Review of Lolita (1962) by Michelle W — 30 Sep 2009

The infamous tale of Lolita. Adapted from one of my favourite novels ever and directed by my favourite director of all time, I was looking very much to seeing this film.

Now let's cut to the chase, this isn't a film like 2001 where the visuals are predomiant, this film, especially as it's adapted from a novel, the most important featues of this film are the acting the screenplay.

It's interesting, because I think the two main characters Lo and Hum where out-shone by members of the supporting cast. What I mean is that, when you read a novel, you have your own thoughts as to what you think the characters should be like, and in my head Mrs Haze and Clare Quilty where exactly as they should've been. Humbert Humbert just wasn't lyrical enough, charming enough, pathetic or doomed enough. Lolita simply wasn't young enough and at the end old enough. It's a little disappointing as these main characters are so much more important, but its not like they were terrible, just not quite right.

The adaption of the novel was very well done. Kubrick is very meticulous and it's obvious that he prefers to make direct adaptions (with a few twists or his own) rather than base a film on novels. And so in regards to that criteria, it was all very well done.

Now obviously the films downfall wa the censorship. Lo and Hum's sexual relatioship was never explicit, even in the novel, but it had much more of a presence than in this film. The obscenity of some of poor Humbert's thoughts and conversations was so much a part of his character, and cutting it out left him hollow. We see what Kubrick can do unencumbered with A Clockwork Orange (which was released only a decade later) which is a masterpiece.

I greatly enjoyed seeing one of my favourite novels on film, skillfully made by Kubrick, but it's restraint set it back, and no it's definitely not as good as the novel.