comment #1

Craig Kennedy says ...

Ahhh...the underrated Lolita.

comment #2

tholl-yung says ...

It's a Stanley Kubrick, Peter Sellers kind of day. Kind of reminds me of Britney in an utterly disgusting platinum bobbed wig looking like a cheap transvestite, classy -- I could buy a better looking wig on Fairfax.

comment #3

The Movie Man says ...

I have issues with Kubrick and I've bored you all with it before, but LOLITA is a masterpiece with some of the best acting (especially the constantly underrated James Mason) to ever grace a Kubrick film.

comment #4

le corbeau says ...

Yeah, for a guy who directed everyone to the same monotone, he sure did get career-high performances out of everyone from George C. Scott to Jack Nicholson.

comment #5

Craig Kennedy says ...

I realize the movie pales in comparison to the book in many ways, but it's not the book. It's a Kubrick film and I think it's terrific. The ending always gives me a chill.

"Quilty? Quilty!"

comment #6

Rich S. says ...

Stephen King complained for twenty years about what Kubrick did to The Shining. Then, when he had a chance to make a miniseries that was exactly what he wanted, he made a total botch of it. The "happy ending" was especially appalling.

Kubrick had a way of getting to the essence of his material. He was definitely an acquired taste, but worth the effort to acquire.

comment #7

The Movie Man says ...

Many of King's problems with Kubrick's film are valid, but then he had to go and make that TV version which is just an embarrassment. I've never gotten King's thing for Mick Garris, who is (and I don't use this word often) a damn hack, who's yet to make a film with any artistry, and let's not get started on his screenwriting skills.

Scott's work with Kubrick stands among his best, but I have to disagree about Nicholson, I think his stuff in The Shining is very interesting but also sort of autopilot, one of the earliest of the Nicholson cruise control tick performances, and one of the basic problems of that film. Nicholson's work in the '70s is far superior, and his best recent performance is About Schmidt.

comment #8

Craig Kennedy says ...

I always think of The Shining as a Stanley Kubrick movie and not a Stephen King movie. It's not surpising King didn't like it since it diverges from the book in significant ways.

I 'discovered' Kubrick when The Shining was still his most recent film so it was always kind of a cornerstone for me. Looking back though, Movie Man is right that it's kind of the end of Nicholson as an actor and the beginning of Nicholson as a character. He's continued to be entertaining as hell, but there often seems to be a vitality missing he delivered earlier in his career.

I still love The Shining but it's not one of my favorite Kubrick's anymore.

comment #9

The Movie Man says ...

CJ-Nicholson has diverged from the crazy party man bit twice in the last several years that I can really remember, ABOUT SCHMIDT and THE PLEDGE, and he's terrific in both. Of course more people saw SOMETHING'S GOTTA GIVE in its opening weekend than those two films combined.

I really like THE SHINING, I just wish Kubrick had gotten a tad crazier with it. He seems to be ashamed of the fact that he's doing a Stephen King book.

comment #10

joncro says ...

Can I suggest MacTheRipper then ffmpegX, if you are on a mac.

comment #11

Craig Kennedy says ...

About Schmidt. You're right Movie Man. His performance as a guy who could've been my dad is about as far from The Joker as you can get.

I used to lump Pacino into the same category of being great in the 70's but more recently just sort of repeating himself. But then I sat down and watched a big pile of his movies. He relies on many of the same tics and mannerisms, but there's a variance to each character and he's almost always pretty great.