Charlotte: “Humbert – oh, you touch me and I go limp as a noodle. It scares me.”
Humbert: “Yes, I know the feeling.”

I snigger all the way through this movie. This is the more comical, cheeky adaptation of Nabokov’s novel, whereas Adrian Lyne’s 1997 version (while not without its hilarious moments) focussed more on the tragedy of it all; or, to put it differently, Kubrick puts you squarely in Humbert’s shoes, and Lyne lets you see a little through Lo’s eyes. Of course, Nabokov’s novel has both the comedy and the tragedy, so it’s always the better way to experience the story unless you’re short of time… until the next movie, I guess.

With each viewing, I notice new things. Every line becomes a double entendre – even, “I showed you my garden,” for example, this time, made me laugh out loud – I don’t even know if it was intended to garner a laugh. I don’t think there’s a single character in Kubrick’s version of Lolita that isn’t somehow or other kinky (“Two of the, two of the troopers agreed to double up, sir, that’s how I got the cot, sir!”). I love how Humbert is constantly trying to hide his weirdness, and when they go to Lolita’s school ball, and her best friend Mona’s parents come over to talk, you can tell immediately that they get up to some strange things in the bedroom (“As a matter of fact, Professor Humbert, both John and I are… open-minded…”), and even Mona herself has this weird close moment with her father when they bump into each other on the dancefloor, calling him “darling,” and rubbing up to him.

James Mason is even funnier than I remember. I don’t think I’ve seen a single movie of his where he’s less than brilliant. And this is the first time I’ve watched the movie and not found Shelley Winters annoying – of course, her character is annoying, but the performance is amazing. With this and A Place in the Sun, she’s definitely one of my favourite old-time actresses.

Then there’s Lolita herself, Sue Lyon. As with the movie on the whole, it’s kind of pointless to compare her to the 1997 version, but at least between her and Dominique Swain, Lyon’s the one you don’t feel completely weird about finding attractive, as they made Lo a little older for this version, for obvious reasons. It’s a shame she ultimately shrank away from the limelight and really hates this movie in particular (I seem to remember she made some blunt comments around the 1997 version’s release about it was going to ruin Dominique Swain’s career or something, but look who’s still working…) I love when she’s reacting to Mason reading Poe to her (that scene also contains a moment you wouldn’t expect to be sexy but is probably more passionate than anything even in the ‘97 version, when Lo feeds Hum the egg as a “reward” – watch how hard he grips her arm).

I keep mentioning the ‘97 version. This time round watching this version, I was amazed by how much the two versions really resemble each other in certain scenes – even one of my favourite moments, which Nabokov describes cinematically in the novel, when Humbert emerges from the bathroom in his pyjamas (though Lyne translates it more literally) – and how, in most cases, my favourite little moments of those scenes are in the ‘62 film, like for example, Lolita’s “Don’t forget me,” wink before she leaves for camp. That whole scene is pretty much exactly the same in Adrian Lyne’s version, but it’s missing that line which for me completely makes it (then, Morricone’s score and the thunderous sound of Lo running up the stairs also makes it in Lyne’s version, so I don’t know what to think, lol). I’ve always been very torn up over the matter of “which one’s best?” but for once after this viewing, I’m fairly certain that Kubrick did the better job.

I’ve written this much… I really can’t give it less than 5 stars, there’s just so many things in this movie that I find cool, unforgettable. It’s a movie I almost find myself talking back to as it plays, quoting lines, waiting for punchlines. I might object to it being too long, but Kubrick divides his movies up so wonderfully into 50 minute acts that you never really catch yourself thinking, “how long left?”

I do still love Adrian Lyne’s movie, and I’ll talk about that when I next get round to seeing it, at which point I’ll probably change my mind yet again. But with Lyne’s version it’s more to do with Dominique Swain’s performance and Ennio Morricone’s score as opposed to the overall achievement by everyone involved here. It’s really a testament to the source material, though, that both adaptations to date are pretty damn amazing. The humour is probably the most important thing in Nabokov’s novel, and Kubrick really pushes it close to the line; it’s funny how this works better than Lyne’s version, where there was no line. I haven’t even mentioned Peter Seller’s performance as Quilty. He makes Quilty the mysterious, complex character as in the novel without resorting to the extreme tactics of Frank Langella in ‘97. He keeps it funny while still being a real sick puppy.

For me, this one’s core viewing.

This entry was posted on Monday, May 23rd, 2005 at 1:36 pm in 5 hearts, Movie Reviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.