Somewhere (2010) User Reviews (238)

Life on screen

[Xander1989 · 7/10 · 4 September 2010]

A 30something year old actor spends his days (and nights) driving his Ferrari as fast as it can go, getting private shows from women,getting massages and participating in events which are part of his career. When at a press conference a journalist asks him "Who's Johnny Marko" he is unable to respond. Johnny is someone (or is he?) but he doesn't really know who. The relationships he has with people are far from personal.

From what we see at the beginning of the movie we would probably think Johnny is the usual single good looking but empty inside actor and that he pretty much has been all his life. But when his daughter shows up the picture is different: a failed marriage behind him... could this have made him what he is? maybe. As he welcomes Cleo back in his life she somehow seems to fill the emptiness of the environment around him. Nothing particularly overwhelming, just the little things that make the difference.

Does this movie display emotion in an explicit and clearly visible way? No. The dialog between characters is not what makes the difference. It's the feelings that make us think we're going somewhere or instead that we are so disconnected we can't care less where we are going. The feelings you can't really put into words (as properly emphasized in "Lost in Translation").

Just like the latter, "Somewhere" shows life as it is, no astonishing happenings, not many life changing experiences and maybe this is what will make a lot of people walk out of the theater unsatisfied or bored. We usually go to the cinema to evade from reality, see relationships develop clearly as they drastically change the lives of those involved in them. But this is not the case: just like in our lives things slowly develop and maybe over time change the way we see the world or feel the world. Maybe as the film suggests at one point, we need to slow down and take a look at where we are going instead of just passing through.

"Somewhere" is a particular movie from a particular director/writer. I can't go ahead and say watch this movie, you will love it, because it isn't for everyone but this is not a good enough reason to not give it a try altogether.

A very long Ferrari advert

[vazu · 5/10 · 28 December 2010]

I have watched this film in a cinema with a bar inside the screening room where you could order hummus and wine and have it delivered to your seat. If you think this sounds like a delightful idea, than you'll probably find this movie very mature and enjoyable. If you prefer pop-corn and cola instead; this film is not for you — the caffeine in your cola makes you inpatient.

Spoilers start here, I will even spoil the end. This review is not really intended for prospective viewers, I am just joining in the support-group of people who have already watched this film.

The film opens with a scene of the hero endlessly driving around in circles in his Ferrari, than eventually he finally stops to step out of it so we can have a look at him and think that the film is about him and not the car. According to the brochure that came with the movie ticket this is a metaphor of him going around in circles (how subtle and mature!), and of how meaningless his life is. Now lay back: this is further illustrated with many examples: we see him acting superficial toward other people, we see other people acting superficial towards him, we see him being bored by his daily routine (we have to see that repeatedly so we can understand that it's daily routine), and we see him being bored by luxury and women throwing themselves at him. Basically we take forever to find out that he's a bum, a celebrity, and his life is very boring.

We get a bit of relief when he has to stay with his daughter for some time, finally starting to form what seems like a real relationship. Yes, this is one of those movies where a divorced father who is a bum gets a grip through his new formed relationship with his child. Except that in other movies a crisis forces the father to develop his character dramatically, but unfortunately this film is too understated/boring for a crisis but not quite good enough for character development to happen anyway.

Instead what we see is the hero going back to his regular life after parting with his daughter. Now comes again the same boring scenes that took up the first long part of the film, except that this time our hero seems to feel our pain and realises how boring and pointless it is. And here comes the catharsis: he drives off to the distance until he runs out of petrol and leaves his Ferrari behind to walk further off to the distance. Judging by the brochures explanation this must be the pair of the first metaphor thus framing the movie, and it probably means that he's leaving his meaningless life-style behind. This cries for elaboration as we all would like to know how exactly he carries that out. Or do we? Well after how long and boring the explanation of the first metaphor was, I was happy to see the credits starting to roll instead.

This film was just a never ending set of scenes that were obviously intended to be very meaningful, but I didn't ever really feel it develop into a story, nor has it given enough depth to the characters. Perhaps it would have been better to show the characters from at least half as many angles as the Ferrari was shown.

In my opinion character of the alienated father would have worked just as well if he were a sales assistant living in a studio apartment. The "meaningful" world of hotel rooms and celebrities added little to the plot, anyone can be a disengaged bum in any life circumstance and the story would probably speak to more people. I find Coppola's insistence of portraying the world she's grown up in arbitrary if not boastful.

And am I the only one that thinks it's not so good that it has SO MUCH in common with Lost in Translation?

By now you probably guessed that I wanted cola and pop-corn. But I'm giving it a five because I kind of enjoyed it anyway, mostly due to Fleming's acting.

Slow Pace but It Hits Emotional Punch

[Nickilodspiker · 7/10 · 29 December 2010]

I am a big fan of underrated actor Stephen Dorff. I don't know what happen to him but his career is kind of dead. So, this movie "Somewhere" gets me interested the fact that he is the star of it. This movie also stars Elle Fanning, the younger sister of former child actress Dakota Fanning.

Some people might not like the direction given by Sofia Coppola. The movie is slow pace, too quite, there are scenes with long cuts, and sometimes there is nothing going on for 1 minute or more. This approach could be boring to some people but for me it is very effective in conveying the despair, loneliness and boredom of Hollywood actor Johnny Marco.

Stephen Dorff didn't do much dialog or doing actions in this. When he speaks, he spoke only few phrases. But, the emotion through his eyes, the tears or a simple smile kills it. Elle Fanning is remarkable as well.

The movie runs maybe slow but if you are patient enough, the emotional impact that struck on you throughout the film is worth it.

Everything that worked out beautifully in "Lost In Translation"...

[Benedict_Cumberbatch · 4 February 2011]

...makes "Somewhere" an utterly forgettable, self-indulgent (in the worst sense of the term) waste of celluloid. I gotta say, first of all, I have immense respect and admiration for Sofia Coppola. The girl who showed the world she couldn't act in "The Godfather III" had a decade to find herself and prove everybody she was a sensitive, talented writer-director with 1999's "The Virgin Suicides". "Lost In Translation" (2003), which gave her the Oscar for best original screenplay (and a nomination for best director - the third female and first American woman to ever be nominated in that category), is my #3 favourite film of all time. I can watch it over and over and every frame of it can make me appreciate the beauty of life, film, human connections, and music, more. Sounds corny, doesn't it? Well, but it's true.

Sofia's follow-up to LiT, 2006's ostracized "Marie Antoinette", was, yes, sort of shallow, but I have to admit that eye candy and great music alone make it a delicious piece of cake for me. The same can't be said about her latest, "Somewhere", which won the Golden Lion for Best Film at Venice 2010 (a blasphemy, specially considering titles like "Black Swan" and "Balada Triste" were in competition). It follows a bored, kind of good-looking, shallow and womanizing movie star, Johnny Marco (Stephen Dorff) who (surprise) goes through an emotional transformation after spending some time with his 11 year-old daughter (product of a failed marriage), Cleo (Elle Fanning, a more natural actress than her older sister Dakota). We already knew that Sofia is fascinated by the ennui of the rich; but what made Bob Harris and Charlotte such wonderful characters in "Lost In Translation" was their humanity (and the chemistry between their fine performers, Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson). Johnny Marco is not 1/5 as interesting as those two. Not every main character needs to be likable for a film to work for me, at all - I love character studies, no matter how conflicted ("The Piano Teacher") or pleasant ("Happy-Go-Lucky") the protagonist might be.

However, Marco is not someone interesting enough to spend 97 minutes with, and although Cleo seems to be a nice enough girl, she can't carry a whole film on her shoulders. They don't even share the historical curiosity of a figure like Marie Antoinette and her colorful ways. Marco is just shallow. Filthy rich. Bored. And boring. It's hard to feel bad for him, or even compelled to follow what he might become (the open ending, in that sense, is not a quality, since the movie ends when it could possibly become somewhat interesting). The soundtrack was nice enough (not memorable like those of her previous work), the cinematography is pretty enough (by Harris Savides, and not Lance Acord, this time around), but this is no 'Lost in Translation Redux', or even a film I would want to see again. It's a shame, but I am still curious to see what you do next, Sofia. I know you have it in you to amaze us! Verdict: 3/10.

P.S.: Quentin Tarantino, Sofia's ex-boyfriend who awarded "Somewhere" the Golden Lion as president of the jury at Venice last September, later wouldn't even name it one of his top 20 movies of the year (yet, he lists abominations such as "Jackass 3D", "Knight and Day"...). That can prove one of two things: 2010 was a less than great year for movies, or he finally realized the mistake he made. Well, perhaps both?

Less is less.

[lordforbes · 6/10 · 27 December 2010]

'Somewhere' anatomizes the mindset of a man who has everything - except purpose. Johnny Marco is a thriving Hollywood actor but his soul is adrift on the sea of ennui which afflicts those to whom life denies nothing – he lacks meaningful relationships and doesn't know what to do with himself between projects.

In classic European art-house style Coppola evokes Marco's inner desolation through the extensive use of eccentrically framed, lingering, static, wide shots in which the focus of attention listlessly enters and leaves frame. And she does this relentlessly throughout the movie to the point that, like Marco, you just want to give up. Yes the guy is a bit defocused, a bit haunted and generally of a bit of a mid life plateau and yes these attributes are successfully evoked by the directorial style, but the result is so anodyne that you just want to watch a film about a guy with some real reasons to be miserable.

Naturally you're hoping he'll rediscover his mojo through his relationship with his daughter and work out what to do with his life but given the film's obvious anti-Hollywood credentials, you feel your optimism for any kind of resolution seeping away just like Johnny Marco's.

I imagine that if you are the daughter of a like-able, pampered but lost Marco figure, drowning in existential anxiety, then this character study is pretty poignant but it's really no more than a letter from Coppola to her father – and, of course, a gift to the type of film-goer for whom every aspect of the human condition, including boredom - is interesting.

Sometimes less is more; sometimes it's just less.

Technically a well-made character study, but difficult to care for

[oOgiandujaOo_and_Eddy_Merckx · 6/10 · 30 December 2010]

In a nearby safari park the wardens have taken steps to alleviate depression amongst the gorillas, they hide their food from them or leave it in hard to get places; this saves the gorillas having to sit around, eat, copulate and vegetate. Hollywood A-lister Johnny has this gorilla depression, everything he could possibly want comes at the end of a telephone call. Even the most difficult banana of all, sex, is available by scratching the back of his neck and signalling his assent, or at the end of another phone call if he's feeling especially lazy (which is often).

I once heard it said that rich people live years in the span of a single day, and Johnny certainly does have that flow of experiences coming at him, but the problem for him is that there's no feeling (let's all take a moment to have a boohoo for Johnny). He can barely stifle yawns when his eleven-year-old daughter Cleo, on a custody visit, shows him how she has become a brilliant ice skater and cooks him perfect eggs Benedict for breakfast. Life's too easy and it's suffocating him. There is a suspicion that he's a fluke, that his surfer-boy looks and beatific smile have carried him to the top, but I think there must have been some drive once, as evidenced by a faltering but very pretty rendition of Bach's Goldberg Variation #1.

Ultimately, Johnny Marco has the kind of problems that everyone else wants, and so it's very difficult to feel for him. The movie doesn't have any contrast either, none of the harsh realities of normal Californian workaday lives makes it to the screen. After the decadence of Marie Antoinette I kind of wondered whether Sofia was aware of normality, or whether she just grew up in Arcadia with the other film kids who turn up in the special thanks section at the end of the credits. Johnny Marco is probably the most complacent human alive, but the film doesn't exactly scream that, perhaps because Sofia Coppola doesn't know it. Another flaw is that Coppola's alter-ego Cleo has a decidedly airbrushed personality.

The detail was a big highlight of this film, time seems to have been spent getting the authenticity of the trappings of wealth. Johnny has a bottle of Château Pétrus on the bedside table (retails from $1,000 to $30,000 depending on vintage), chambréed to vinegar, and propped up on a wall is a lithograph by that master of Californian alienation, Ed Ruscha ("Cold beer, beautiful women", $10,000 to a cool million depending on whether it's a limited edition lithograph or the original painting). Other nice details give you insight into character, including a pill bottle of Propecia in his bathroom (prevents male pattern balding), which says he's worried about the onset of middle age, and the player name he has on his games console, 20thCenturyBoy, a sign that he's become his persona.

The cinematography is the second plus, though it's not exactly adventurous the filmmakers were prepared to let the action drift out of shot when they felt like it.

I think Somewhere is a difficult film to watch twice because there's very little connection for a non-wealthy person, the film's torpor has a complacent lull to it which is a little hard to bear. Thematically, I'm not convinced that I've seen mature filmmaking from Sofia Coppola yet.

Out there...

[CineCritic2517 · 6/10 · 8 February 2011]

A successful actor in his 40's leads an estranged life from his daughter. He boozes his way through the various engagements his contract with the film company requires him to attend. At some point his 11 year daughter played by Dakota Fanning's younger sibling unexpectedly turns up at his hotel. And a sign that reads: "Let the bonding begin".

Cappola revisits with this movie her own legacy by making a Lost in Translation II, albeit with significantly less oomph than the successful predecessor starring Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson. 'Somewhere' does inspire to the same level of narrative flow (or intentional lack thereof) and it does kind of grow on you as the film progresses. But it never makes the same impact.

This is however still a watchable film in between the lingering shots that is, with some convincing acting by both Fanning and Stephen Dorff who is casted perfectly for the role.

65/100

He's bored we suffer.

[Quietb-1 · 2/10 · 19 November 2010]

A black Ferrari, on what appears to be an oval track, roars past. The same place five times. The car is going nowhere fast. The movie goes nowhere slow.

Eventually a bored Hollywood star has to take care of his eleven year old daughter. That's were it starts? But that's about a half hour into the film. Elle Fanning adds some life to the movie. The relationship of Stephen Dorff to his daughter in an underwater tea party is the only thing that makes him likable.

Nearly every scene is too long. Dorff sits on the sofa, drinks beer and smokes more then once. Twin pole dancers twice get too much screen time. In a swimming pool, the star floats on a raft slowly out of frame. When he is called in for a make-up mask we watch the plaster dry. Thankfully we didn't have to see the plane fly to Italy in real time.

There is some red herring, read between the lines, business with nasty text messages and paranoid behavior that never pays off. The send in the masseuse bit was funny, but who would question his sexuality, as he rarely declined the gorgeous women that continually threw themselves his way.

The film is short on dialogue and has nothing to say. Some striking visuals skillfully convey a boredom story that is way to thin to be told.

Written and Directed by Sophia Coppola, here, the apple falls far from the tree.

An insightful story about human desensitization

[toxicsham · 8/10 · 17 September 2010]

I watched the film yesterday and I was surprised by the many negative reviews this film has received. I think most of them didn't really catch what the film is about so I felt it would have been useful to share my thoughts in the hope that they'll help the ones that didn't get it to better understand this movie.

This is a movie about boredom and existential discomfort, about the subtle effects of a way of living that forces you to slowly disconnect from yourself making you every day less receptive to the richness of experiences. This is probably something most of the people feel at some point in their life and to which I surely can relate. When does it start evolving? It does as soon as you are alone with your pain and you are forced to fully embrace it. The moment in which this happens is getting every day harder to achieve because there are an increasing number of things to keep you distracted from your condition. Johnny Marco have virtually limitless resources to avoid this confrontation, and this is his biggest misfortune. The ability to get whatever he think he needs prevents him from realizing he is slowly becoming numb to life. His final breakdown is not the usual unrealistic breakdown we are used to see in most movies today, but it's a believable manifestation of the feeling of a man that just realized something is wrong but that lacks of the self understanding needed to get what it really is. The father-daughter relationship here is just the match that ignites the small fire needed to unwittingly regain enough sensitivity to finally perceive the top of the emotional iceberg that's hiding underneath. The relationship with his daughter doesn't change him drastically, they don't unrealistically find the perfect way of communicating but they do menage to find a very basic one to the best of their abilities, and it is enough for Johnny to feel the difference when his daughter is gone and he is back to his previous life. When in the end, in the middle of his breakdown, he says on the phone "I'm not even a person" he is right, because what defines a person is his/her ability to experience, to be fully receptive to the whole spectrum of emotions.

I've read a lot of reviews saying this film is slow and boring but I think they are missing that it is supposed to be. It is not only boring, it is uncomfortably boring, you need to beg the director to cut to the next scene to understand the level of Johnny's self disconnection, you can't stand watching 60 seconds of him waiting for his mask to dry, how does he menage to bear that for 45 minutes with his face completely covered in some sticky substance breathing only through two small holes?

In the end I agree this is really not a film for everyone, but I do think that it is about something that everyone can relate to someway or another, and if you are able to make the connection you are surely going to find it food for thought.

Neither Here Nor There

[colinrgeorge · 6/10 · 27 January 2011]

"Somewhere" is a polarizing film, which makes it all the stranger that I find myself precisely in the middle of debate. Some hail it as a minimalistic masterwork, while others leave the theater rubbing sleep from their eyes. The latest film by Sofia Coppola isn't for everyone, and stands so structureless that it threatens to liquefy at any moment. With few cuts and most scenes playing out in even fewer angles, it's easy to grow impatient or frustrated with the director. What I admire about her film however is its commitment to capturing complete moments even at the expense of the audience.

"Lost in Translation" this isn't. "Somewhere" isn't anchored by as charismatic or immediately recognizable an on screen pair as Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson. The world of the former film is also more vibrant and alive than the Hollywood Coppola depicts. She dials back everything until "Somewhere" is essentially an exercise in simplicity. Many have found that quality refreshing, but I was left somewhat cold by the purely surface-level examination of the tedium of stardom.

I absolutely admire Coppola's intentions. Probably my biggest gripe with "Somewhere" is that it employs plot-bombs out of necessity. After 45 minutes of casual observation of our protagonist, burnt-out actor Johnny Marco (Stephen Dorff), Coppola inelegantly drops 30 seconds of expository dialogue into a phone call that sets up the rest of movie. It rings immediately false and seems out of place in an otherwise drifting film.

And there are some beautiful sights along the way. Coppola manages to transcend her sedentary camera-work with occasionally brilliant choreography. A pair of pole dancers performing a hokey routine springs to mind, as does a gracefully executed figure skating sequence. The director has a knack for using characters rather than set-ups to color our experience, but my problem with "Somewhere" is that not every scene is equally fascinating. Some merely communicate an idea and a feeling, but drag on for far too long. Admittedly, to truncate her moments would be to rob them of their intended impact, but as a moviegoer it's hardly thrilling to watch characters lounge poolside for the better part of a minute.

Coppola is at her most successful when she's able to wring the irony out of a scenario. When Johnny arrives in Italy to accept an award, we get a clear sense of the dichotomy between the hoopla of the entertainment industry and a jaded entertainer. That everyone around him is speaking in a foreign language completes the metaphor and makes for one of film's best sequences. Watching the character play "Guitar Hero" is comparably flat. That scene serves only one purpose: to demystify celebrity. While I wouldn't go so far as to call it boring, it doesn't offer any additional insight into the character.

But then "Somewhere" isn't just a portrait of a movie star but a portrait of a father, and Dorff and Elle Fanning deserve recognition for the flawlessly naturalistic relationship their characters share. Considered opposite her countless melodramatic peers, Coppola is in a league of her own. The people who populate her films never fail to impress with their nuance, but in this case I'm not convinced the filmmaking does them justice.

"Somewhere" is a film I find equally hard to love or hate, though I sympathize better with its detractors. Nevertheless, it posits compelling characters, great performances, and enough smart and amusing scenes to make worth recommending. Whether you leave the theater rubbing sleep from your eyes or having witnessed a minimalistic masterpiece, you have my blessing. Much like Marco himself, I'm neither here nor there.

Empty People, Empty Lives, Empty Movie

[ligonlaw · 4/10 · 20 November 2010]

Stephen Dorff plays Johnny Marco. His life is boring. He is the target of beautiful women, the epicenter of LA parties. He tools around in his Ferrari, the cad-about-town who sleeps with lovely strangers. At one point his boredom is so complete that he falls asleep with his face between the thighs of a beautiful woman, before she is able to have an orgasm,unable to gorge himself on more sex. He is a much-in-demand movie star. He goes first class, but wears casual clothes. There is no appetite he cannot quench immediately. He is jaded by his own sated appetites.

This is a bad script. There is no tension, no stress, nothing to overcome. The characters are flat. They are spoiled people who live their excessive lives without joy or enthusiasm. They are not bad people. They do not do bad things. They are not particularly interesting people, except that they walk through rich lives without friction or much interest. So we lose interest in them fairly soon.

"Lost in Translation" shared some similarities with this story. It was an insular world, known to only a privileged few (life in a 5-star Japanese hotel) and the players had little to do other than live well in their fish bowl. "Somewhere" is the insular world of the movie star in a fishbowl of fame with immediate access to the world's pleasures. Movie stars wait for someone to take them somewhere to be interviewed or to speak a few lines. Apparently, no one tells Johnny Marco, what his movies are about so he isn't prepared for the little he is expected to do. Similarly, Bill Murray waited for days to be taken somewhere to do his commercials. He stumbled through his lines. The language barrier was a source of some humor.

Unlike "Somewhere," "Lost in Translation" had a plot line which kept you guessing. Would Bill Murray's character take advantage of the bored young wife, played by Scarlett Johansson? The male leads in both films have long spaces between activities and their next words. They lead lives of self-gratification. But empty lives - cavernous emptiness, without soul or joy or hope. Pleasure-seeking without purpose.

Johnny Marco's relationships are elsewhere. An ex-wife who calls to drop off his daughter, people want to arrange something for him and people who don't matter want to hang out. Johnny is sleepwalking through life. He isn't sad or unhappy, just unaware.

The film comes to life, a little, when his daughter shows up. One must wonder if Cleo Marco, played by Elle Fanning, isn't the autobiographical proxy for Ms. Coppola. Cleo wants more time with her father, who is preoccupied with his movies. Perhaps, Ms. Coppola spent long hours when she was eleven, waiting for Francis Ford Coppola to return from his movie sets. Johnny plays with his daughter, and she likes it, but she is afraid of being left behind in the divorce. These scenes are as close to a plot as the movie gets. They are nice scenes, but they are long, music-filled and much in need of editing. They are almost too romantic for a father-daughter relationship. We have seen these scenes in romance stories, and they are generally post-coital.

This film feels like a remake of "Lost in Translation" without the minimal plot in the former movie.

Somewhere isn't going anywhere. It is Johnny did this, then that, then this other thing, the end. At no time, is there a question, a moment of tension or apprehension, a suspenseful scene, a moment of conflict or a resolution to a problem. He's rich; he gets everything he wants. No problem.

Raw and funny.

[qsigne · 10/10 · 17 November 2010]

I went out of the cinema feeling cleansed, which is the same reaction I had to Lost in Translation. Which, for me, is a very rare reaction. It's slower and slightly more adult, but it's the same limbo theme; alienation, emptiness and loss of purpose. And SC uses the hotel as a symbol once again: A nothing place, like standing on a platform waiting for the train. Stephen Dorff plays, excellently and believable, the pleasure addicted star that is in the middle of falling apart, slowly dissolving in his surface life. SC let's the character free himself from all the unnecessary things in life, one by one, until there is only the core left, and I couldn't help feeling lighter and happier myself when that happened. Apart from that it's also hilarious - if you are able to appreciate subtle humour and can laugh at the ridiculous side of life. Just a little thing like the unsexy, squeaky sound it made, when the blonde twins turned on their poles... It totally cracked me up. :D

More like "NOWHERE" !

[george.schmidt · 6/10 · 8 January 2011]

SOMEWHERE (2010) ** Stephen Dorff, Elle Fanning, Chris Pontious, Lala Sloatman, Ellie Kemper, Michelle Monaghan (cameo: Benicio Del Toro) Sofia Coppola's almost decidedly existential look at celebrity showcases Johnny Marco (Dorff, the poor man's Kiefer Sutherland), a popular film star whose life is in transit most of the time until he is saddled with his lovely adolescent daughter (Fanning, Dakota's little sis) who proves to be the sole meaning for his life (and soul meaning) in this meandering, listless narrative that gets old fast where nothing seems to be happening and yet everything is (get it?) While I applaud the talented filmmaker for sticking to what she knows she needs to get out of her comfort zone of just that and try something I don't know, more meaningful? Frustratingly good but not great filmmaking on display.

The audience has to do all the work

[jgmcghie · 2/10 · 20 April 2016]

This is a very odd movie: we as the audience have to do all the work!

Is there a plot? No. You have to imagine it. Is there a script? No: you have to imagine that, too.

I spent the entire movie waiting for something to happen. Nothing ever did!

OK, it was a very pleasant wait: the scenery is very attractive, and most of it is scantily-clad. So if you like looking at women in a state of undress (I do!) then you will at least have something to do while you imagine a story to go with the visuals.

There is one stand-out: the sound. Many of the scenes are shot with ambient sound, and it is beautifully captured. As a former sound man myself, I know how hard this would have been to do.

Everything else: that's up to your imagination!

An original and personal film

[hamid-r-goodarzi · 20 January 2023]

Sofia Coppola's personal cinema, in addition to being valuable and admirable, is also fascinating and endearing. I like his viewpoint on cinema. She is the daughter of the godfather of world cinema, Francis Ford Coppola, but she has not been under her father's shadow and stands in an area of cinema that her father was not in. Sofia's minimalist and personal cinema with its themes, concerns and worldview has made for her a special style in her films. The "somewhere", she made in 2010 has a specific form in structure and content. Relatively lengthful shots, fixed camera where the subject is moving in the frame and little dialogue are some of my favorite cinematographic features, which can be seen in abundance in Sofia Coppola's works. The beginning of the film in a fixed frame, where a black Ferrari car is constantly going back and forth, promises a different, fascinating and deep film, and in the final shot, which reminds me of a scene from my own short film (Saz and Khurshid). Johnny, played by Stephen Dorff, leaves the Ferrari on the side of the road and goes alone on the horizon. This is an amazing ending. The film only moves the camera when it is necessary and in line with the structure and content of the film, and this shows the awareness of the director. The film presents a paradox in the world of cinema. Johnny is a depressed, aimless, unmotivated and failed person from the inside and the reality of his life, while he is a prominent actor in the world of cinema and is glamorous.

A new Sofia Coppola for a new consciousness about life

[yris2002 · 7/10 · 19 September 2010]

If you have seen Sofia Coppola's previous trilogy and loved it, it would be dishonest to say that "Somewhere" brings about that same emotional involvement: frankly speaking, me and everyone in the theater (few people, indeed, considering it had shortly been awarded with Leone d'oro in Venice) showed perplexed faces and some kind of disappointment. Given as a premise that we, as viewers, are no longer used to slowness, silence, and pauses, it is incontrovertible that even the most patient and quiet spectator would get a little annoyed and bored by long, extremely quiet scenes, where nothing happens, nothing is said, and life simply succumb to the wearing-out power of wasted, useless, unproductive time. Jonnie Marco is hard-living world-famous actor wasting his numb life in a hotel in Los Angeles, drinking, smoking, having private sexy shows in his room, driving his Ferrari, which even once breaks down leaving him on the road. When his 11-year old daughter appears, something is shaken inside his fragile and inconsistent world, he at least starts feelings something. Not that he changes so much, his relation with Cleo remains in a way made up of short exchanges of words, very rare demonstrations of love, but it's a positive relation, where each one is able to accept the other for what he/she is (and shouldn't affection work like this?). The merit of Sofia Coppola (this is the first movie directed being a mother herself) is to depict this relation in a realistic way, the father won't undergo an extraordinary change, as it would be improbable and unrealistic, he just starts embracing the idea that there can be a meaning, somewhere. As the almost intolerable slowness, well, it is the best way to render the complete void and nonsense in the protagonist's life, where everything is a bore, and time a burden, we no doubt feel the oppression of his unprofitable passing of time, of his lack of real acquaintances, of sane company, of real life, mainly in the first part of the movie. When Cleo appears, time turns into profitable and meaningful, and so he can spend hours on the edge of a swimming pool, without speaking, but her daughter laying beside him makes a substantial difference of quality. The always delicate touch, typical of Sofia Coppola' style, is to be appreciated also here, although certainly the director, now become a mother, shows a more mature and more lucid, in a way more simple, consciousness about life, which seems here more clear, definite and evident than in her previous productions, things are black or white, you cannot hide behind too many complications, when you have born a child, and when you realize that she is the only precious thing you have done in your life, you know what kind of man you have to be.

Who is Johnny Marco?

[ferguson-6 · 6/10 · 12 January 2011]

Greetings again from the darkness. My reaction to this film is that no way it gets made and no way anyone would care ... unless Sophia Coppola was involved. With her involvement, our approach as a viewer is totally different. She has lived this life and, more importantly, observed this life since she was an infant. She captures details and minutiae that no other writer or director would even sense.

Stephen Dorff plays Johnny Marco, a very successful movie star who is holed up at the infamous Château Marmont. This is the Hollywood retreat where celebs go to disappear. Marco has gone a step beyond retreat. He is lost. Even his daughter Cleo, played by Elle Fanning, can't find him. He dutifully fulfills his movie star responsibilities: press junkets, photography sessions, awards ceremonies, etc. He plays video games with his daughter with the same emotion that he poses for pictures or answers questions from reporters. He is a shell of a man and he is beginning to see that himself.

The film displays all the trappings of stardom and shows that no stream of Ferrari's, strippers, fans, supermodels, international trips or pile of money can bring personal fulfillment. The man that has everything can still have nothing. Sound a bit depressing? Well it is. But it's also a nice little peek behind the celebrity curtain.

A ride in the elevator with Benecio del Toro is no more substantive than a party in his room filled with beautiful people who just want to be seen ... or do what some people do with celebrities. Isolation can happen in plain site and Ms. Coppola has proved herself to be quite the expert with this film and her even better film, Lost in Translation.

Coppola's fingerprints all over this redemption story

[Bart_OP · 7/10 · 25 January 2011]

Anyone who saw (and liked) "Lost in Translation" will easily recognize the light-handed direction of Sofia Coppola (long silences, limited- perspective camera work, minimalistic and thoughtful dialogue)in this subtle redemption story. It is a slow movie (I kept waiting for something, anything to happen), but like a subtle seasoning with cayenne pepper, the beauty hit me in the after taste. Stephen Dorff's turn as a bored stimulation-junkie Hollywood actor was rich. He is constantly looking for his next fix (but not in a "leaving Las Vegas" way) He is restless and that restlessness finds momentary reprieve in a bottle, in a pain killer, in a video game, in a meaningless sexual encounter. In the space of a few minutes at a party in his own hotel room, he washes down a pain killer with scotch, lights a cigarette and beds a woman he just met. In the middle of that encounter, he falls asleep. This quick sequence is a perfect metaphor for his life. In between stimulating encounters, he spends a great deal of time on his hotel balcony looking for "what's next." Unlike similar characters in other movies, he is not in danger of dying from his overindulgence, he is rather in danger of dying from boredom.

Redemption will come for Dorff's Johnny Marco not as the result of a tragic heart-breaking event, but rather when he is forced, over the course of a couple of weeks, to establish a relationship with his precocious 11 year-old daughter, Chloe - played charmingly by Dakota Fanning's kid sister, Elle. I don't want to say more about what transpires in this relationship, but I will say that Sofia Coppola was wise not to depict the typical negligent father/angry daughter relationship one might expect in this movie. The two seem to have essentially a good relationship from the beginning, making for a much more subtle transformation throughout.

Without saying so much as to spoil the movie for anyone who might reed this, I just want to say that the first and last sequences of the movie, both involving Johhny's Ferrari, make beautiful metaphorical bookends for the story. This is the kind of movie that Sundance audiences eat up and Sofia Coppola again shows why she is a darling of film festivals.

Pretentious horrid little film

[lelectra26-1 · 2/10 · 24 December 2010]

Well, I am considerably shocked that anybody found this big yawn some kind of brilliant statement. It made most minimalist European art films look like exhilarating action flicks. Not that I'm a fan of action flicks. I am a fan of well written scripts, usually character driven. This character, well there is no there there. Which I guess is the filmmaker's point. But in making a movie about how empty and superficial Hollywood is, Sofia, a product of said Hollywood, proved her point by making an empty superficial film.

The only compelling bit was when the daughter signaled her emotions without much help, it appears, from the script, and this was a few fleeting moments.

Now I guess this is a spoiler. But since not much really happened, I am not sure. I knew I was in trouble when the car went around the track half a dozen times at the intro, when 2 or 3 would suffice. Then I was treated to a pole dance that lasted a few minutes too long, the daughter dancing about 4 minutes when 2 would suffice, an eternity watching the actor sit in a plaster cast (I know, it was MEANINGFUL-he was suffocating), etc etc etc.

Obviously Sofia is of the school that painfully long sequences of nothing much happening is broadcasting to us that something IS happening. But I'm an old fashioned girl. I like actual drama.

Better Than You Think

[chrisliz57 · 8/10 · 29 December 2010]

This is a more intelligent film than you might think.

I nearly didn't go to see Somewhere. People who'd seen it suggested I'd find its long winded nature, irrelevant. I'm so glad I decided to see it.

This intelligent film took us on the same ride that our key character was embarking on. From the first scene as we stand stationary watching a car circle a circuit aimlessly we begin to experience the monotony of Johnny Marco's life.

We sat through whole episodes of amateur pole dancing, done reasonably well, so that Coppola could drag us through the point she was trying to make. Hey, you don't recommend a film like this to many people because most people like film to entertain, to have a beginning a middle and an end.

Somewhere had a turning point, the arrival of his daughter, and a conclusion, the electronic beep of Johnny's car ignition. That is when it was headed elsewhere.

And just maybe his life was headed in a more entertaining direction but Coppola would see that as another film; but not necessarily one to be made by her.

Sticking it to the man

[jimharvey87 · 7/10 · 10 February 2011]

When Sofia Coppola was growing up, life must have been tough. Thrust into the limelight since her uncredited appearance as baby Michael in her father's The Godfather (Francis Ford Coppola, 1972), fame has weighed heavy on her back, like a jewel-encrusted load, and it's a subject that's been evident in her work since her first short, Bed Bath and Beyond (1996). Since then there's been the much acclaimed Lost in Translation (2003), whereby the meeting place between older male (a figure unavoidably connected to that of her father, Francis) and neglected younger female (herself) is beginning to be explored. In Japan, an international superstar is feeling lonely and alienated, and finds solace in the beautiful Scarlet Johansson. In L.A., an international superstar is left lonely and alienated, and finds solace in his neglected daughter, the young Elle Fanning. This is Somewhere: it might be clear why some have derided the generic nature of the film, and its sulky, brat-like tone, and the potential divisiveness Johnny Marco (Stephen Dorff) is the movie star who has what he wants in abundance - but like the opening scene implies, even the luxury of a Ferrari becomes dull when you're just driving round in circles. This guy is on self-destruct – on more than one occasion we're shown that he'll only sleep when passed out between the legs of some faceless blonde (who always resemble his yet to be introduced daughter), due to too much whisky. He receives anonymous texts asking "why do you have to be such an asshole" – these are never explained, and nor do they need to be. The film is highly elliptical and contemplative in its exploration of the spiralling waster. It must be said that this is due in part to one of cinema's most wanted cinematographers, Harris Savides (having previously carried out the role for Gus Van Sant, Noah Baumbach and David Fincher). Slow zoom outs, lingering stationary shots, and eerie use of symmetry all work to build on a sense of lunacy that must underlie all the sunshine, lollipops and rainbows of Tinseltown.

We've been here before with Danny Huston's superb Tolystoyan 'Ivan' in Ivansxtc (Bernard Rose, 2000), and while Dorff never reaches the intensity of pill-fuelled Huston, his performance as the always nonchalant actor, who, despite having to stand on a platform to reach a co-star for publicity (no other reference to Tom Cruise exists), is irresistible to women. Fanning is the natural choice for the role of Cleo - a sibling herself to more widely recognised sister Dakota, she's supposedly familiar with her surroundings here. She recalls Jodie Foster's Iris, the teenage prostitute in Taxi Driver (Martin Scorsese, 1976), minus the angsty dominance. What does relate the two is the same theme of corrupted innocence. After her dad is lulled to sleep by twin pole-dancers in his hotel room, he's woken up by Cleo – a drastic choice of cut, and one that confirms the idea that this little girl is bound to this way of life, when viewed in light of what follows. Perhaps the key scene in the film, whereby Cleo manages to combine the elegance of a refined ballet dancer with the awkwardness of a pre-pubescent, she ice-skates to Gwen Stefani's Cool. Dad watches with more intent than he'd have possibly given to those twin strippers.

It's a film which would understandably frustrate many, alienating the art-film crowd with the frequency of trendy music (Phoenix score; Julian Casablancas; Foo Fighters; Sebastian Tellier), while boring the mainstream with the seemingly absent plot. While several elements are pure replication of previous projects, I'd argue that Coppola has found progress in the daring she attributes to young Fanning, the direct stabs at Hollywood (if only on account of her father's legacy), and in a continued project which strives to make the mainstream think. Not about the potential for space and time manipulation (which is what many attributed to Chris Nolan last year), but through the contemplation she affords the audience. To say any real ground is broken though would be a major overstatement.

somewhere doesn't go anywhere now, does it?

[phaenomenalbert · 3/10 · 28 December 2010]

lets start off with something that I did like quite a bit about this movie: it is minimalistic and very low key. if this style of film making was combined with an intriguing story, it could make for a masterpiece. however, that is not the case here.the story about an apparently very successful actor who is desperately trying to find meaning in his life while he gets to spend some time with his 11 year old daughter has no substance whatsoever: tell me something thats not so obvious and cliché, please!!! portraying a successful but dull life is not really an excuse for a dull movie, not even for someone with the name Coppola. In a time where awards are piling up in every corner of the filmmaking industry lets just rely on common sense: "Coppola continues to surprise and amaze with her singular view of the world" is but one of the praises I found. I am sorry, but if we are talking about the same movie, the words "surprise", "amaze" and "singular view" are wrong by definition.

Headed SOMEWHERE

[twilliams76 · 9/10 · 1 July 2011]

Sofia Coppola's latest examination of life tackles that of Johnny Marco (Stephen Dorff - Blade, Public Enemies, Cold Creek Manor - at his best), a highly paid and fast-living Hollywood mega-movie star residing in the Château Marmont. Marco's current existence (as he was injured "filming a stunt" for a movie) consists of lounging around, watching twin pole dancers in his hotel room, drinking and over-medicating. Marco's life has become numb ... except for the brief moments he spends with his 11 year-old daughter, Cleo (a fantastic Elle Fanning - Super 8, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Babel).

These moments are fleeting and brief until Cleo shows up at his hotel one morning unannounced as her mother has to "take some time for herself". The biggest chunk of the movie takes place between these two people as they play Guitar Hero, layout in the sun, swim, eat etc. The movie is quiet, ponderously slow paced and poetic; but every scene has meaning. Somewhere is rather remarkable with what it can achieve through its near-silence.

Coppola generally gathers a wide variety of music to complete her soundtrack (see Marie Antoinette and Lost in Translation) which layers each scene with even more meaning; but here she allows for a more minimal soundtrack which reflects the film's tone nicely (the ice-skating scene with Gwen Stefani's "Cool" still makes me smile).

Both characters have a life of privilege but neither seem to take advantage of it or assume that it'll be there forever (Fanning's character seems complete innocent child -- not the pampered, posh princess she could be). Money may keep these characters from having some of the day-to-day problems of others; but it doesn't allow for them to escape life completely as these people still have their ups and downs. This is apparent with Marco who is realizing his life is blank, meaningless and that he is a cipher without someone who means something to him.

When Marco realizes the meaning Cleo gives to his life, he comes full-circle and realizes his life has been empty. The film is not for everyone as it is slow and there is sparse dialogue; but I found it to be a most-rewarding watch. Somewhere is not a movie of action -- it is a movie of meaning and substance.

Metaphorically, Marco is driving around in circles at the beginning of the film going NOWHERE; but by the end he has found an open road and can finally go SOMEWHERE.

Bambi and Cindy almost steal the show, but not quite

[socrates99 · 7/10 · 4 May 2011]

I can't complain. For a movie directed by a woman this is not what I expected. The sensibilities on display seem unusually in line with a typical male's preferences. The twin pole dancers near the opening are given a generous amount of screen time. And though the sex is all done with taste, it's all from the point of view of a young celebrity. Not surprisingly the casual sex is not very satisfying. In fact the most rewarding love interests in the young man's life seem to be a tie between his daughter and his Ferrari, with his daughter having the edge.

Elle Fanning is as natural as the breeze as his daughter. It's easy to imagine yourself being her dad and enjoying her company. Stephen Dorff is a convincing movie star hiding out in a residential hotel, racking up the perks alloted to his kind. The whole movie plays out as a slice of life as experienced by up and comers in LA and Milan. It's meant to be depressingly empty and meaningless, and it pretty much succeeds. Somehow that's enough and something of a treat. There's little plot but all the scenes are quite understandable and believable. I couldn't help admiring Sofia Coppola's steady non-judgmental gaze throughout, even toward women throwing themselves at the star.

Somewhere a self-indulgent student film

[electrablind · 3/10 · 16 January 2011]

thefilmsmith.com

Sofia Coppola has made a career out of following the existential malaise of the rich and famous (save for Virgin Suicides), so another film by Ms. Coppola within that framework is not a surprise. What is surprising is just how bad it is.

Stephen Dorff plays the famous actor Johnny Marco, whose day consists of random sexual trysts, purchasing pole dancer-grams for himself like a normal person would flip on the television, and being shuffled around for various promotional events by publicists and chauffeurs. Upon spending an extended amount of time with his eleven year-old daughter Cleo (Elle Fanning), Marco is confronted by his vapid existence.

Which sounds interesting until you see how it's executed. In a supreme display of hubris, Coppola takes the audience's attention for granted not merely by showing the monotony of Marco's day, but by making us live it. The film's static opening shot, Marco making several laps in his black Ferrari, is indicative of events to come. To quote my review of Police, Adjective: "Cinema can never be 'real life' but is the place for the hyper-real, whereby meaning can be tapped from the banality of our own existence." Editing exists to cut the fluff, but Coppola's abuses of the long take go unchecked.

I take umbrage with the film's presentation, but there are some interesting bits: the juxtaposition between Marco's womanizing and his relationship with Cleo is deliberately situated to prompt discomfort (punctuated by the visual metaphor of Marko's arm cast, which starts out only bearing the signature of his daughter, but over time accumulates lipstick kisses and signatures from his dalliances). We see that such sexual ventures do not actualize male fantasies, but instead only showcase their emptiness. Further, Coppola is competent enough to show, not tell (a common sin of amateur filmmakers) and the film's ballsy ending,

MAJOR SPOILERS, SKIP PARAGRAPH

in which Marco realizes he's a vapid sh*t, is a wink to the audience – "We're going to show you this monotony and in the end he'll acknowledge it and do something about it." Narratively it's an interesting twist, but the ending doesn't earn the power of its attempted punch.

MAJOR SPOILERS OVER

In the grand scheme of things, Somewhere is like the amalgamation of leftovers from Lost in Translation. Marco's language-related discombobulation in Italy, and the meaningless nature of his existence, echo the same thematic concerns of Translation–but sans a pulse. Somewhere is the prototypical art film, in which the banality displayed is intended to provide an ethereal truth, but in praxis stalls and dies as a boring, pretentious piece of celluloid meandering.