Lolita

1997 "A forbidden love. An unthinkable attraction. The ultimate price."
6.8| 2h17m| R| en
Details

Humbert Humbert is a middle-aged British novelist who is both appalled by and attracted to the vulgarity of American culture. When he comes to stay at the boarding house run by Charlotte Haze, he soon becomes obsessed with Lolita, the woman's teenaged daughter.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Dorathen Better Late Then Never
Spoonatects Am i the only one who thinks........Average?
Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.
Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.
inioi To begin with, I will say that Adrian Lyne's one of my favorite directors. Whatever he does, he adds his unmistakable personal stamp on filming. The depth and detail are overwhelming. Each frame is a picture by itself. He is a master at creating atmospheres along with music and photography.He is also a provocateur, and he likes to be considered as such. One of the recurring subjects is the attraction between men and women, which can also be seen in "Unfaithful (2002)," "Indecent Proposal (1997)," "Fatal Attraction (1987)," "Nine 1/2 Weeks (1986) "" Flashdance (1983) "and" Foxes (1980) ".On "Lolita" The film seemed intense and intimate in equal measure. And even could say that is extremely private, as depicts personal feelings and sensations that could cause rejection or criticism.For me, there is nothing to criticize.The question of our capacity to empathize with Jeremy Irons role, arises.The psychological game between the two protagonists is as intense as unstable, and the roles of dominator and dominated are exchanged. We finally have a dramatic situation in which nobody wins, so it is as real as life itself.We stand before a, deeply and brutally honest movie.9/10
cheergal The director has done several well-known obsessively sexual films. In my view, his genius may lay within his sharp sense of subtle differences between normal and twisted affections.Pedophiles don't see adolescents are immature or silly whom other might not care socializing with. They see them as their peers. A lot of adolescent teenagers already have grown adult figures which might intensify sexual fantasies to them. It's complicated to explain why they are not attracted to adults instead. Partially, they want to control their objects of affections. This movie indeed showed those vital characters.Some scenarios were far-fetched in the story like the playwright's role and mother's death. However, they were faithful to the novel. Jeremy Irons played a very convincing Humbert who covered all the flaws in the story. I could see why this movie was censored at that time. I saw 1962 version also. It was less visual flirtations which did not stir too much alerts in the society back then. Somehow, theaters worried about being paralyzed by controversies now than then. Nonetheless, I am glad I found this movie now.
Harriet Deltubbo Jeremy Irons proved to be a better choice than James Mason was in Kubrick's version. It's the kind of film that proves that a small story can be much more meaningful than a larger one. The colors are amazing and seem to follow the mood of the story. The highlight is the last scene in which Humbert surrenders. The cinematography is stark and bare, with only the soundtrack adding some effect. From an artistic standpoint, there were some plot elements and character developments I didn't think were totally needed. They do however drive the story, which seemed to be their purpose, so I can accept them. Nothing to laugh at.
videorama-759-859391 Here was another remake, I enjoyed more than the original, this one would of really come well across the big screen. Perfectly filling the boots of the Lol real here, Swain is one hell of an acting revelation. She can act, but also as proved in this, can act younger than she looks. She's the whole package of Lolita: cheeky, innocent, flirtatious, and soon to be manipulated and corrupted, by a playwright/pedoarse, (Langella, hauntingly evil) who's a bad turn of fate upon Irons in the finale. Swain is up against some stiff acting competition, like her older lover, Irons, her strict and selfish mother, Griffith, really impressive, and of course Langella as I mentioned before, who cringes like a toad, for his sins, in the finale which I really liked. This time around, Lolita has been done more visually, with more plotting and life poured into it's characters, sorry Stanley, although that vivid sunbaking scene, to whet your whistle, I never got out of my head. It was easy to see, the controversy that burst out from the public, accusing it of promoting pedophilia, where there was one or two scenes with our leads stark, making love, that actually bordered on crossing that line. Adrian Lynne, of course renowned for that 86 hit, Nine And A Half Weeks (god that was a long time ago) has done us proud here, or remade us proud here. A must definitely watch: of course it's main reason, fresh new acting find, Swain.