[after his parents have left, thinking he is ill] "They bought it. Incredible! One of the worst performances of my…
A forbidden love. An unthinkable attraction. The ultimate price.
Urbane professor Humbert Humbert marries a New England widow to be near her nymphet daughter.
I'm really happy with this movie. It was everything I expected and more.
When I watch a movie based on a book, I need them to be really really similar or I'll freak out with every change they make.
In my opinion, if someone chooses to make a movie out of a book, then they must respect the writer's views, they can't change anything that will give another meaning to the story and they sure as hell can't overlook important parts of the book.
Before this movie I watched "Lolita" by Stanley Kubrick and I didn't like it one bit because he left out so many important little things and changed a lot of others and I was so disappointed.…
This is my father's favorite novel.
It is considered one of the greatest novels written, and one of the most well known Russian litereature works.
The novel was made into a film in 1962 by Stanely Kubrick.
If there is one rule for any director, screenwriter and producer, is to never remake or redo a film that was made by Kubrick.
No matter what is your reason. You can't.
I did not watch Kubrick's film, or read the novel (I intened to).
Still I am pretty sure they will be a whole lot better than this film.
Melanie Griffith was atrocious in this film. So bad.
Now I don't know how Kubrick's adaptation is, but going by his other films,…
A beautiful film about an ugly corruption.
This is far more faithful to the novel than Kubrick's adaptation, and I think that's why I prefer this one (though it's been some time since I saw Kubrick's - have to rectify that) the strengths of the source material is easily transported to the screen, as is its weaknesses or rather, vagaries. Like the novel, we can only hear Humbert's side of the story and as we know he's not the most reliable of narrators. What was actually going on in the mind of Delores remains unclear.
The film has a stunning beguiling performance at its core from Dominique Swain, an actress so good she's inevitably disappeared and dropped off the radar…
I think the main reason Lolita is such a hard work to adapt to film is not just the subject matter, we've seen several films tackle this issue, Hollywood mainstream films even. It's that Lolita is such a mixture of different genres and style. It's a tragedy, a love story, a parody of a love story, and a black comedy all rolled into one, and told with such rich, purple prose.
The Lynne film just doesn't seem to 'get'the original novel. It does the tragedy stuff fine, but the black comedy? eh not so much.
However Jeremy irons does give a great performance, as does Dominique Swain, though at times she does come off as a little annoying. Melanie Griffith's…
Absolutely disgusting. Portrayed child sex abuse as a love story; literally serves as the antithesis of Nabokov's intent. I'm tired of this Woody Allen type shit that Hollywood literally feeds off of!!!!!!!!! Get ur ugly Humbert ass outta here please!!!!! Stop sexualizing young girls!!
By making Lolita a more sexual film, Lyne is taking the audience closer to the source material and thus increasing our level of discomfort. Kubrick probably would have done it like this had it not been for the sensors (who already had their noses raised towards his adaptation) limiting his choices.
Here, Lolita appears older and Humbert appears younger which gives us the illusion of the age gap being ever so slightly shorter. Some of the cinematography was brilliantly and delicately executed, something which will always come under criticism when a director reworks material Kubrick has done.
In fact, there is much here that I prefer to Kubrick's interpretation, such as the aforementioned likeness to the stunning Nabokov novel. The…
Twisted, captivating and beautifully written.
I hate the little girl so much
More Langella needed, as always. Excellent performances but the film was a slog, not taut and not energetic for some reason. Lyne is a fantastic and visually experimental director, but this was too much FATAL ATTRACTION and not nearly enough Kubrick.
One of my favorite movies and one of my favorite books. Eternal love.
Uhhh where do I start? It's an interesting movie and despite it being a bit weird with the whole pedophilia thing its actually pretty good. Although be warned: It is a movie about a 40 yr old man trying to have sexual relations with a 14 yr old girl
He visto las dos versiones de "Lolita" prácticamente seguidas y, contra todo pronóstico, me quedo con la de Lyne.
Sí, es cierto, la de Kubrick está bastante mejor ambientada y, con total seguridad, es más fiel a la novela original (redactó el guión mano a mano con el autor, tampoco hay más misterio), pero es que decir que la Lolita de Kubrick y la Lolita de Lyne son la misma "niña" sería mentir.
Me quedo con la insoportable pelirroja, con la vulnerabilidad de un hombre reflejada en una horquilla y con la escena en la que los dos protagonistas se conocen.
Film based on the book by Vladimir Nabokov.
It made you squirm when you think about how young as as Lolita put it 'daisy fresh' she was. Dominique was a great casting choice because she kept it youthful and pouting, bubble gum kisses and all that jazz that just screams young female.
I can't compare it to the novel because I don't even remember it.
Although an improvement upon the 1962 adaptation I still found this version to lack considerably the charm of the novel. The film is far too long and rather lackluster, I found myself increasingly bored just an hour in and remained so for the remainder of the film.
Although there was some interest in the portrait of Lolita as the seducer in this adaptation, Dominique Swain's acting started to waiver somewhat in the later parts of the movie.
Irons' portrayal of Humbert Humbert was also of a much weaker man than the Humbert of the book, which I felt took away from the dilemma's of sympathy you felt reading the novel and greatly limits the film as a whole.
"Although it remains axiomatic that Spielberg and Lucas should be condemned for using CGI to alter their own classic films,…