1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die- Lolita

#401- Lolita (1962)
Starring: James Mason, Shelley Winters, Sue Lyon
Directed by: Stanley Kubrick


Plot Summary: Professor Humbert Humbert arrives in Ramsdale, New Hampshire searching for a room to rent. Charlotte Haze offers him to stay in her house with a reasonable price for rent. Humbert begins to decline until he sees Charlotte's 14-year-old daughter Delores, who goes by the nickname "Lolita." In order to stay close to Lolita, Humbert agrees to stay in Charlotte's home. Over time, Charlotte confesses her feelings for Humbert and he reluctantly agrees to marry her. While Lolita is away at summer camp, Charlotte discovers the truth about Humbert and flees the house. Humbert receives a call saying that Charlotte was struck by a car and killed, and now he must deliver the news to Lolita as he goes to pick her up from camp. Instead of being upfront with her, Humbert takes her on the road to start their new lives together.


Now we are getting into a popular subject when analyzing Stanley Kubrick's films: controversy. From the treatment of his actors, to his unorthodox filmmaking techniques, to many of the social commentaries and criticisms obviously presented in his movies, Kubrick was a man who knew how to get people talking about his films. So then, while we are on the subject of controversy, let's look at a film whose entire subject was controversial: Lolita. With a tagline that actually begs the question "How did they ever make a movie of Lolita?," the film details the story of a middle-aged man who falls in love with a 14-year-old girl. Once you've digested that idea passed the nausea in your stomach, you're probably agreeing with the film's tagline. But when you watch it, you're probably even more confused and unsettled by the fact that this film is actually pretty entertaining. Without a question the plots and characters are morally despicable, but this film is a character study that puts you in the mind and heart of each main character. So let's look at each of the 4 main characters and analyze what can be taken away positively from the controversial decisions of Kubrick's vision.

James Mason stars as Professor Humbert Humbert (I'm dead serious...that's his name). The first thing I'm sure everyone will notice about Mason is his voice. It sounded like the perfect amount class and elegance to mirror how sick and perverse his character will be around the film. Humbert has a LOT of emotions and events he must endure throughout the film. My favorite is his paranoia for anyone finding out about him and Lolita. I mean he becomes a mad man over being caught, he's that upset. As far as leading a film, Mason does a good job and I was instantly won over by his performance. A lot of people assume this is Lolita's film, but it's actually Humbert's and Mason does a superb job of reminding us that by commanding the screen.

The titular character of Lolita is played by Sue Lyon. Lyon injects an attention-grabbing attitude to Lolita that really steals the show. Up until this point in film, most "kid" characters are in the background or are well-behaved angels. With Lolita, she plays a down to earth teenager that I'm sure spoke to many viewers as a refreshing realistic approach to the ongoing behavior movement that was going on in the world. And for all of you wanting to point at the elephant in the room about her being marketed as a "seductive" character, I'm avoiding discussing that like the plague. It would be way too easy for someone to take my words out of context, so all I'm going to do is address her attitude as a teenage character, and NOT whether or not she has sex appeal (sickos).

One of the more annoying characters in the film is Lolita's mother Charlotte, played by Shelley Winters. With Humbert in love with her daughter, the audience can definitely feel bad for Charlotte in that regard. It's absolutely despicable that he used her love for him as a way to gawk at her daughter and the audience should feel for her. However, she also comes down on Lolita with a parenting technique that might be considered cruel and verbally abusive. So, she's a very complex character to watch. There are times where you can feel sorry for her, and other times when you want to shut her up. I'll admit of the characters, she's probably the one who has aged the worst over time, but Winters at least does a good job of playing such a complex character for the audience.

Peter Sellers rounds out the cast as Clare Quilty, a crafty and charismatic character who plays a pretty big role in the film's climax. I won't dare spoil what lengths his involvement is, but trust me when I say Sellers absolutely owns this role and adds a lot of comedy to the film when necessary.

To address the controversy surrounding the plot, Kubrick actually made sure Lolita's age was altered from 12 (which was the original age for the character in the book it was based on) to 14. While not a drastic alteration, Kubrick at least seemed aware that the plot may leave many viewers unsettled and tried to work alongside the censors to create something a little more "acceptable." To clarify, this film isn't smut. It's not porn. They are never even shown kissing or having sex. Lolita uses a controversial topic to tell an artsy character study. And I believe it works really well. You go into the psychology of characters like Humbert, the family dynamic between Charlotte and Lolita, and Quilty's connections to the narrative, and the plot takes a back seat. You are invested in these characters and wonder what is going to happen to them, that's a mark of how great Kubrick was at directing. He created a film with characters so compelling that you forget about the controversy and focus on other elements within the film. That's not an easy thing to do in any era of film, so kudos to Kubrick.


Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

With a controversial plot, Lolita is one of Kubrick's earliest films that will have audiences thinking. The main cast is very strong, and the plot blurs the lines of drama and comedy to create a film I would recommend watching at least once for any fans of Kubrick.

Lolita and movie images are copyrighted by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer

1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die- Spartacus

#374- Spartacus (1960)
Starring: Kirk Douglas, Laurence Olivier, Tony Curtis
Directed by: Stanley Kubrick


Plot Summary: In 1st Century BC, a proud and courageous slave named Spartacus is sold to be a gladiator. He proves to be an impressive warrior and forms a strong relationship with serving woman named Varinia. When she is sold to Roman senator Crassus, Spartacus is taunted and leads a riot with the rest of the slaves. They flee and appoint Spartacus as chief of the fugitives and they pillage their way to prosperity in order to reclaim their lives. Spartacus gains many allies along the way, including Antoninus, a former slave of Crassus who fled after his master attempted to seduce him, and Varinia, who reunites with Spartacus and they start a family together. As Spartacus and his army continue to defeat all obstacles that are put in front of them, Crassus and the Roman Senate use bribes and underhanded tactics to leave Spartacus and his army vulnerable to their attacks. Paranoid of a takeover from Spartacus, the Senate puts full power in the hands of Crassus. With all opposition against them, Spartacus convinces his troop that if they are going to die, they should die fighting because it proves they are more than slaves. It proves that they are human beings and individuals.


Of all the films Stanley Kubrick has done, Spartacus might seem a bit left field for his style. Heck, I had known about the movie my entire life and only maybe last year did I actually find out he directed it. With a cast including film legends Laurence Olivier, Tony Curtis, and Kirk Douglas (who worked with Kubrick in Paths of Glory), along with a 3 hour epic narrative, how could it not work within Kubrick's style? I'll tell you how, because even though he was directing the movie, he didn't have as much creative control as he'd like. At the end of the day, he was replacing a director who was fired after one week of filming, and Universal Pictures had final artistic control of the project. With that in mind, does Spartacus feel like an authentic and genuine Kubrick movie? Does it at least feel like half of one? And if it only feels like half a Kubrick movie, or not at all, is it worth watching? That's what we're here to find out.

Kirk Douglas once again stars in a Kubrick film, this time by playing the titular character of Spartacus. Often times in gladiator films, main protagonists have the same character tropes, from Ben-Hur to Gladiator, and Spartacus is no exception. He's selfless and courageous, and knows what needs to be done to achieve his objectives. Do I think anyone could have played him? It's possible, but it can't be denied that this is one of Kirk Douglas's most notable movie roles. Personally, I liked him more in Paths of Glory, since Col. Dax was a bit more complex than Spartacus as a main character. It's still a pretty powerful and important performance to watch, and Douglas more than certainly holds his own as the lead.

Douglas isn't the only powerful performance in the film however, as many big actors from the time come together to round out the supporting cast. One in particular I was paying attention to was Laurence Olivier as the main antagonist Crassus. Considered one of the greatest actors of all time, I expected to be wowed by Olivier, but maybe this wasn't the greatest introduction to him. That's not to say he doesn't command his scenes (because he does), but there is an elephant in the room with his character. A big GAY (admittedly bisexual) elephant that comes out of nowhere and isn't brought up often. That's not to say I dislike homosexuality, and I understand bisexuality was a thing back then, but it was distracting because it was only present for maybe 2 or 3 scenes in a 3 hour movie. Another character played by a big name actor was Antoninus, played by Tony Curtis. This was miles different from what I have seen from him (The Great Race and Some Like It Hot), but I thought he did a great job in scenes that allowed him to work off both Douglas and Olivier. He's a sidekick character, but he plays it really well.

The love interest of Spartacus is Varinia, played by Jean Simmons. She's your basic love interest, but her love for Spartacus is strong and it gradually grows throughout the film, like you would imagine love to grow. They start with a normal friendship and it blossoms throughout and they evolve as a couple together. And the chemistry between Douglas and Simmons is believable, so kudos to them. Interestingly enough, the only acting performance to win an Oscar was Peter Ustinov as Batiatus. I enjoy the character of Batiatus because it allows Ustinov to run the gamut of emotions and motivations for an individual character. Early on in the film, Batiatus is your typical, greedy, businessman-type character. He specializes in buying and training slaves to be gladiators. My favorite scene of his is when he is trying to sell gladiators to Crassus, he is underselling great warriors like Spartacus and is trying to pawn off smaller and weaker gladiators as greater fighters. Is it because he values Spartacus as a person? No. It's because he's a quality businessman and wants to make a product off his weaker commodities. I really dig it. By the end of the film, he develops into a more compassionate and helpful character for Spartacus and his allies. It's a really good character that stands out as one of my favorite parts of the film.

My absolute favorite part of Spartacus, however, is the large amount of atmosphere, most present in the action scenes. The gladiator battles are one on one, so they not only are intimate between characters, but Kubrick puts up so much scenery that the audience is also able to absorb the atmosphere and feel like they are in the middle of a Roman coliseum watching real gladiators fight. Another great scene involves Spartacus and his army of slaves battling the Roman army. The amount of extras they used (no use of CGI here, those people are all real), and the intricate camera angles really made this epic war between armies feel like something Kubrick could create. And give props to the stunt team, the stunts draw that fine line between overly choreographed and intense realism. When they fight with such finesse that it looks effortless, it's more on the overly choreographed, but when they bring FIRE into the mix, there's the realism. These scenes should really entertain any fan of action movies, as many of them still hold up to this day.

The big question about Spartacus is whether or not it feels like a genuine Kubrick film. Even if it does feel like a drag during certain parts, there are many instances that remind of Kubrick's style. He's done grand and epic movies since this (2001: A Space Odyssey and Barry Lyndon come to mind), so it's great to get some experience in filming large scope projects like this one. I know he didn't get the full creative freedom he would've liked for this film, but it is still feels up his alley with how it's filmed and because of how extravagant it can be. Lastly, the film is still enjoyable to watch, so it stands well on its own. People generally associate The Shining, A Clockwork Orange, and 2001: A Space Odyssey more with Kubrick's work and style more than Spartacus, but people still know about the film despite the lack of direct correlation with Kubrick as director. Maybe that's the most telling detail of the film's legacy.


Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

Spartacus is fueled by great acting performances from a very talented cast, and is full of enough action and atmosphere to keep moviegoers coming back from more. It might stand alone without Kubrick's name, but it also proves Kubrick can tackle the epic movie. However, it may be longer than some would like, so I'll just say all movie buffs should rent this one and watch it at least once.

Spartacus and movie images are copyrighted by Universal Pictures

1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die- Paths of Glory

#330- Paths of Glory (1957)
Starring: Kirk Douglas, Ralph Meeker, Adolphe Menjou
Directed by: Stanley Kubrick


Plot Summary: When a suicide mission is ordered from within the French Army during World War I, the attack is put in the hands of Colonel Dax, despite his beliefs that the attack will only weaken the French Army. When Dax leads the attack, the mission is a failure and many of the soldiers retreat. In an attempt to deflect the blame from reaching him, General Mireau orders for 100 soldiers to be tried for cowardice. As a compromise for the numbers seeming too big, it is decided instead that a man from each company is picked to stand trial, reducing the numbers to only 3 men. Colonel Dax, who was a criminal defense lawyer outside the war, volunteers to defend these three men, knowing that each of them are unfairly accused and tries his hardest to win them their innocence and the chance to continue living.


When you talk about revolutionary filmmakers, one name that usually appears at the top is Stanley Kubrick. Considered one of the greatest directors of all-time, Kubrick had a method of filmmaking that was unlike anything proceeding him, and has since then been unable to replicate in the modern days of film. Not to mention he loved to tell stories that stretched to a variety of different genres. He's made war movies, satires, horror films, historical movies, and science fiction films. Let's begin looking at this legendary career of film by looking at one of his earliest masterpieces, Paths of Glory. Of his early days of directing, Paths of Glory is the one that really put his name on the radar thanks to its World War I setting, its anti-war themes, and the star power of its leading man. It really allowed the door to be opened for Kubrick for future projects, and the rest (as they say) is history.

Kirk Douglas stars as Colonel Dax, in one of Douglas's most memorable roles on film. Douglas as Dax is the definition of a powerful performance. His monologues command the screen, his words are always to the point, and he is even able to show some compassion towards his fellow soldiers. It's the human elements of Dax that serve as one of the film's biggest themes. When other characters are so dehumanizing, Dax serves as a refreshing take on what a war Colonel was normally NOT portrayed as. Everyone has an idea in their mind of a stereotypical army character (and we will get to that stereotype further when we get to Full Metal Jacket), so when Douglas plays Dax as something different, it's completely unexpected and appreciated. I know Douglas did at least one other film with Kubrick (a pretty important film for his career in fact), and add that with how much I loved him in Gunfight at the O.K. Corral and we have the makings of one of my all-time favorite actors (right up there with Tom Hanks and James Stewart).

Let's briefly discuss a trio of authority figures that serve as antagonists for the film. I say briefly because what you see with these characters is what you get. Lieutenant Roget, played by Wayne Morris, is an absolute coward. General Mireau, played by George Macready, is emotionless and thirsty for blood and violence. And Major General Broulard, played by Adolphe Menjou, is a master manipulator, trying his best to cater to as many characters' loyalties in order to get what he wants out of them. Just cause these characters are by the books doesn't mean they aren't well-performed. All three have traits that get under your skin and loathe them as much as the main characters do.

Thanks to the underhanded actions of the authority (a phrase which reminds me of my wrestling blog), a trio of victims are tried for treason and cowardice on the war front. The most empathetic is definitely Corporal Paris, played by Ralph Meeker, who is accused by Roget in a cover up for his own cowardice. Paris was just that guy who was in the wrong place at the wrong time and now his life is held in the balance of a trial hearing. The other two have their moments as well. Private Arnaud, played by Joe Turkel, is a character that was thrown into the lot despite being honored for bravery twice. He's a decorated soldier who has been given a serious raw deal, and even goes as far as to deny religion and the priest who visits them in prison. The final member is Private Ferol, played by Timothy Carey, a taller fellow deemed "socially unacceptable." He puts up a really strong front at first, but as their judgment day draws nearer, he begins to cry like a baby. We really get to know these three and we pray for them to be found, an excellent example of how all soldiers are men with lives and emotions, not just expendable drones at the army's disposal (I really hope I don't offend anybody with that one...).

Paths of Glory has been referred to by many film scholars as one of the greatest anti-war movies ever made. You really have to think about when this film was released. During the previous war, films came out as propaganda to glorify the war effort and restore patriotism in their respective countries. In this film, it takes an entirely different approach and shows that war is not as amazing as it was built up as. In fact, most of the time taking place during the war isn't detailing a battle between opposing sides (even though there is a spectacular battle scene), but rather much of the focus is between men who are supposed to be on the same side. There is so much manipulation and betrayal between the main characters that it's really disheartening for anyone who thinks military life is automatically this great brotherhood or family environment. Like I said earlier, Dax is one of the only characters to show compassion for his fellow men, so it is achievable to some extent, but this film shows it is easier said than done. This probably opened a LOT of eyes at the time, and in fact, it was banned in certain countries due to its anti-war themes (an early display of controversies surrounding Kubrick's films).

I discovered that Kubrick's movies are the kind that you should own on DVD for the Bonus Features. Even if you can enjoy the movie on its own, it really pays off to watch the Bonus Features since they unlock some of Kubrick's brilliance behind the scenes. A good example in Paths of Glory was Kubrick's use of multiple takes (a popular trope he used in nearly all of his projects). This man was the epitome of meticulous and wanted to make sure every shot, every line delivered, every scene on film was there for a reason: because it was perfection. It was said by a colleague of his on the Paths of Glory Blu-ray that Kubrick feared mediocrity, and I believe it is his passion to make sure everything in his films have a purpose that cements his legendary career as a director. When you take your films THAT seriously, there can only be success right? Well, maybe not at first at the box office (with Paths of Glory achieving moderate financial success), but they are appreciated throughout history by movie buffs everywhere, and this film is no exception.


Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

What I expected to be a small taste of Kubrick's career proved to be an early contender for one of his best projects. The characters and anti-war themes are compelling and Kirk Douglas captivates the screen as Colonel Dax. If you love Kubrick or war movies, Paths of Glory is definitely worth owning in your collection (particularly the Criterion Collection Blu-ray). And if you're the casual moviegoer, this is one is still worth a weekend rental.

Paths of Glory and movie images are copyrighted by United Artists