Lost.In.Translation.

Two weeks ago in class, we watched the movie Lost in Translation. I had never seen it before and was excited to actually watch a popular movie in class. Although the movie was different and did not follow normal movie "guidelines" (predictable ending, predictable plot, etc.), I still was intrigued by it. The movie could be related to places vs. non-places, like we discussed in class. Much of the movie had scenes of people just sitting around, which would correlate to non-places. Also, it seemed that the two main characters might have in fact viewed Tokyo as a non-place, as they did not have any history in it and seemed to just be "drifting" around in it.
In class, we also discussed the possibility of turning a non-place into a place. We asked if someone spends a certain amount of time in a non-place and establishes relations, does this qualify as a place? I think that a non-place turns into a place as soon as the characteristics of a place (has history, has relationships, etc.) appear in the alleged "non-place". In addition, we felt that the language barrier in the movie presented a challenge for the two main characters to change Tokyo from a non-place to a place.