Am I missing something?

I love Bill Murray, and Scarlett Johanssen is maturing into one of the better new stars, with a delectably "human" shaped figure and expressive face. You have solid direction and cinematography displaying a tapestry of Japan's pop culture. Maybe it was a poor plot that failed to inspire. No, couldn't be that, because there was no plot to speak of.

Without giving away whatever plot outline there was (because an actual plot was non existent), Bill Murray was the cliched rich guy who long ago settled in to a married life that was depressingly mundane at best. Scarlett Johanssen played the very bored, bright educated young woman who seems early on, to have surrendered any personal direction in life. Rather she chose treding time as an appendage to her vocationally preoccupied equally young husband. In short... a future divorce waiting to happen.

These two environmentally alienated people meet in an unfamiliar environment and slowly grow on each other. It seems that neither can sleep, probably because deep down, they realize that life is ticking by like an old regulator clock with a broken chime. In some ways, you might say that Bill Murray's character sees Scarlett as the embryo of his present existence. Scarlett bonds to Murray for a taste of her own developing life drama.

Yeah... so what. If you're a teenager with limited witnessed time on earth, all this might seem intriguing. But in fact, if you strip "Lost in Translation" of its Japanese environment and planted it in Chicago, or Atlanta, or Boise or anywhere else, it would be crashingly dull.

Funny Part: The Japanese hooker. Earlier funny part: Long winded director of a whiskey commercial.

Tasteful Theme: No gratuitous sex.

When the film was over, my wife and myself scratched out head, because there really wasn't an ending in the true sense of the word. But then again, there wasn't a beginning or a middle either.

For very good acting, direction and cinematography, I give Lost in Translation a generous 6 out of 10.