Dynamixor
The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.
Usamah Harvey
The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.
Jenna Walter
The film may be flawed, but its message is not.
Janae Milner
Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.
Antonius Block
Like the book, the film is strongest in the beginning, as Humbert Humbert (James Mason) takes a room with a widow (Shelley Winters), only after spotting her teenage daughter (Sue Lyon) lounging around in a bikini. The tension between his forbidden attraction, concealed in sly glances and little gestures, all while Winters practically throws herself at him, is fantastic. Unfortunately, after an event I won't describe to avoid spoiling it, the film drags on and gets a bit ridiculous. The point is to show how ridiculous an infatuation can make a man behave, even if it is taboo, bringing him to humiliation, but the road trip, being pursued, and the recurring character played by Peter Sellers, who is so endearing in the beginning, eventually gets over-used and annoying. The film is far too long at 152 minutes, and another screenwriter should have been used instead of Nabokov. There are several places the film suffers from the Production Code, and we never really feel the sickness of lust from Mason, but Director Stanley Kubrick does get a number of allusions in, and perhaps it's better that the majority of it was left to the imagination. It's disturbing that Sue Lyon was just 14 when filming started, but her performance is impressive, and Shelley Winters is also strong. Kubrick does reasonably well, but errs by wandering into some silly comedic moments, and should have tightened things up. There's enough here to be entertained when you're not cringing though.
damian-fuller
I sat to watch Lolita for the third time. The first time I was too young to truly understand what I was seeing. Then I read the book a few years later and saw the film again. That time it left a mark. I detested James Mason's Humbert Humbert to such a degree that stopped me from accepting him in other roles other than utter villains. To see it now after two decades is a whole other story - All of a sudden James Mason's Humbert Humbert has become human, very human. Corrupt and haunted by the awareness of his own weakness. What a performance. Shelley Winters is superb, unafraid and bold bringing to life an embarrassing human spectacle. What a performance. Peter Sellers is chilling in all of his Quilty incarnations. Sue Lyon is sublime as the innocent torturer. Stanley Kubrick never made 2 films alike but I'm starting to suspect that as literary adaptations go, this is his finest.
frankwiener
Whether the film is faithful to the classic Nabokov novel or not, I would like to read the book soon in order to compare the two and to determine whether the printed version is as enjoyable as the movie. I recently did this with the "Cider House Rules" and, after struggling through 600 pages of the most graphic depictions of very detailed human anatomy, as well as the gloomiest of characters and locales in Maine, a state that I love, I should have let well enough alone, but I will always crave apples of all varieties for the rest of my life, and an apple a day keeps the doctor away. But I digress.Aside from Kubrick's excellent direction, what makes this film succeed are a well chosen cast, a sharp and thoughtful screenplay, visually appealing locales, and a beautiful musical score by Nelson Riddle. James Mason's brilliant portrayal of Humbert Humbert transforms an ordinarily, dull professor into a fascinating, psychologically complex character as he is gradually consumed by his infatuation with Lolita, a fourteen year old girl who becomes his step daughter. Shelley Winters, cast once again as an unpleasant and often whining matron type with a grating, irritating voice ("Night of the Hunter", "Place in the Sun", "Patch of Blue"), perfectly fits the part of sexually frustrated Charlotte Haze, who is Lolita's overbearing and obnoxious mother. While several other reviewers did not appreciate Peter Sellers as Quilty, in addition to his portrayal of several disguised characters who stalk Humbert and Lolita during their road trips, I found him to be very entertaining and don't believe that the film would have held my interest as much without him. Watch how he throws himself into that German accent and the characters who accompany it. A whimsical, unpredictable Quilty sharply clashes with a dead serious, humdrum Humbert, as an inevitable explosion continues to build.As to Sue Lyon, I found her to be exactly as she was in "Night of the Iguana" without much of a variation--very cute but aloof and, for the most part, emotionally detached from everyone and everything around her. Yes, she cries when she learns of mother Charlotte's fate but not for very long. That was how she was supposed to play the role, and she performed it very well. Once in possession of her desperately needed inheritance, what are her last words to a shattered, destroyed Humbert, "I hope that we can see each other some time!" or something like that.While I found Bob Harris's "Lolita Ya Ya" theme song annoying and can't blame composer Bernard Hermann for not wanting to have anything to do with it, Riddle's score was otherwise quite pleasing to the ear, strongly enhancing the drama on the screen.I'm always curious about film locations, especially when they contribute significantly to the overall atmosphere, as is the case here. Although most of the film is supposed to take place in New Hampshire and in Ohio, it was actually filmed in England, Rhode Island, and the Albany, New York area. In case you were wondering, Lolita's ramshackle neighborhood at the end of the movie is located in Rensselaer, New York with a view of Albany, the state capital city in the background. While there supposedly aren't as many double entendres and word plays as in the novel, they pop up quite often in the film. Naturally, Mr. Swine would be a friend of Quilty's. Why would we ever doubt that? Did you get the one about Quilty's uncle who was Lolita's dentist and who urgently needed to fill her cavity? Oh, never mind.
crakatoot
Kurbrick was one of the greatest film makers of all time. His attention to detail and his meticulous style is rarely seen in films today. It was rarely seen in his day too. The down side of his perfectionist nature thought, was that he didn't make many films. Still he did make a few classics in his day. Films like A Clockwork Orange, 2001, Paths of Glory, Dr. Strangelove and The Shinning. One film that often gets overlooked though, is Lolita.This film is
different. The tagline is "How Did they Ever Make a Movie Out of Lolita." The plot is this, Prof. Humbert Humbert comes to America, rents a house, meets the landlady's young nymphet daughter, falls instantly in love and purses her, rather relentlessly. So yes the plot of this story is rather unconventional. Kubrick has gone on record saying, that if he knew the kind of limitations there would be, that he wouldn't have even bothered making the movie. Basically with the censors of the day, the relationship between Humbert and Lolita couldn't be shown or talked about in any real way. Now this movie came out in 1962 and to keep things in context, you should remember that in the 1950's married couples on TV and movies were shown sleeping in separate beds at night. So the idea of showing a man in his 50's sleeping with a young girl (the actress who played Lolita, Sue Lyon was only 14 at the time) was pretty much out of the question. And while some might see this as a major problem, it really isn't. The relationship, while never out right admitted, is alluded to, a lot. They say it without actually saying it.The real strength of this movie though, is the actors. James Mason plays Humbert perfectly. His character oozes aristocratic disdain and disgust for everything around him. Especially Shelly Winters, that's the landlady. That is, until he sees Lolita. Once he sets his eyes on her, that's it. While his intentions are a little repulsive, he pursues them with such a dogged genuine determination, you do sympathize with him a bit.And Sue Lyon was absolutely perfect as Lolita. The way she carries herself, the way she talks, the way she teases Humbert. On the one hand it seems like she knows exactly what she is doing. She knows the effect she has on him and she seems to love toying with him. Although, on the other hand, she might just be a teenager fooling around. With her character it is very hard to tell. One scene, she seems wise beyond on her age and in the next she is carrying on like petulant child.And of course we have Shelly Winters, one of the most underrated actress of all time. And yes her character, Lolita's mother, is very shrill and annoying. That was kind of Shelly Winters bread and butter, but she was supposed to be shrill an annoying. An obstacle for Humbert to get past. Still, Shelly Winters brought such a wounded vulnerability to her character. This is a woman who lost her husband, is not very bright and her new tenant Humbert is uh
kind of problematic. There is one scene where she breaks down and it is truly heartbreaking.This film is also filled with Kubrick's usual cinematic flair. There are so many little things hidden in the visuals that you don't notice at first but make the film much richer on repeat viewings.This film is not without its flaws however. It does drag a bit in the middle. And there is way, way to much of Peter Sellers. Kubrick was such a meticulous director with his shot and his sets and especially his actors. But for whatever reason, he gave Sellers way to much leeway. Now this did work in Dr. Strangelove, where Sellers had to play all these different characters, but here, where he just plays the character Clare Quilty, all these different voices and mannerisms he keeps using, it's just distracting. And a little annoying. Kurbrick definitely should have rained Sellers in.Besides those few flaws, this film is truly a classic. It deserves to be ranked right alongside all of Kubrick's other classic films. It's the kind of film, where one scene your laughing, the next scene your skin is crawling.That's the power of Lolita