|
| Lolita | 
 enlarge | Director: Adrian Lyne
Actors: Jeremy Irons, Dominique Swain, Melanie Griffith, Frank Langella, Suzanne Shepherd
Studio: Lions Gate
Category: DVD
Buy Used: $12.85
New (1) Used (14) Collectible (2) from $12.85
Avg. Customer Rating:  138 reviews
Sales Rank: 18178
Format: Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, Dvd-video, Letterboxed, Special Edition, Widescreen, Ntsc
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled), French (Subtitled)
Rating: R (Restricted)
Number Of Items: 1
Running Time: 137
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
DVD Layers: 2
DVD Sides: 1
Picture Format: Letterbox
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.5 x 5 x 0.6
ISBN: 1573627046
UPC: 031398719335
EAN: 9781573627047
ASIN: B00001IVFG
Theatrical Release Date: September 25, 1998
Release Date: October 12, 1999
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 133 more reviews...
 One of the greatest love stories ever. August 11, 2008
This film gets better and better each time I watch it. I never seem to tire of it. It has a fantastic poetic quality that takes it's cues from the novel. One of the greatest love tragedies I have ever come across. Not demon film everyone makes it out to be. A masterpiece in every sense of the word and Lyne's best film.
A must see for anyone who loves a good, honest love tale.
 Europe and America: fatal attraction February 1, 2008
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
Humbert is really a despicable human being. If there's a moral in this twisted morality tale, it's that obsession can really, really screw up your life. Oh, and also, don't write things in a diary you wouldn't want anyone you know to see.
Jeremy Irons was great, as usual. He's a lot like Johnny Depp, in that he takes roles of people I don't like but is such a good actor that he overcomes the material. Dominique Swain overdoes the nymphet act, but I blame the writer and director more than her.
Great metaphors abound. Insects being zapped after coming too close to the light. Flies stuck on flypaper. Barking dogs straight out of Greek myth. Fields of fire like something out of medieval Italian poetry.
However, the movie engaged in cheap foreshadowing by showing us at the beginning of the movie the results of the dramatic confrontation at the movie's end. I know lots of people have read the book or, like me, know its general outline, but that's no excuse for giving away part of the plot. And overall, does the movie really go anywhere we haven't been, or say anything we haven't heard? I don't think so. The story's as old as King David and Bathsheba. Three stars.
Disturbing, Sad, Funny January 24, 2008
There's some heavy handed symbolism here and there in the movie, but all in all it's a nice update to the old Kubrick version. A scene that involves a teenager moaning in the lap of a middle aged man might disturb some viewers, and you probably don't want to show it to your high school students.
The first part of the movie comes across as dated, demented, sentimental and unrealistic, but things pick up after that. In general the film is surprisingly funny, like the book, despite the awfulness of the general situation re: daughter Lo and father Hum.
Ms Swain Should Have Won An Oscar September 3, 2007
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Both Dominique and Jeremy gave Oscar-worthy performances in this brilliant movie. The fact that Dominique had zero previous acting experience was of course the very reason that she could not possibly have won. I mean that would point out a rather obvious fact about Hollywood.....
Anyway this movie is very atmospheric and will make you happy, sad, sick, and angry. Which is exactly what a good movie is supposed to do....drag out your feelings/emotions. This is a timepiece movie and you really get a feel for the 1940's. We all know the story about an older man infatuated with a young girl so I won't rehash any of that...it is the backbone of the whole thing. Mr. Irons is absolutely perfect in the role of the hopelessly torn and consumed Humbert. He has a way of saying so much without having to say a word. Mr. Langella is the perfect villain and whereas you have empathy for Humbert, you have none for Quilte. Melanie Griffith gives a good performance as the unaware and overbearing mother who herself falls hard for Humbert.
I especially liked the fact that Dominique was never shown nude. This actually increases the erotic element of their relationship and keeps an edge on the movie. The emphasis on the girls bare feet and legs puts a punctuation mark on her coltish figure and her "barefoot girl next door" image that is so cute and yet so seductive, in a natural and innocent way.
There is also a very interesting point made (Humberts first tragic love...) regarding "sexual imprinting" that boils down to your first sexual experience sometimes being the reason you gravitate towards a certain type of person whether it be age, weight, or even sex. It is like you become fixated based on moment in time and you just continue to loop on that fixation. A most interesting theory. It may provide insight into the situation where an older adult falls hard for a young boy or girl.
Dominique makes the movie. You can't fake being a nymphette. You either are or you aren't...and she is. She is so natural, playful, and innocently sexual she literally embodies everything that is attractive about young women. Easily the best performance by an actress I have seen in a long time. She is truly a "natural".
An instant classic....
It's the closest adaptation of the two films, March 8, 2007
but it does have a few significant differences.
One thing that bothered me was that they favored Humbert's perception a bit. They seemed to miss the point that Humbert was delusional, and often exaggerated Lo's "evil" ways. In reality, Lo was pretty innocent, with a few childish idiosycrasies... not so much the vile demon Hum sometimes emphasized. This is all made clear towards the end of the novel, yet they seemed to have missed the point.
There was also the choice of having her start off at 14 instead of 12. I can understand why they chose to do that (It's borderline unethical... but they could've just hired an older actress that looks 12.), but I think it kind of detracted from the fact that Lo was a child, not just "jailbait".
Other than that, she looked more like the vaguely described Lolita from the novel. She had the Auburn hair (I know, he also mentions chestnut. I still don't know if that was Humbert's or Nabokov's mistake), the Russet Venus look, the golden skin, the same wit (though, it was a bit exaggerated.), et cetera et cetera.
The tone was great too. It was beautifully shot, just as the novel was beautifully written. Over all, there were a few missing parts and some flaws, but that's natural with film adaptations, and could you imagine if they shot every scene that occurred in the novel? It would be tedious.
|
|
|
 Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
