I grew into Grease.

After I grew out of it, I mean. First time round it was the most marvellous film ever (I was 9, and there was mooning). Second time round it was childish and silly (I was 16, and there was mooning). By the re-release it was a movie with fun bits wrapped around dumb bits, and I've liked it about evenly since then.

I love GF2 deeply, but I'm not sure if it is because of my thing about, you know The Thing. Crime and criminality in general interest me more than the average, you know. But it has so much to say about America, and starting a new life, and... ETA: ita is me, in re Grease. I remember thinking I was very cool for getting the smutty bits, which is a pleasure I still enjoy, come to think of it.

This is why I adore Lost in Translation while many don't, because I love the characters. Nothing happens in the movie. But it's pretty, and there are characters I can get into. That's what I need.

I felt like there was a great movie struggling to get out. I loved the scene where they talked in bed. I loved "That was the worst lunch ever." There were a lot of nice moments, but they were few and far between. You make an interesting point about character and story not always intertwining, but I think it's hard to learn about characters unless they're in some semblance of a story. Even if it's just a narrator telling us about them, that counts as a story. It's storytelling.

Oh, and since I was just thinking about it yesterday, another movie that I didn't see the love for: Y Tu Mamá También. (Also, I hated 21 Grams .)

(grumbling) But I see your point about LiT. Not that I disliked it.

Because it is! As Nutty notes, Godfather 1 is gorgeous pulp. Godfather 2 is as close to Shakespeare as American film gets.

Heck, yeah. Although lots, and maybe all, of my favorite movies are pulpy genre flicks with miles of brains behind them. I mean, even Shakespeare's fairly pulpy in the context of his time.

And another heck yeah on those first five Godard movies. Wonderful stuff.

I haven't seen very many foreign films but "La Cage" and stuff.(Or I should say films not in English) I'm Godard-impaired. ETA: Corwood gets to blurb my book if it ever comes out, being as pulp with miles of brains is my artistic heart's desire.

Godfather 2 is as close to Shakespeare as American film gets.

Oh HELL yeah.

This is why I adore Lost in Translation while many don't, because I love the characters. Nothing happens in the movie. But it's pretty, and there are characters I can get into. That's what I need.

I felt like there was a great movie struggling to get out. I loved the scene where they talked in bed. I loved "That was the worst lunch ever." There were a lot of nice moments, but they were few and far between. You make an interesting point about character and story not always intertwining, but I think it's hard to learn about characters unless they're in some semblance of a story.

But the characters *were* the story. It was all internal. (Which is not a popular mode of storytelling, I'm aware.)

I haven't seen any French films, but I do seem to like German films. Everything from M to Das Boot and Run Lola Run. Toss in the silent films such as The Cabinet of Dr. Caliguri and Metropolis and I'm a happy camper.

(A neat Metropolis thing I saw on Antiques Roadshow FYI a few weeks ago--the appraiser was asked what would be his "Find of His Life" that he would do anything to locate, and he said it was the one-sheet for the American release of Metropolis. There are some promotional stuff from the initial release (lobby cards, mostly), but no one-sheets have ever been found. He estimated that, if it did ever show up, it would probably sell for over $1 million.)

But the characters *were* the story. It was all internal. (Which is not a popular mode of storytelling, I'm aware.)

Yeah, I guess I just can't get into it that way. Do you feel the same way about Garden State ? Or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind ? Because people compared both of them to Lost in Translation, which made me all a-feared, but I really liked the former and loved the latter.

Yes. The story of LiT is entirely in the connection, and its silliness, and its importance.

It makes me think of people I've spent little time with, usually mere days, but whose faces and names I remember with crystal clarity. Friends at week-long church camps as far back as elementary school, including my first real crush. The girl I still think of as the most beautiful person, internally and externally, I've ever met, despite our total lack of compatibility and a total time spent together of maybe 15 hours over 3 years. Friends from summer programs age 12 and higher who inspired me in late-night conversations, that could exist only because of the temporary nature of our acquaintance, to express my true nature and mature into me.

I don't talk to many of these people anymore. Their importance was in the temporary nature of our meeting. And that is a story.

But not one that everybody would want to hear.