This film remains my all-time favorite. It's a delicious, adultmeditation on youth, obsession and sex. While not entirely faithful tothe novel, it captures the book's spirit and is nonetheless amasterpiece on its own terms. To fully appreciate what Kubrick hasdone, compare this version to Adrian Lyne's anemic remake.
Kubrick chose his cast wisely for the most part. James Mason conveysboth the tormented inner soul and the outwardly polite gentleman withsuch charm that you simply can't despise him for his treachery. ShelleyWinters was never better as the shrill, man-hungry shrew. Sue Lyon isenormously credible in a complex role - physically attractive, childishat times in her behavior, but quietly calculating and manipulative. Theweakest link is Peter Sellers, who Kubrick found amusing enough to lethim run on too long. Sellers was a brilliant performer, but just notright for this film. As Quilty, he's fine. When masquerading as others,he's mostly intrusive and tends to alter the tone of what's going on.
The need to tread carefully around the censors in 1962 actually worksin the film's favor. There's a sophisticated subtlety thatcounterbalances the lurid subject matter. In fact, I even prefer theedited-for-television version of the scene in which Humbert and Lolitafirst have sex. Here she merely whispers in his ear before a suggestivefade-out. In the complete version of the film, the scene continues withthem discussing a silly game played at summer camp. The less said, thebetter.
"Lolita" has aged remarkably well. Its topic is relevant today, and thecareful craftsmanship that went into this production holds upbeautifully. I think it's Kubrick's best film - they tended to get moreself-indulgent as time went on. This one's a gem. Not to be overlookedare the aptly provocative title sequence and Nelson Riddle's lusciouspiano score.
