“Lost in Translation” Makes the Meaning of Life Sound Elusive

Posted on June 28th, 2008 in art by art-world

\”Lost in Translation\” Makes the Meaning of Life Sound Elusive

By: Ed Bagley

Lost in Translation ‘ 2 Stars (Average)

“Lost in Translation” was written and directed by Sofia Coppola and won enough awards to fill a grocery cart.

The independent film earned Sofia Coppola an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay and also had 2003 Oscar nominations for Best Picture (won by “The Lord of the Rings, the Return of the King”, bad timing for Sofia), Best Director (won by Peter Jackson for Lord of the Rings) and Bill Murray as Best Actor (won by Sean Penn in “Mystic River”).

Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow in “Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl” lost the same nomination as Murray. I would have voted for Johnny Depp as Best Actor rather than Sean Penn.

Sofia Coppola’s creation also won Golden Globe awards for Best Picture, Best Screenplay and Best Actor (Bill Murray), and earned nominations for Best Director and Best Actress (Scarlett Johansson).

The Oscar win was among 70 wins and 58 more nominations. To say Sofia Coppola’s creation was lauded by the critics would be a huge understatement.

Seeing this film, I would not have guessed it would have won so many awards.

Sofia Coppola wrote the lead role specifically for Bill Murray, and later said that if Murray turned it down, she would have scrapped the project.

She was nothing if not persistent in recruiting Murray for the role. In 1999, Murray apparently replaced his talent agency with a voice mailbox and an 800 number he gives out sparingly.

Coppola reportedly left hundreds of messages before Murray finally called back to discuss her offer to cast him as the star. Coppola apparently knows something about selecting actors who win awards.

Lost in Translation follows Bob Harris (Bill Murray), a fading American film actor with a humdrum marriage, who is in Tokyo to do a Japanese whiskey commercial. He meets Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson), a recently college graduate in philosophy and the bored wife of a photographer doing a shoot in Tokyo.

They develop an unlikely friendship when the language barrier, Japanese culture and their own discontent surfaces. When it is time for them to resume their normal lives, leaving becomes difficult.

I give Sofia Coppola a lot of credit for not writing into the script a sexual relationship between the two. In Hollywood this would be like taking the financier’s money and not worshipping at his or her feet.

Coppola had it her way because this independent film cost only $4 million to make, was filmed in 27 days and grossed $44.5 million at last count.

The opening of the film has a lingering shot of Scarlett Johansson (as Charlotte) lying in bed sideways in her panties. Johansson was apparently reluctant to film the shot until Sofia Coppola modeled the panties herself.

Thankfully, this opening was not a precursor to the film, which sought to explore a more important issue: the meaning of life. As two unhappy individuals in their roles, both Murray and Johansson struggle to find real meaning in their current circumstances.

What happens in their exploration is really nothing special.

“Lost in Translation” Makes the Meaning of Life Sound Elusive
...

“Lost in Translation” Makes the Meaning of Life Sound Elusive
...

Language Translation To Count On
...

More Cheap Spanish Translation Advertising Techniques
...

Legal Translation
...

Therein is why I gave this film an average rating rather than a good or excellent rating. I wanted real substance in this film that I could relate to in my everyday life, and I was left wanting.

How odd is it that Bob and Charlotte never introduce themselves to each other despite spending days together contemplating their mutual miserable situations? This makes no sense to me whatsoever, and does not ring true in real life.

Despite winning an Oscar for her original screenplay, Sofia Coppola does not give the substance I expect. Hollywood pours out awards for her effort, and to me it only reflects why Hollywood is called Tinseltown, all show, confusion and stress without real substance.

Ultimately, both characters are seeking meaning in their lives.

One viewer wrote this about the film, “Overall the film is just perfect. The acting, the direction, the soundtrack, plot, themes, humor, visuals . . . what’s not to like?”

What’s not to like is this: People who seek true love seldom find it. People who seek the perfect mate never find the perfect mate. People who seek to find the true meaning of life seldom find it.

The reason is simple: you do not bring meaning to your life by seeking meaning in your life, you bring meaning to your life by giving meaning to your life. Life does not come to you, you come to life, or you become an unhappy, dissatisfied person.

When we blame others we give up our ability to change.

Lost in Translation has some great scenes of Tokyo, but like pictures in a photo album, they only reflect the meaning you bring to them.

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

Article Source:
http://www.articlecity.com/articles/music_and_movies/article_906.shtml
.

Shopping for a Piano: Acoustic vs. Digital

Posted on June 28th, 2008 in art by art-world

Shopping for a Piano: Acoustic vs. Digital

By: Eugene Chung

The most serious piano teachers will adamantly point their students in the direction of an acoustic piano. For serious piano studying, I agree with this completely for reasons I will discuss shortly. But for many reasons, a genuine handcrafted instrument may not be the best choice for you. With the affordability, portability, and the many features that come with digital pianos, you may wish to head the other way. Summarily, the question of acoustic versus digital boils down to a matter of authenticity versus everything else.

Mostly, the drawbacks of an acoustic piano are matters of practicality, such as price. For what you could get a new, decent quality digital piano with, you?ll be dealing with a rather meager acoustic. This can encompass a number of problems. For instance, aside from any tuning it might need, the overall sound quality of a cheap acoustic piano can be quite poor. This may not just be an issue of old strings, but can result from an infinite number of possible factors arising from any of the complex mechanics of the piano being in disrepair. Other common problems of old pianos are broken keys and sticky keys, which is when the keys fail to spring up the way they should. There may also be faults with the framework that can range from nuisances to impending hazards. The trouble of a bad acoustic continues indefinitely, and the piano may need a decent amount of initial maintenance, in addition to periodic maintenance, which is likely to pull a few additional large bills out of your wallet right way.

Also, because of its bulk and weight, an acoustic may be a very difficult accommodation for people living in tight or elevated spaces, such as dorm rooms and certain city apartments. Some buildings may even prohibit pianos, particularly on floors above the ground level because the weight and bulk of pianos make them quite cumbersome and possibly hazardous to either the tenants or the buildings themselves. This raises the issue of portability as well. Do you gig? Do you relocate frequently? Toting a 500 pound upright piano isn?t possible for most people; moving one across the room is a challenge for most people. If your music needs to be ready to go, your hulking wooden companion is not going to be sympathetic.

Acoustic pianos also lack the many features present in digital pianos nowadays that may be valuable tools to you. For example, volume control may be necessary in dormitory, or close living, situations. Newer digitals also come with a suite of onboard functions, including on-the-fly recording, voice customization, electronic metronome, and even music mixing features, which you won?t have. You will also lack the benefit of porting your music to your PC; a simple MIDI connector would feed your performance directly into your computer?s audio card without any ambient noise or loss of sound quality, which will probably beat any recording made with an acoustic piano and consumer grade recording hardware available at a neighborhood electronics store.

With an acoustic, you will surely be at, at least, some degree of inconvenience. Still, despite the great deal of effort digital piano makers have put into their product, none have been able to truly reproduce the sound and feel of a good acoustic piano. First, lets talk about the piano sound. To most people, casual or occasional listeners of piano music, the resulting sounds between an acoustic piano and a digital piano are quite identical and equally satisfactory musically. But listen closely, because there is an important difference.

A digital piano outputs high quality recordings of the sounds that were made by a real piano at one time. During the process of making a digital piano, each key of a real concert grand piano is struck a number of times at varying velocities and recorded with sophisticated equipment to be used as the digital voice. This will give the digital piano a sufficient range of tonality and an overall likeness to the sound of an acoustic piano in varying music dynamics. But once the notes have been recorded and finally integrated with the digital piano?s voicing mechanism, they are never going to be changed. Even though the aesthetic quality of the sound is state of the art, it is the way the sounds should behave but cannot because they are fixed recordings that is the fundamental problem of digital pianos.

An acoustic piano uses a complex array of hammers, strings, a soundboard, and other moving parts that function in collaboration. This means that when any note is played, it is not played with entire independence, but is highly affected by the current state of the surrounding components of the piano. For example, playing a chord on a digital piano will simply result in three notes being played, as they were recorded individually, at the same time, whereas with an acoustic piano, the three notes will interact with each other through the soundboard and become a stew of vibrations, producing a different, more complex, and ultimately richer sound. Lacking this quality, what comes out of digital speakers will typically be quite boring and unsatisfactory to aficionados of the true piano tone.

An acoustic piano is also an analog instrument, which means is has virtually infinite range. For example, there is no limit to the loudness or softness a note may be played on an acoustic piano. With digital pianos, there is a point at which a minimum or maximum will be achieved. This means there will be occasions when you will not be able to play a note as softly or as loudly as you wish. In order words, true pppp or ffff are probably beyond the reach of digital pianos without you resorting to adjusting the volume dial while you?re performing. Even if you were to do that, the tonal quality of the notes would remain static from that point on, when it would further continue to dull or brighten on an acoustic piano.

Another problem of digital devices is the matter of intervals. In photography, for example, pixels are the intervals. With a traditional film camera, the amount of detail you are able to capture is theoretically unlimited because film is a single and continuous malleable body. The ?film? of a digital camera is not single or continuous but is a multitude of pixels, each of which is only able to record a solid block of color. The amount of detail a digital camera is able to capture will depend on the how small the pixels are and how tightly they?re packed together. If the pixels, or intervals, are small enough and packed tight enough, the amalgam of the blocks of color they record will appear to be smooth curves and gradients to the human eye.

There is a similar issue of intervals with digital pianos, which is mainly the issue of touch sensitivity.

Advantages of Buying a Digital Piano
...

Shopping for a Piano: Acoustic vs. Digital
...

How To Buy Keyboards
...

Upright Pianos - What Are the Benefits?
...

3 Ways To Buy Cheap Digital Cameras
...

The more intervals there are and the closer they are to each other, the more realistically the piano will respond to your dynamics. High end digital pianos will have quite a lot of them. But digital pianos within the means of average shoppers may not have sufficient sensitivity. This means that while the vast difference between piano and forte may be noticeable, the most intricate variances of touch pressure may be disregarded. This will be quite a nuisance to pianists seeking a highly responsive instrument, particularly when it comes to meticulous classical music.

It also manifests in pedaling. Piano pedals are ranged. Between simple on and off, or up and down, there are degrees. Half-pedaling and quarter-pedaling are crude terms describing the manner of pedaling in which the pedal is only pressed partially down in order to create an intermediate effect. For instance, rather than completely depressing the pedal so that the full brilliance of a note is sustained, you may wish to depress it only half way to dampen about half of the note and let only the remainder of it sustain for a subtler, suppressed quality. Certainly a scrupulous pianist will wish to employ the complete range of pedaling available to him, which may not be represented entirely accurately in a digital piano.

Aside from sound, as mentioned previously, key touch is also an important issue. Digital piano makers these days have gone to great lengths to reproduce the feel of acoustic pianos. For the most part, they?ve done a good job. They?ve even gone as far as implementing graded hammer action, which is in line with the hammers of acoustic pianos gradually becoming lighter from left to right. As a matter of fact, if you could take a look at the inner workings of a digital piano, you would be quite surprised and impressed with the complexity of the hammer mechanics. However, as long as digital pianos look the way they do, being the shape and size they are, there is going to be a limit as to how authentically the key feel can be made.

The hammers on a digital piano are simply extensions of the pianist?s fingers. When the pianist presses a key down, it will raise the opposing lever, which touches the electronic pad inside the piano that serves as the string. The hammers on an acoustic piano do not behave this way. Instead of being extensions of the pianist?s fingers, they are rather like projectiles that are sprung toward the strings high above them. Imagine the carnival game where you must hit a pad on the ground with a mallet, which flings a projectile up the meter towards the bell at the very top. The finger is the mallet, the visible piano key is the pad, the hammer inside the piano is the projectile, and the string is the bell. First of all, this means if you press a key all the way down but not with the minimum amount of force needed, the projectile hammer will never leave its seating and the string will actually never be struck. Secondly, this launch-pad-like action feels quite different than the seesaw-like action of digital piano hammers.

The only way this can truly be reproduced in a digital piano is by the use of bona-fide acoustic hammers. And there?s nothing wrong with doing that. But the problem is there isn?t enough room for them inside the compact size of most of the digital pianos today. That?s why as long as they look the way they do, the action of digital pianos will not feel completely akin to that of acoustic pianos. Larger, higher end models do integrate the acoustic hammer action simply to recreate the key feel. Even higher end models, which are called ?silent pianos,? integrate strings as well and are bona-fide acoustic pianos with the added ability to remove the strings from the action and toggle on digital mode in order to provide volume control! But these tend to be even more expensive than acoustic pianos.

These are the basic points to think about when shopping for your piano. To restate what I said at the beginning of the article, it really boils down to the authenticity versus everything else. And the authenticity is usually going to cost you more to get. What you should think about is how important it is to you that the piano truly resembles an acoustic. Are you a classical piano student looking at a long road of perfection and possibly a career as a concert performer? Then a digital piano is probably not what you want to be practicing on, even as a temporary substitution. I would suggest taking financing an acoustic and using your relatively small budget of cash as the down payment. If this is not necessarily what you?re going for, then perhaps a digital reduction is all you really need. For most people, it is.

Article Source:
http://www.articlecity.com/articles/music_and_movies/article_940.shtml
.