets nominated for Oscars.

farkingismybusiness: Mugato: Yeah, nepotism rules Hollywood and politics. Holy shiat, someone discovered something new!

[i2.listal.com image 462x273]

It's not nepotism if you change your name.

His name isn't really Nicolas?

The only thing worse than that article is that there is a freaking "hipster" trifecta in play.

At first I was all "what?" then I read the opening line about nepotism and the comparison actually made some sense.

And Somewhere would have been approximately 500x better had it actually had the joke plot the author postulated, so I've gotta say I kind of enjoyed reading that article overall. Thanks, subby.

vrax: Umm, no. GWB represents about The Asylum level of directorial ability. I thought that Lost In Translation was a solid effort, but it's a farkin' masterpiece compared to that shiat.

I hate The Asylum, and I hate you for reminding me that I know who they are.

InmanRoshi: jackiepaper: People still read Vice? They were annoying hipsters before the word "hipsters" made its way to the modern vernacular

I've known many hipsters, none of which are going to arms black markets in Pakistan, interviewing warlords in Liberia or sneaking into North Korea.

The original article was quite right ... LiT was the only movie Sofia Coppola made that was even halfway decent, and if not for her last name it probably never makes gets picked up for Indie Distribution, much less gets nominated for Oscars.

I think Vice started throwing the word hipster around in 2002 when it best described themselves. It's great that they're doing neato journalism now, but back then it was really just a rag to talk about DJs and make fun of people's outfits.

You're in Austin - one of Vice's favorite cities because of all the hipsters. I figured you would know this.

antidisestablishmentarianism: *checks pic*

I would hit it.

And I have only seen her first two movies, mainly because of the actors in them. I had no idea she existed until I read this

That's nothing, I had no idea that motion pictures existed until I read this, I have never seen one.

"Lost in Translation" Winning an Oscar for the best original screenplay is the ultimate perversity. It HAD NO SCRIPT! The movie was adlibbed and put into some sort of comprehensible order in the editing room from which a script was transcribed. Its like winning a Pulitzer for the book you INTENDED to write!

There is a lot of butthurt in that article. She may not be a good director but she's far from the worst. And Lost in Translation was aimless but not so bad.

Marisyana: She was the baby in the baptism scene in II, Michael's daughter Mary in III. And she was farking HORRIBLE in III

What are you talking about? There was no third Godfather movie. There was one and two, and that was it; they covered everything in the book, but not in the same order.

Dwight_Yeast: What are you talking about? There was no third Godfather movie. There was one and two, and that was it; they covered everything in the book, but not in the same order.

While the Godfather III doesn't at all stand up to the legacy of the first two, not many films at all, period, do. Hard to live up to two of the best films of all time.

Taken on its own, The Godfather Part III isn't bad. It's 30 minutes longer than it needs to be and Andy García and Sophia stunk, but there are some great performances otherwise, the whole Vatican angle was a nice turn on the usual formula, and there are some very good scenes. It ain't perfect, but its better than people credit it for.

Look at it the way Coppola and Puzo intended before being overruled by the studio: It was meant to be an epilogue called The Death of Michael Corleone, not a third Godfather film. Looked at in that way rather than as a continuation of a classic series and it watches much better.

Delawheredad: "Lost in Translation" Winning an Oscar for the best original screenplay is the ultimate perversity. It HAD NO SCRIPT! The movie was adlibbed and put into some sort of comprehensible order in the editing room from which a script was transcribed. Its like winning a Pulitzer for the book you INTENDED to write!

And The Station Agent and The Whale Rider don't even get a nomination. Because we get Bill Murray and Scarlett Johanson riffing on ground breaking material, like how the Japanese say their Rs and Ls funny.

LiT was a great movie... The only explaination I can think of for the hate is that the haters are butt-sniffing action film fans who can't sit still for more than 43 seconds without a car explosion.

I tried to watch Lost In Translation. The only thing I identified with was Bill Murray. The rest of it was boring. Anybody could've been cast in that. Hell, it probably would've been better for it if it had been cast differently. Mr. Baseball - even being eleven years older - was a better representation of a Westerner lost in Japan.

She may not be the George W. Bush of Hipster Cinema, but to me, she'll always be the Ronald McDonald of the Neuvo Abstruse.

shoegaze99: Dwight_Yeast: What are you talking about? There was no third Godfather movie. There was one and two, and that was it; they covered everything in the book, but not in the same order.

While the Godfather III doesn't at all stand up to the legacy of the first two, not many films at all, period, do. Hard to live up to two of the best films of all time.

Taken on its own, The Godfather Part III isn't bad. It's 30 minutes longer than it needs to be and Andy García and Sophia stunk, but there are some great performances otherwise, the whole Vatican angle was a nice turn on the usual formula, and there are some very good scenes. It ain't perfect, but its better than people credit it for.

Look at it the way Coppola and Puzo intended before being overruled by the studio: It was meant to be an epilogue called The Death of Michael Corleone, not a third Godfather film. Looked at in that way rather than as a continuation of a classic series and it watches much better.

Godfather III had multiple problems, and they can all be summed up with one sentence: Francis Ford Coppola stopped giving a fark. Everything wrong with the film can be laid at his feet because his decisions (including the decision to even do this farking thing) show that the Coppola of the '70s was truly dead.

Coppola's downfall is one of the saddest things ever. Somehow he either lost his shiat or got greedy, because the man should have just stopped directing altogether and left it at what he did. Apocalypse Now should have been it. Instead, he became a microcosm for Hollywood: inventive at first, then mailing it in, then letting nepotism run rampant as American Film stagnates and rots underneath its own colossal mass.

We can talk about Sofia all we want: how she sucks as an actress, how she wouldn't be able to direct a student film without her name, and how she represents the worst part of modern day cinema that treasures who you know over what you can do. But the real problem when you bring her up is what she represents: the true death of the New Hollywood Era, even in Ironic Terms. A lot of the time, the children of popular artists can do some good and actually succeed in their own right. But with the Coppolas, you that doesn't exist. You see the rancid side of the American entertainment industry that's full of relatives and friends that really have no talent, and with Francis you see that he's a man who got lucky, had some ambition, and even some vision. Then you read some interviews in the '70s-80s and see a man who has sold his soul and his talent has rotted away. You see the true American character of someone who has gotten everything and has gone into a never-neverland of Happily Ever After, which involves nothing but excess and distain for the craft they only pay lip service to.

In the midst of this, Sofia seems like a symptom of a bigger problem. In a way, I can't even dislike her. This doesn't mean I like her movies or even think they deserve to be seen. I just see movies I like falling by the wayside, getting louder and stupider every year, while being ruled by people who were going to change that drowning in their own hypocrisy. We can talk about Sofia all we want, but it seems that the only thing she does well is announce when something is truly rotted, corrupted, and in need of a change.

Sam McPheeters. Nice fake name douchebag. That might have been the biggest piece of crap "article" I have ever read.

skylabdown: LiT was a great movie... The only explaination I can think of for the hate is that the haters are butt-sniffing action film fans who can't sit still for more than 43 seconds without a car explosion.

Or maybe we like a plot somehow involved in our films, doesnt have to be offensive but at least keep one off in the corner to try and pull it together.....


The movie blew dog dick, one of the few me and the GF agree sucked, the other was National Treasure, the only reason we stuck around was because Harvey Keitel showed up on screen and its sacrilegious to walk out of a film with Harvey Keitel, he was the wolf n*gro!

steamingpile: skylabdown: LiT was a great movie... The only explaination I can think of for the hate is that the haters are butt-sniffing action film fans who can't sit still for more than 43 seconds without a car explosion.

Or maybe we like a plot somehow involved in our films, doesnt have to be offensive but at least keep one off in the corner to try and pull it together.....


The movie blew dog dick, one of the few me and the GF agree sucked, the other was National Treasure, the only reason we stuck around was because Harvey Keitel showed up on screen and its sacrilegious to walk out of a film with Harvey Keitel, he was the wolf n*gro!

You do realize there is a difference between you and your GF liking a movie and whether the movie is good or not, right? Unless you are some kinda advanced scholar of cinema or something...

I guess if you don't like a particular food it means that food sucks... or if you don't like a particular band, they suck too.

I don't like basketball... but I would never say the sport "sucks." Lots of people like it and I can recognize the fact that there is a lot of strategy and gamesmanship involved. I just don't like it myself... doesn't mean it "sucks."