I really, really do. But in three outings – The Virgin Suicides, Lost in Translation, and Marie Antoinette – I find myself feeling lukewarm towards her body of work. Granted, she only has three major feature film releases under her belt, and probably has decades of writing/directing in front of her – plenty more chances to wow me.

But Sofie is film royalty. Naturally, expectations are high when you’re the daughter of one of the key players of the Hollywood Renaissance. Think The Wallflowers’ Jakob Dylan – you don’t think there were expectations of him? It’s not that I think Sofia Coppola is talentless (unless you were asking about her acting), but I find myself wanting a little bit more from her.

I saw The Virgin Suicides once (several years ago, mind you), and while the story was intriguing, the movie fell flat in the performances. There was nothing visually striking about the film except for one part towards the end. You saw well-composed images of the interior of an empty house were cut together while you heard narration about “puzzle pieces”. When the words “puzzle pieces” were mentioned, you saw a shot from a hallway that actually looked like a jigsaw puzzle piece. That was the only thing that stuck, and maybe it warrants a second viewing. But what would a second viewing do?

Probably the same thing a second viewing of Lost in Translation did for me. I’ll admit I bought into the film’s hype. And I’ll admit I thought it was overrated. But I didn’t hate the picture. I liked Bill Murray’s performance and the relationship his character had with Charlotte, the young wife portrayed by Scarlett Johansson. But it really wasn’t until the second viewing that I realized how well-made the film was. The shots were well-composed and well-lit…beautiful. I appreciated the story of two people who were completely disconnected from the world around them, yet found solace and companionship with each other. The film’s pace was slow and deliberate and reminded me of the mood that Wong Kar-Wai creates in his films. Okay, so maybe nothing happened in the plot, but I felt really connected with the two characters during the second viewing. I saw subtleties in the performance during the evolution of Bob and Charlotte’s friendship.

One of the strongest scenes is when Bob and Charlotte silently and uncomfortably eat lunch at a shabu-shabu restaurant. This scene takes place immediately after Charlotte discovers Bob had spent the previous night with another woman. Dialogue between Bob and Charlotte was nearly non-existent, yet the awkwardness was clear in the the way the scene was edited.

So the other night, I watched Marie Antoinette. I was not sure what to expect (besides the extravagant costumes that yielded the Best Costume Design Oscar on Sunday night) and I knew very little of the history of French queen. But going in without any preconceptions allowed me to make judgments on how the film was made and Sofia Coppola as a director.

I knew this was a stylized version – and as an aspiring director, I’m all about interpretation – but there were some things that felt out of place. For one, none of the main characters, Marie Antoinette, Louis XVI and Louis XV, had accents. While the rest of the cast played the roles with accents (natural or fabricated), the American ones did feel a bit out of place. I get that it’s “stylized”, but with “stylized” works, there is usually a reason for every decision. With the whole accent thing, it wasn’t apparent.

As far as cast performances, I have a bias – I only liked Kirsten Dunst in one movie, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. I am now 0-for-2 when Sofia Coppola and Kirsten Dunst team up for a movie. Jason Schwarzman, whose characters I loved in Rushmore and Shopgirl, was flat and unsympathetic as Louis XVI. Molly Shannon was an interesting casting decision, but ultimately unimportant. Sometimes, saying a film is a “stylized vision” doesn’t excuse poor casting choices.

The biggest qualm I have with this movie is that it was a visual chronology of Marie Antoinette’s life. I’ve never read the book, so if the book is simply a biography of her life, then perhaps the film stays true. But what the film lacks is the ability to create that connection between protagonist and character. The film showed me the events of Marie Antoinette’s life, conflict (whether internal or external) was missing. While the film explored some conflict – the pressure of producing an heir to the French throne, extra-marital sexual temptation, and intense scrutiny of her actions by nobles and common folk – I never found myself sympathizing with the character.

However, though the film lacked in character and performance, the visuals and sound design fared much better. Like Lost in Translation, the shots looked great. Sofie used her Extreme Long Shots well, showing the vastness of the Versailles estate. She also used her insert shots and close-ups well. There was good use of color and lighting and the Art Direction was good. Perhaps the strongest part of film was the soundtrack. The contemporary indie/alt rock tracks fit in nicely with the “stylized” feel of the piece.

There were some nice montage sequences, but they were questionably paced and placed within the film. It felt like a 2-hour long music video at times. There were some nice, slow and deliberate sequences, yet had really quick montage sequences thrown in between.

So after watching her third time out (IMDB.com says she’s directed 4 movies, but I’m only counting the major releases), I tried to look for some recurring themes, her worldview if you will, in all three of her movies.

The Virgin Suicides and Marie Antoinette are fairly easy to see the commonalities in theme. Both films explore female teen angst, where the female protagonist must deal with the pressures of their surroundings. In Suicides, the girl(s) had to deal with strict parents and behave according to their rules. In Marie Antoinette, the protagonist faces a similar situation. She is a displaced teen forced to live and behave under the scrutiny of an entire nation. Though the protagonists in each film react differently, both films are representations of the effects of parental and societal pressures.

Finding similarities in Lost in Translation was a bit more challenging. This film was about the connection – the presence of one, rather than the absence of it like in her other films. You can say that like the other films, it is about how characters deal with their surroundings. But really, isn’t that what ALL stories are about? To me, Lost in Translation is a head and shoulders above the other two. I feel it’s her most complete film as a storyteller. It should be noted this film was an original screenplay, rather than an adaptation. Perhaps that says something. I read once that M. Night Shyamalan might make better movies if he didn’t write it himself. Perhaps Sofie should stay away from adaptations entirely and just write original screenplays.