tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post4086399175629250389..comments2024-03-27T21:42:56.131-05:00Comments on 1001plus: 14 Will Get You 20SJHoneywellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-13799793048181436032017-09-16T14:09:55.695-05:002017-09-16T14:09:55.695-05:00I agree with that. This ranks pretty low on the li...I agree with that. This ranks pretty low on the list of Kubrick films for me. It's not terrible, but it's not a film I think I need to watch again any time soon, or ever.SJHoneywellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-25282364339206050502017-09-15T11:47:32.724-05:002017-09-15T11:47:32.724-05:00I think what makes Lolita a Kubrick movie is that ...I think what makes Lolita a Kubrick movie is that he does something that is difficult and he does it different. This movie does not look like anything else, certainly not in its day and that it (almost) works is a wonder.<br />I normally like Sellers and I know this is about exposing everybody as fools, but he is over the top in Lolita. This is not Dr. Strangelove, but Sellers acts as if it is.<br />TSorensenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12208153011927807857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-68946001299449374692012-12-06T16:45:03.677-06:002012-12-06T16:45:03.677-06:00Well, I'd take issue with astronomy/astrology,...Well, I'd take issue with astronomy/astrology, too. One is a real science and one is a bunch of fluffy nonsense.<br /><br />The "pedophilia" label here is not precise, but it's at least in the ballpark--it has real similarities with what it's describing. And, speaking linguistically, words mean what we agree they mean. It drives me crazy when people use "enormity" to refer only to size, but that's the way the word is trending, and that's what it's going to become, like it or not. Words have definitions only because we agree that they do.SJHoneywellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-19800435124106719752012-12-06T15:30:52.346-06:002012-12-06T15:30:52.346-06:00I'm anal about some things and terminology is ...I'm anal about some things and terminology is one of them. You don't know how many times I've seen someone write "astrology" when they mean "astronomy", for instance. It doesn't matter how many people do it, though, and it does seem to be growing in usage (astrology when they mean astronomy) but that doesn't mean that it's right, or should be ignored - precisely because it's growing in usage. "Pedophile", like "liberal" and "convservative" has now started to become one of those words that is growing in usage for many situations where it is completely wrong. I respond sometimes on the IMDB boards, too. <br /><br />Sorry. Pushed one of my buttons.Chip Laryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00787403805554027107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-50036670485466284662012-12-05T23:37:30.740-06:002012-12-05T23:37:30.740-06:00@David--I can see that, but I think for those unfa...@David--I can see that, but I think for those unfamiliar with the story, it's not a necessary bookend and it may deaden the effect of seeing Humbert get to that point. <br /><br />@Kim--I call <i>2001</i> a "sandwich movie" in that you can go make a sandwich and come back and not have missed anything. I think it's an important film and a better film than <i>Lolita</i>, but also one that can get really boring.<br /><br />@Chip--Technically, you're right about the terminology, but in common parlance, "pedophilia" has become sexual attraction to anyone under the legal age. But, yeah. <br /><br />Also, Lolita in this version is no innocent either. In their first morning in the hotel, it's she who really broaches the subject of sex, telling him that they can play a game that she learned at camp. Sure, it's never said explicitly, but it's pretty obvious what she's talking about. Sure, he's obsessed and willing to take advantage, but in that moment, it's evident that he's hardly taking advantage of an innocent.<br /><br />@Alex--Yeah, I can see that. There are a few films that I'm not sure I ever want my kids to watch, let alone enjoy. Then I realize that my parents probably felt (and may still feel) the same way. SJHoneywellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-42166409184783579832012-12-05T19:06:49.756-06:002012-12-05T19:06:49.756-06:00I used to really like this movie - even had the po...I used to really like this movie - even had the poster for Kubrick's Lolita (with its tagline of "How did they make a movie of 'Lolita'"). Then I had kids of my own and decided it was probably not a good idea to have a poster like that hanging on the wall. Still, its a lot more entertaining than the 97 version.Alex Jowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11737798466816750685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-53164906247789629652012-12-05T13:54:16.083-06:002012-12-05T13:54:16.083-06:00I agree that this is not Kubrick's worst film,...I agree that this is not Kubrick's worst film, although it's not a top tier one, either. My least favorite part of the whole film is Sellers. His constant mugging for the camera ("Look at me! Boy am I wacky!") just ruined what was supposed to be a truly evil characterization. Yes, the restrictions of the time would not have allowed Kubrick to be true to the novel, but watch the 1997 version for a far better portrayal of Quilty from Frank Langella.<br /><br />One note, and I see many people make this mistake, especially on the IMDB boards - Humbert Humbert being attracted to Lolita is not pedophilia. While acting on that attraction is illegal, it's not a disorder. (A century ago 14 was marrying age for women.) Pedophilia is the attraction to pre-pubescent children. If there is one thing that Lolita is, it's definitely post-pubescent. If you want a label for it, Humbert's attraction would be ephebophilia.<br /><br />I found your description of her in this version of the film to be interesting since I found the Lolita in the 1997 version much less black and white. I felt Lyons' portrayal was still very restricted at the time. The 1997 version, for example, has Lolita "negotiating" a higher allowance from Humbert, establishing that she is definitely not an innocent. Again, it could be more true to the original story because of when it was made.Chip Laryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00787403805554027107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-81333626268680601472012-12-05T11:28:42.136-06:002012-12-05T11:28:42.136-06:00I like this much more than 2001: A Space Odyssey. ...I like this much more than 2001: A Space Odyssey. LOL! I think this is a black comedy, so I would have had no complaint with your labeling it as a comedy. Sellers and Mason are hysterical pedophiles--that sounds shocking, doesn't it. People are uber-sensitive when it comes to pedophilia (I understand why), so that's one reason they react rather unpleasantly to this. Still, I think the film has some merit.Kimberly J.M. Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09078951928157843937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-73383553217880395382012-12-05T08:29:32.344-06:002012-12-05T08:29:32.344-06:00I have seen the Lyne's version first so I alre...I have seen the Lyne's version first so I already knew the story,and the opening didn't bother me at all,on the contrary,I love it quite a bit,I think it sets the tone perfectly and it's Peter Sellers' best part in the film.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02579915072251488639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-57486143130818918862012-12-04T12:54:51.269-06:002012-12-04T12:54:51.269-06:00@Sio--No shock here. You were one of the people I ...@Sio--No shock here. You were one of the people I figured might be mildly annoyed at this review. You're right--it's not a "bad" film, and I agree that it's in the lower half of Kubrick's work. But I came into it with fewer expectations than you did, I guess--and for me, James Mason goes a long way in the plus column.<br /><br />@Chris--Saw that. I was just on my way to read it when I noticed this, so I'm headed there now. I agree on <i>The Killing</i>, by the way. It's a great little noir-ish number that deserves more acclaim.SJHoneywellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13550007053995112090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-28417208860736826752012-12-04T12:49:17.004-06:002012-12-04T12:49:17.004-06:00Scary coincidence department: I put up a post for ...Scary coincidence department: I put up a post for Lolita today as well.<br /><br />It wouldn't be in my upper tier Kubrick either, but you know, he only made a dozen or so films-so let's keep it in the book...and add The Killing and what the hell, add Killer's Kiss as well. 1001: A Film Odyssey is produced, directed and written by Chris, a librarian.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04803620768028761898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3166297507174717122.post-34984930109707397642012-12-04T11:09:07.008-06:002012-12-04T11:09:07.008-06:00Whoa, completely disagree re: Barry Lyndon!!! Bar...Whoa, completely disagree re: Barry Lyndon!!! Barry Lyndon>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Lolita in my book!<br /><br />I'm really hit and miss when it comes to black comedies, so if you say this is a black comedy, then chalk this one up to the "miss" column for me.<br /><br />Look, Lolita isn't a BAD film. It's just a victim of expectations for me. When I hear "Stanley Kubrick film," I flat out expect certain things - mood, camerawork, extraordinarily compelling storytelling. Lolita just couldn't live up to those expectations for me. Unfortunately, it's hard for a film to recover from that, even when it might be unfair to the film itself.siochembiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11487373396181856763noreply@blogger.com