Is it good ?
I don't think so. The only quality to me the film has that is of superiority to the Kubrick film is the focus on the sexual obcession of the professor on the girl. Kubrick admitted his film was of fault for not having it. Still, the remake only really succeeds in just tackling that issue. The original is still much more rewarding because it is deeper humanism. The remake feels like a ploy to get some controversy through a touchy subject without exploring that realm to go anything beyond that controversy.
~rougerum
that story about david mamets script being rejected because he made the guy look like a pedphile, is one of the funniest hollywood stories ever
not really, but neither is the kubrick one in my opinion
I haven't heard this story, Butterscotch! What's the steez?
"I was hired by Adrian Lyne to write a draft of Lolita," he says. "Indeed, there are very few people who weren't hired by Adrian Lyne to write a draft of Lolita. I was real proud of it, and I handed it in and didn't hear anything from anybody for weeks. So I was talking to [the film's producer] Dick Zanuck." I said, 'Whatsamatter You didn't like the script?' He said, 'You made him look like a pedophile!'"
Mamet interview with Salon:
What about with "Lolita?"
I had a wonderful time writing it.
But in terms of the reaction in the U.S.?
They didn't end up using my script. They kicked me off the movie and ended up hiring somebody else. I haven't seen the finished movie.
Why did they hire someone else to write it?
For the same reason the moron threw the alarm clock out the window -- to see time fly.
It's not as terrible as you'd expect from Adrian Lyne, but it's not good, and it doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the Kubrick rendition.
David Mamet writing AND directing might've been something different, though...
i hope people will one day realize that this book cannot be made into a movie
it just doesn't work
To be honest the remake just put me to sleep. :?
Fresh Sex Doesn't Mean Kicked Up Notches