![]() It may just be a notch better than Kubrick's film, and for me personally, as an adaptation of the novel, it also rings more true. Another stronghold for the film in its dignity as an adaption of the novel, is Ennio Morricone's sweepingly romantic and classic score. ![]() More faithful to the novel, the film successfully achieves the great character nuance of the civilized and sophisticated Humbert Humbert, and the way he falls completely in love with such a obnoxious and difficult child, who's at the same time such an alluring, facetious and sexual creature. Tragedy in the sense that it dares more than Kubrick's film did (which I believe has nothing to do with the censorship in the 60ties), because director Lyne isn't interested in sexually or provocatively exploiting the relationship between Humbert (a marvelous Jeremy Irons) and Lolita/Dolores (Dominique Swain), he makes it sort of enigmatic, carefully lingering and beautiful. ![]() LOLITA by Adrian Lyne, was immediately and understandably compared to Stanley Kubrick's adaptation of the novel by Vladimir Nabokov, and although I think Kubrick made a wonderful film, what I do think director Lyne's version does better, is the way it captures the tragedy of it all, instead of the comedy. Reviewed by EijnarAmadeus 10 / 10 Lyne outdoing Kubrick ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |