dominique swain has really nice legs, feet & toes. the kind that look like they'd be great to caress, smell, kiss, lick & nibble on. jeremy irons is one lucky actor.
They should do a better version than this. Or at least, find some miraculous way to get rid of this Delores and replace her with someone with an ounce of acting talent.
@Toxilicks I don't think it's the acting that is the problem, it think it's how the character was written. She's acting a very annoyingly written part
How was Nabokov inspired, really? That is the problem I always asked myself when Iwas passing through the leaves of the book. Might have been so revolutonary @ his time.
Am I alone in really liking the Lolita portrayed here? She's my favourite fictional character of all time, I love her in the book and the film! Didn't like her quite so much in the Kubrick version, but that was a great film in its own right.
@ofxxxthexxxflowers No I like her too. i think she is a bit different from the book, but this gives her more character and complexity. While the book gets deep into Hum's mind, the movie explores Lo a little more. And let's be honest, any teenage girl isn't going to be proper like 'book lolita' ALL the time, this movie makes a realistic 14 yr old girl (a very immature and emotionally unstable 14 yr old girl, but still)
this dude was a total asshole and predator. he only married the mother because of her. he abused her sexually and physical he was a total asshole. i'am attracted to young girl too but i dont pray on them and act out these fantasies. i have no right no one does. if fucks up a kids life they never want it as bad as an adult does.
@AssMaster0069 i hope if you do fuck a girl like this you dont abuse like he did. this dude was total asshole my only regret was at the end of the movie he didn't kill himself.
he actually manipulated her into having sex with him after her mother died by telling her she will be place into the system and by making it seem like he was her only hope. i think the reason y so many people are sympathizing with Humbert is because Jeremy Irons is playing the part and he is very handsome, therefore it does not seem to be wrong. if lolita did not think what he was doing is wrong, then she would have stayed with him not run away in the end.
Lolita is not a child in the movie. She looks to be a good 17 years old, possessed of a striking figure and a devilishly haughty teen-age air.Horrible.
@MrMadamedemontespan The movie had to make it as a 14 year old because of the conflict that was brought up, and the actress was either 14 and or 15 when they started filming this.
@imnotapsychopath Yes, here she's like reddish-blonde, but Sue Lyon had a really bright blonde hair.. I don't understand why they haven't dyed their hair a little bit darker! Probably in 62 blonde starlets in cinema were more popular, I don't know :O
It's a *deleted scene for a reason people. This clip does not accurately represent the general behaviour of Lo in this film. They were obviously just experimenting a little. This version is infinitely better than Kubrick's
Why is this scene deleted? While the character being portrayed is like only 12 in the original story, it's quite obvious the actress playing her is much older than 12. So nothing should have needed to be censored.
2:09 I can't help it, it's disturbing me. Why is the girl's head on the different side of the man's head in that part? It doesn't look like she's changing the side.
this is where this version went wrong. lo was much more sophisticated than this, she was rebellious but SOOO clever and she spoke french and was painfully flirtatious and she'd talk and talk mindlessly about movie stars and celebrities and current this and current that from a 1940s era. she wasnt this foot-in-your-face, snake tongue, blisteringly american-accented, tall& lanky little beotch. this is so not the kind of 'nymphet' the humbert in the novel wouldve been attracted to. epic fail.
this is where this version went wrong. lo was much more sophisticated than this, she was rebellious but SOOO clever and she spoke french and was painfully flirtatious and she'd talk and talk mindlessly about movie stars and celebrities and current this and current that from a 1940s era. she wasnt this foot-in-your-face, snake tongue, blisteringly american-accented, tall& lanky little beotch. this is so not the kind of 'nymphet' the humbert in the novel wouldve been attracted to. epic fail.
this is where this version went wrong. lo was much more sophisticated than this, she was rebellious but SOOO clever and she spoke french and was painfully flirtatious and she'd talk and talk mindlessly about movie stars and celebrities and current this and current that from a 1940s era. she wasnt this foot-in-your-face, snake tongue, blisteringly american-accented, tall& lanky little beotch. this is so not the kind of 'nymphet' the humbert in the novel wouldve been attracted to. epic fail.
@RoyaRox1128 exactly. I'm reading the book at the moment and in the book she's completely different. In the movie she's unintelligent and annoying. Yes in the book Humber also said that he behaviour would be annoying if he wasn't in love with her, but the movie character is truly an epic fail
@RoyaRox1128 I totally agree with you. The book never portrayed Lolita to be so annoying. In the book she hardly behaves her age, which is 12 I believe. But in the movie it's painfully obvious she is a 12 year old. The movie was fabulous and all, but nothing can compare to the magic on the actual literature. I couldn't believe how annoying Lo was in this movie. It kind of made it hard to enjoy her character as much as I enjoyed it in the novel.
@RoyaRox1128 actually, I think this quote from the novel contradicts your opinion: "I was not really quite prepared for her fits of disorganized boredom, intense and vehement griping, her sprawling, droopy, dopey-eyed style, and what is called goofing off. . .Mentally, I found her to be a disgustingly conventional little girl. Sweet hot jazz, square dancing, gooey fudge sundaes, musicals, movie magazines and so forth - these were the obvious items in her list of beloved things."
@RoyaRox1128 additionally, Nabokov himself has acknowledged enjoying the comparison of Lolita to young America and Humbert to Old Europe, so I find both of their performances to be quite fitting. This Lolita represents America in a wonderful way- gum chewing, in your face, celebrity-obsessing, clever, annoying America.
@RoyaRox1128 wasn't that the entire conflict of the book, that lo was high and low cultured, the juxtaposition of americanised/americana culture and the european nymphet from his youth that humbert wanted her to emulate? epic fail.
@RoyaRox1128 your the epic fail,her character was great!.it's not like a remake must be made precisely like the original.it's better with little changes or why would someone even make a remake if it has to be identical to the original?u lack logic
@RoyaRox1128 "Lolita when she chose, could be a most exasperating brat. I was not really quite prepared for her fits of disorganized boredom, intense and vehement gripping, and what is called goofing off." (177)
@RoyaRox1128 usually films become a little more realistick than novels japan has been influenced by lolita as well and the kids there even if they flirt they still are childish in one way or another
@RoyaRox1128 I'm sorry, but it seems to me that you rather missed the point of the novel. The Lolita we read about is not a real person, but Humbert's horrifically objectified and rose tinted view of her. It's why the novel is a masterpiece; nothing can be taken as the objective truth when it's being told to us by a traumatised psycopath.
She's rubbing his crotch with her feet? I don't know if anyone saw the 1962 version with Sue Lyon but there was NO kissing & definitely NO sex scenes. When you watch the film, it's clear that they have a sexual relationship but there was nothing like this. I haven't watched the 1998 version so I don't know what it's like but it looks like they definitely took the 90s approach & put in some obviously sexual images in there...after all, it's a taboo story.
@andyrooney12 in the movie, there are scenes HOTTER than this "rubbing crotch with feet", hehehe. ;) I didn' eatch the 62' version, but I can imagine there's no sexual scenes at all (you know...censorship).
@Elyzater a girl in her mid teens is not a little girl. She's biologically and pshycologically a very young woman. Dominique Swain was in her mid teens back then. A little girl means a girl who hasn't reached puberty or she is in kindergarten, not in highschool.
There should be more movies about this topic/theme. It's like how talking about interracial relationships was so TABOO but now its out and open. Pedophilia is so TABOO and its like nobody is allowed to talk about it. I think we should talk about it much more and realize that its much more common than you think how everyone desires "young girls". "Underage" is just a made term for new legal purposes whereas 100 years ago 14 and 15 yr olds were getting married and having babies all the time.
@Mr1000words I personally can't agree with you more. A Lolita version 2012 would be interesting, of course with an actress in her early teens in the main part.
@Mr1000words yeah so true the world would be mindfucked if they heard the truth how many guys over 30 likes (young girls early woman) for ex 15-16 and above if they had the chance that is.
Almost no one would admit it though but look at prostitution a 40 year old guy doesnt go in and ask for a 30 -40 year old woman thats fo sure.
Most guys in relationships is 5-10 years older and not uncommon 20-30 years or more.
This movie isn't crap. In my opinion it does pretty well in not hiding how truly sick this type of relationship can be. I think one of the most heartbreaking scenes is when a photo of a father hugging his daughter on the wall of Lolita's bedroom.She seemed to really desire a real father figure in her life, not like the kind with Jeremy's character. I think the film is much deeper then it seems at first.
this role of Lolita was practically made for Domanique Swain. Like Vivien Leigh as Scarlet O Hara, it's hard to imagine another actress playing her role.
@Engage777 That's not true. Kubrick's is brilliant because it is the original and Kubrick is just fabulous - but this movie is not crap - it's actually much truer to the book. Due to the time in which the Kubrick film was made, they couldn't be explicit in any way - this film portrays the true relationship between Lolita and Humbert.
The original was biased from the beginning since Kubrick couldn't afford to shot some scenes due to the controversial themes of the novel. And, no offense, but in Kubrick's movie Lolita looks like a young lady and not a little girl which much of jeopardizes the main element of the plot.
I find this movie amazingly loyal to the book and the director actually knows how to exploit and play with scenary and script resources.
Please, do us a favor and stop highlighting the original, thx.
@Harlequinader Interesting, seeing as how Nabokov wrote much of Kubrick's screenplay. Please, do "us" a favor and for the love of God, go take a film class, thx.
I'll revise my original statement: this movie is ABSOLUTE crap.
If you are a fan of Nabokov's book, you may want to check out this new story by a writer who was influenced by his writing. And it's really funny too.
Check out my new book featuring college frat humor, sex-starved spring break vacationers looking for a good time, and an unlikely protagonist who gets embroiled in the seedier side of things of Cancun's dark underworld--That He Did Too: Desperate Writer (Episode One)
I think this is a very important scene! Now you can see more of that she really is having a bad time. Instead of her just saying she hated being with him at the end.
@twilighters111 RE: Comment made by Piccadillyo - HE'S ABSOLUTELY "WRONG". She put "HER" arms around HIM, not "HIS" arms around "HIM" !!! lol That was just STUPID !! LOL
I am currently reading this novel. Its so creepy how he sees all wispy and nubile looking woman as nothing but sex objects to satiate his own perverted desires.
Error de continuidad 2:09 ella del lado izquierdo y en el siguiente plano 2:10 ella del lado derecho! Además la mirada de los personajes no corresponde a la posición del policía según el plano anterior! jaaaa!
@MysticalPopTart He's not her father. He moved into her mother's house as a lodger, then they got married, so technically he is her step father. But he only married the mother so he could stay close to Lo.
So THIS was were the theme of American vs. European sensibiliities and snobbery ended up: in the deleted scenes. It's a running theme in the ones I 've watched so far. Shame they didn't keep it in (along with the more "suggestive" stuff). I love Jeremy Irons but this adaption lacked the edge that the book had.
Ugh I don't blame her. My parents are forcing me to go to some God awful private All-girl's school with dykey bitchy teachers and I hate it so fucking much x(
@vulpecula999 this film adaption is pretty good at following the book's plot! It's missing a lot of the dark humor, but generally speaking it's a rather good adaptation!
The girl has to act like a cock-teasing porn star slut all the way through it because we have to identify with Jeromy Irons' charector wanting to fuck her. However, it looks like she is acting like this deliberately, not by accident, so it makes her charector seem like a fucking insane nympho who needs to be pounded 10 times a day to calm her down.
Still i say..I can spend whole my weekend with her on my bed with her legs over my shoulders and my erected pennis in her heavenly whole and cumming 1000 times inside her till she get tired of screaming!!!
@Piccadillyo because, unlike now-a-days, daughters could be affectionate with their fathers without anybody saying anything. If you read about the 50's it was common for a daughter to admire and almost worship her father, receive him with a kiss when he got back from work and see him as her hero.
Now-a-days, because of novels like Lolita and all the paedophilia panic going on, it's frown upon.
@WestEndDream I know when it was written, and when the boom of paedophilia started. XD The book as influenced a lot of the views people had about a child loving her father, no matter when it was published.
i realy rate this film. i thought it captired the book spot on.jeremy irons is great in this
geobruf123 1 week ago
dominique swain has really nice legs, feet & toes. the kind that look like they'd be great to caress, smell, kiss, lick & nibble on. jeremy irons is one lucky actor.
6n1half 1 week ago
They should do a better version than this. Or at least, find some miraculous way to get rid of this Delores and replace her with someone with an ounce of acting talent.
Toxilicks 2 weeks ago
@Toxilicks I don't think it's the acting that is the problem, it think it's how the character was written. She's acting a very annoyingly written part
TheClassics4 1 week ago
How was Nabokov inspired, really? That is the problem I always asked myself when Iwas passing through the leaves of the book. Might have been so revolutonary @ his time.
MultiPatali 2 weeks ago
Am I alone in really liking the Lolita portrayed here? She's my favourite fictional character of all time, I love her in the book and the film! Didn't like her quite so much in the Kubrick version, but that was a great film in its own right.
ofxxxthexxxflowers 3 weeks ago 2
@ofxxxthexxxflowers No I like her too. i think she is a bit different from the book, but this gives her more character and complexity. While the book gets deep into Hum's mind, the movie explores Lo a little more. And let's be honest, any teenage girl isn't going to be proper like 'book lolita' ALL the time, this movie makes a realistic 14 yr old girl (a very immature and emotionally unstable 14 yr old girl, but still)
TheClassics4 2 weeks ago
She looks like an 18 year old that is stuck in a mental state of 6 years earlier. She looks way too old to be a lolita.
johnnygamer2011 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
silentswan12 4 weeks ago
i love his smile! This movie is the best ever <3
itsmrsmaslow 1 month ago
but Lolita doesn't a nice lady ,anyway,this film creep me out
LIUMEGNLAN 1 month ago
this dude was a total asshole and predator. he only married the mother because of her. he abused her sexually and physical he was a total asshole. i'am attracted to young girl too but i dont pray on them and act out these fantasies. i have no right no one does. if fucks up a kids life they never want it as bad as an adult does.
MrCalculus999 1 month ago
@MrCalculus999 That's not what the novel is about.
stevesg92 1 month ago
Man I would love to fuck her, I need to meet a girl like that.
AssMaster0069 1 month ago
@AssMaster0069 i hope if you do fuck a girl like this you dont abuse like he did. this dude was total asshole my only regret was at the end of the movie he didn't kill himself.
MrCalculus999 1 month ago
This girl suit for this role 100%. well lo from old movie looks boring.
Bosakitti 1 month ago
@Nicky131Popstar The movie put it to 14 years old because of conflict.
BackPeddlingNoob 1 month ago
he actually manipulated her into having sex with him after her mother died by telling her she will be place into the system and by making it seem like he was her only hope. i think the reason y so many people are sympathizing with Humbert is because Jeremy Irons is playing the part and he is very handsome, therefore it does not seem to be wrong. if lolita did not think what he was doing is wrong, then she would have stayed with him not run away in the end.
skutekittens 1 month ago
even if they say he is not a pedo, then he is definitely a perv. the way he was thinking about her made it appear that she was seductive.
skutekittens 1 month ago
this story is written from Humbert's perspective and it's common 4 pedophiles to think their victims were leading them on.
skutekittens 1 month ago 3
check out our bands musical tribute for lolita here on you tube just type DROP DEAD BEAUTIFUL - LOLITA
Thanx =)
mrbatdance 1 month ago
Lolita is not a child in the movie. She looks to be a good 17 years old, possessed of a striking figure and a devilishly haughty teen-age air.Horrible.
She is definitely not a "nymphet˝.
Novel that Vladimir Nabokov wrote is other thing.
greetings from Ukraine!
MrMadamedemontespan 1 month ago
@MrMadamedemontespan The movie had to make it as a 14 year old because of the conflict that was brought up, and the actress was either 14 and or 15 when they started filming this.
BackPeddlingNoob 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrMadamedemontespan 1 month ago
God what terrible acting.
Anon36912 2 months ago 2
"Wanted, wanted: Dolores Haze.
Hair: brown. Lips: scarlet"
why the hell Lo is blonde in the movies?
MarilinMaddie 3 months ago
@MarilinMaddie In this version her hair looks reddish to me, but in the 62 it was blonde.
imnotapsychopath 2 months ago
@imnotapsychopath Yes, here she's like reddish-blonde, but Sue Lyon had a really bright blonde hair.. I don't understand why they haven't dyed their hair a little bit darker! Probably in 62 blonde starlets in cinema were more popular, I don't know :O
MarilinMaddie 2 months ago
this version of the novel is a total failure
MrViTopol 3 months ago
LMFAO bunch of pedos in here.
3366catch 3 months ago
Good thing she was beautiful and sexy, because Dominique Swain couldn't act to save her life.
TIMOTHYSAARINEN 3 months ago 2
she dressed sooo slutty,
LavKiri 3 months ago
It's a *deleted scene for a reason people. This clip does not accurately represent the general behaviour of Lo in this film. They were obviously just experimenting a little. This version is infinitely better than Kubrick's
Talisman09 3 months ago
shes horrifying and stupid and disgusting in this version
elurseeknay 3 months ago
@Chard144
How does she looks like 16 to 20 then? Is it just the makeup or something? O_O
BankaiIchigo12345 3 months ago
@BankaiIchigo12345 American teens look old these days.
must be GMO foods
MrViTopol 3 months ago
oh god she is nothing like this.
t33ngoth 3 months ago
She's gross in this version...
marblejester 3 months ago
My god, what i would give to have her feet in my face
vladimere33 3 months ago
I would fuck her, not sexually, I mean kick her fucking head in
mikemike20202020 3 months ago
Why is this scene deleted? While the character being portrayed is like only 12 in the original story, it's quite obvious the actress playing her is much older than 12. So nothing should have needed to be censored.
BankaiIchigo12345 3 months ago
This scene is terrible :D
walkingSurrealism 3 months ago
2:09 I can't help it, it's disturbing me. Why is the girl's head on the different side of the man's head in that part? It doesn't look like she's changing the side.
Dangerousefck99 3 months ago 3
screw that snitty little bitch...give me that '40 woody and I'll be happy...lol
onepoundpull 4 months ago
she looks like a real lolita.
MyLalinea 4 months ago
I think she's to inmature to have 14 years old... c'mon...
bohemian1967 4 months ago 5
Jeremy irons is a lucky, jammy bastard...I'd love her feet in my face!
sigmasd10 4 months ago
Comment removed
madbandicooot 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this is where this version went wrong. lo was much more sophisticated than this, she was rebellious but SOOO clever and she spoke french and was painfully flirtatious and she'd talk and talk mindlessly about movie stars and celebrities and current this and current that from a 1940s era. she wasnt this foot-in-your-face, snake tongue, blisteringly american-accented, tall& lanky little beotch. this is so not the kind of 'nymphet' the humbert in the novel wouldve been attracted to. epic fail.
RoyaRox1128 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this is where this version went wrong. lo was much more sophisticated than this, she was rebellious but SOOO clever and she spoke french and was painfully flirtatious and she'd talk and talk mindlessly about movie stars and celebrities and current this and current that from a 1940s era. she wasnt this foot-in-your-face, snake tongue, blisteringly american-accented, tall& lanky little beotch. this is so not the kind of 'nymphet' the humbert in the novel wouldve been attracted to. epic fail.
RoyaRox1128 5 months ago
this is where this version went wrong. lo was much more sophisticated than this, she was rebellious but SOOO clever and she spoke french and was painfully flirtatious and she'd talk and talk mindlessly about movie stars and celebrities and current this and current that from a 1940s era. she wasnt this foot-in-your-face, snake tongue, blisteringly american-accented, tall& lanky little beotch. this is so not the kind of 'nymphet' the humbert in the novel wouldve been attracted to. epic fail.
RoyaRox1128 5 months ago 83
@RoyaRox1128 exactly. I'm reading the book at the moment and in the book she's completely different. In the movie she's unintelligent and annoying. Yes in the book Humber also said that he behaviour would be annoying if he wasn't in love with her, but the movie character is truly an epic fail
DeemBrittyGirl 4 months ago 26
@DeemBrittyGirl In the movie shes his little nightmare... in the book its a romeo and juliet ending.
teflondon91 1 month ago
@RoyaRox1128 I totally agree with you. The book never portrayed Lolita to be so annoying. In the book she hardly behaves her age, which is 12 I believe. But in the movie it's painfully obvious she is a 12 year old. The movie was fabulous and all, but nothing can compare to the magic on the actual literature. I couldn't believe how annoying Lo was in this movie. It kind of made it hard to enjoy her character as much as I enjoyed it in the novel.
supahXXbreahna 3 months ago
@RoyaRox1128 actually, I think this quote from the novel contradicts your opinion: "I was not really quite prepared for her fits of disorganized boredom, intense and vehement griping, her sprawling, droopy, dopey-eyed style, and what is called goofing off. . .Mentally, I found her to be a disgustingly conventional little girl. Sweet hot jazz, square dancing, gooey fudge sundaes, musicals, movie magazines and so forth - these were the obvious items in her list of beloved things."
ChristianaVerite 3 months ago 2
@RoyaRox1128 additionally, Nabokov himself has acknowledged enjoying the comparison of Lolita to young America and Humbert to Old Europe, so I find both of their performances to be quite fitting. This Lolita represents America in a wonderful way- gum chewing, in your face, celebrity-obsessing, clever, annoying America.
ChristianaVerite 3 months ago 3
Comment removed
sandubadequeijo 2 months ago
@RoyaRox1128 americanized shtuff
jessicalilac 2 months ago
@RoyaRox1128 wasn't that the entire conflict of the book, that lo was high and low cultured, the juxtaposition of americanised/americana culture and the european nymphet from his youth that humbert wanted her to emulate? epic fail.
hiyarubytuesday 1 month ago
@RoyaRox1128 absolutely...lo was divine..
lostmelancholy 1 month ago
@RoyaRox1128 your the epic fail,her character was great!.it's not like a remake must be made precisely like the original.it's better with little changes or why would someone even make a remake if it has to be identical to the original?u lack logic
geiuy 1 month ago
@geiuy No you've missed the entire point of the novel upon which it's based. Lolita as a nymphet is crucial to the plot.
Macgilleanders 1 month ago
@RoyaRox1128 You're right, but Adrian Lyne had a different vision. He wanted her to be a bratty child. ( I was a lowly prop asst. on this version)
AmberAlley 1 month ago
@RoyaRox1128 "Lolita when she chose, could be a most exasperating brat. I was not really quite prepared for her fits of disorganized boredom, intense and vehement gripping, and what is called goofing off." (177)
Meteorfreak101 1 month ago
@RoyaRox1128 usually films become a little more realistick than novels japan has been influenced by lolita as well and the kids there even if they flirt they still are childish in one way or another
D100J 3 weeks ago
@RoyaRox1128 I'm sorry, but it seems to me that you rather missed the point of the novel. The Lolita we read about is not a real person, but Humbert's horrifically objectified and rose tinted view of her. It's why the novel is a masterpiece; nothing can be taken as the objective truth when it's being told to us by a traumatised psycopath.
MrKeepitunderyourhat 3 hours ago
Pedo bear approves of this film! :D
madbandicooot 5 months ago
if you have watch the hole film its very sick it should be band its these kinda films that create paedophiles
bigste797 5 months ago
@bigste797 You're dumb, a film isn't going to make someone a pedo. paedophiles aren't they're already wired that way.
Hersheychocolate567 5 months ago
What's with her teeth? Ewww!!
lpgurlnj 5 months ago
@lpgurlnj i kinda like the braces :)
ShOwStOpp3rr 5 months ago
@ShOwStOpp3rr Those are braces?! Looks like she has 13 layers of tartar and plaque on her teeth!
lpgurlnj 5 months ago
She's rubbing his crotch with her feet? I don't know if anyone saw the 1962 version with Sue Lyon but there was NO kissing & definitely NO sex scenes. When you watch the film, it's clear that they have a sexual relationship but there was nothing like this. I haven't watched the 1998 version so I don't know what it's like but it looks like they definitely took the 90s approach & put in some obviously sexual images in there...after all, it's a taboo story.
andyrooney12 5 months ago
@andyrooney12 in the movie, there are scenes HOTTER than this "rubbing crotch with feet", hehehe. ;) I didn' eatch the 62' version, but I can imagine there's no sexual scenes at all (you know...censorship).
hernita88 5 months ago
Is this bitch bipolar or something? One minute she's yelling at him, then she's all lovey dovey....what the fuck?!
lpgurlnj 6 months ago
@lpgurlnj ahahaha. watch the full movie and many scenes like this will surprise you...LOL
hernita88 5 months ago
@hernita88 I saw a bunch of scenes and I'm quite surprised by this crazy girl's behavior lmao
lpgurlnj 5 months ago
Pure power and beauty from Dominique.
drewbehr 6 months ago
Lol @ the comments.
Love this movie, And this scene is epic. She is annoying him, And in turn acting her age.
Other then her threatening him (Which she should have gotten slapped for) it is a awesome scene.
Oh yeah, And very nice feet btw.
sandvig1990 6 months ago
@sandvig1990 I LOVE FEET FEMALE
2014and2016Brazil 6 months ago
where i can watch dis in full..
rhey2010 6 months ago
@rhey2010
letmewatchthis. net
charias72 6 months ago
Affss queremos sexo nisso aew u.u
0Havianas 6 months ago
Wait... this scene was DELETED? It's not in the movie?
Double00AA 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I just want to punch that chick in the face for doing that stupid tongue motion. So damn annoying!!
lpgurlnj 7 months ago 46
@lpgurlnj That's the point I guess, she's supposed to look like an annoying little girl
fastos 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are so many feet scenes in this movie. I wonder why
darkfoot 7 months ago 21
@darkfoot
fooot fetish? lol
Rebelchickstar 6 months ago
@darkfoot foot fetish baby!
MrBlahblahgaga 4 months ago
@darkfoot
I find it funny that you say this and your username is darkFOOT.
Morbidchild182 4 months ago
@darkfoot feet ?
itslenibitches 4 months ago
@darkfoot foot fetish.....? ;))
allyob133 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This movie is so disgusting....
ilizashlesingerrocks 7 months ago
They really didn't have to subject a little girl to this. They could've gotten an adult actress who looked younger than her age to play this role.
Elyzater 7 months ago
@Elyzater a girl in her mid teens is not a little girl. She's biologically and pshycologically a very young woman. Dominique Swain was in her mid teens back then. A little girl means a girl who hasn't reached puberty or she is in kindergarten, not in highschool.
lillybellebutterfly1 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lillybellebutterfly1 She was 14 when she auditioned for this and 15-16 when this was taped.
I don't think reaching puberty necessary makes a young girl a woman. She may appear to be one but she is still a child.
I called her a little girl because that's what she appears to be despite of her having tits and getting her period.
Elyzater 7 months ago
This was Bree Olson at her age. She rubbed her bare foot over his block & tackle.
ghostdancer2302 7 months ago
she could play at exorcist movie as well XD
nathiiii19 7 months ago
There should be more movies about this topic/theme. It's like how talking about interracial relationships was so TABOO but now its out and open. Pedophilia is so TABOO and its like nobody is allowed to talk about it. I think we should talk about it much more and realize that its much more common than you think how everyone desires "young girls". "Underage" is just a made term for new legal purposes whereas 100 years ago 14 and 15 yr olds were getting married and having babies all the time.
Mr1000words 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Mr1000words
What about children who aren't old enough to consent?
KneezBees 7 months ago
@Mr1000words Ok, but there is a good reason why pedophilia is taboo. There is a huge difference between 15 and 5...
vintagewhimsy 7 months ago
@Mr1000words I personally can't agree with you more. A Lolita version 2012 would be interesting, of course with an actress in her early teens in the main part.
lillybellebutterfly1 7 months ago
@lillybellebutterfly1 me and Alan Rickman... Yeah I know not possible lol
darkfoot 7 months ago
@Mr1000words yeah so true the world would be mindfucked if they heard the truth how many guys over 30 likes (young girls early woman) for ex 15-16 and above if they had the chance that is.
Almost no one would admit it though but look at prostitution a 40 year old guy doesnt go in and ask for a 30 -40 year old woman thats fo sure.
Most guys in relationships is 5-10 years older and not uncommon 20-30 years or more.
DRock7977 6 months ago
This girl gives me a stiffie. Mmmmmmm.....
schlumbucket 8 months ago
This movie isn't crap. In my opinion it does pretty well in not hiding how truly sick this type of relationship can be. I think one of the most heartbreaking scenes is when a photo of a father hugging his daughter on the wall of Lolita's bedroom.She seemed to really desire a real father figure in her life, not like the kind with Jeremy's character. I think the film is much deeper then it seems at first.
thoserubyslippers 8 months ago
this role of Lolita was practically made for Domanique Swain. Like Vivien Leigh as Scarlet O Hara, it's hard to imagine another actress playing her role.
thoserubyslippers 8 months ago in playlist lolita 3
its not pedophilia...its hebephilia..young girls are very sexy indeed
TheRoyalThoughts 8 months ago
@Christ4lifeJesus not all pedos are the same some prefer young boys
kotraquin 8 months ago
She reminded him of his first love that died.
LitenFlicka 8 months ago
She really is a horrible little brat
cromerbeach 8 months ago
I busted a nut to this video, no lie. This lolita, MY lolita is but a goddess, If only they stayed so perfect
Natziism 9 months ago
Even Pedobear gave up on that shit...
yarden900 9 months ago
in the book she is blond
MrEbsun 9 months ago
@MrEbsun Nope, she's a brunette... with curls and a fringe or something like that
clawler123 9 months ago
@clawler123 yup you are right :D I missed something in the book :D
MrEbsun 9 months ago
the girl from the exorcist hahahaha!!
arrotogenital 9 months ago
This movie is pure crap compared to Kubrick. Do yourself a favor and see the original.
Engage777 9 months ago
@Engage777 That's not true. Kubrick's is brilliant because it is the original and Kubrick is just fabulous - but this movie is not crap - it's actually much truer to the book. Due to the time in which the Kubrick film was made, they couldn't be explicit in any way - this film portrays the true relationship between Lolita and Humbert.
LoDoll 9 months ago
@Engage777
The original was biased from the beginning since Kubrick couldn't afford to shot some scenes due to the controversial themes of the novel. And, no offense, but in Kubrick's movie Lolita looks like a young lady and not a little girl which much of jeopardizes the main element of the plot.
I find this movie amazingly loyal to the book and the director actually knows how to exploit and play with scenary and script resources.
Please, do us a favor and stop highlighting the original, thx.
Harlequinader 9 months ago 3
@Harlequinader Interesting, seeing as how Nabokov wrote much of Kubrick's screenplay. Please, do "us" a favor and for the love of God, go take a film class, thx.
I'll revise my original statement: this movie is ABSOLUTE crap.
Engage777 9 months ago
@Engage777 Kubrick was a genius director but his Lolita sucked. I think this film is a much better interpretation of the book.
OMGitsFay 8 months ago
read the book. fuck the movie. well, not literally, of course.
aidanvinum 9 months ago
i read in psychology that children at the minimum age of 11 are likely to have sexual desires
orchidz89 9 months ago
Seriously, Lo is nuttier than a bag of squirrel shit.
2wingo 9 months ago
If you are a fan of Nabokov's book, you may want to check out this new story by a writer who was influenced by his writing. And it's really funny too.
Check out my new book featuring college frat humor, sex-starved spring break vacationers looking for a good time, and an unlikely protagonist who gets embroiled in the seedier side of things of Cancun's dark underworld--That He Did Too: Desperate Writer (Episode One)
Only 99c!
amazon.com/dp/B004ZSC5YC
TheGrittyNitty 9 months ago
Why is the funniest scene in the show deleted, someone explain please.
xXxLOLxXxMAiDSxXx 9 months ago
I think this is a very important scene! Now you can see more of that she really is having a bad time. Instead of her just saying she hated being with him at the end.
kitsunamii 10 months ago
who cares if this movie is creppy. jeremy irons is sex on legs.. that is all
hateration45 10 months ago
Thanks for posting these! :)
sarah83summers 10 months ago
@twilighters111 RE: Comment made by Piccadillyo - HE'S ABSOLUTELY "WRONG". She put "HER" arms around HIM, not "HIS" arms around "HIM" !!! lol That was just STUPID !! LOL
BMSMUSIC 10 months ago
I am currently reading this novel. Its so creepy how he sees all wispy and nubile looking woman as nothing but sex objects to satiate his own perverted desires.
UncleBobIsAngry 10 months ago
thumbs up if you tried the lolita tongue motions while watching.
youngaria 10 months ago 47
how come hes acting like her father?
supasta3 10 months ago
Error de continuidad 2:09 ella del lado izquierdo y en el siguiente plano 2:10 ella del lado derecho! Además la mirada de los personajes no corresponde a la posición del policía según el plano anterior! jaaaa!
Arrobo03 10 months ago
wait, is she acting all sexual towards her DAD???
MysticalPopTart 11 months ago
@MysticalPopTart He is not her father
hamshankable 11 months ago
@MysticalPopTart He's not her father. He moved into her mother's house as a lodger, then they got married, so technically he is her step father. But he only married the mother so he could stay close to Lo.
becimarie 10 months ago
If you've read the book, you'd know she is the perfect lolita. Especially in this scene.
Lolita is not a sweet, innocent girl. She is just as cruel, strange and twisted as Humbert is.
MoriartysSaloon 11 months ago
she needs to get beaten the shit out of..shes fucking annoying
mgirl1090 11 months ago
@mgirl1090 Agree!
NYtoTX 6 months ago
poor kid shes had such a messed up life shes become violent
KaylaNoelle1 11 months ago
oh my gosh she's so gross in this scene. smacking on that gum and the lizard tongue? ew. why is he attracted to her after something like that? ugh.
ilovekyle12345 11 months ago
I think she's mentally unstable.
uloveshawna 1 year ago
So THIS was were the theme of American vs. European sensibiliities and snobbery ended up: in the deleted scenes. It's a running theme in the ones I 've watched so far. Shame they didn't keep it in (along with the more "suggestive" stuff). I love Jeremy Irons but this adaption lacked the edge that the book had.
ladycontrary725 1 year ago
please check out my lolita tribute video set to kill the director (kill quilty) by the wombats! :)
BergdorfBlondeJulie 1 year ago
the girl is hot and beautiful.... but definitely not the Lolita I imagined when I read the book :(
I used to imagine a little girl, much more innocent, sometimes trying to seduce her man, but still with a strong childish thing.
Sue Lyon fit the character better than her.... just my opinion!
layla99257 1 year ago 11
HAM ALERT!!!!
twooffour 1 year ago
ewwwwwwwwwwwwww..
Bernachaeleeckson 1 year ago
Press 3 and wait. That part is bizarre.
Sleazymush 1 year ago
She Seems A Bit Annoying. >.<
PeninaPoison 1 year ago
Ugh I don't blame her. My parents are forcing me to go to some God awful private All-girl's school with dykey bitchy teachers and I hate it so fucking much x(
tessFranco9 1 year ago
Putting foot on adult's face wasn't very nice!
thekuy00 1 year ago
it's amazing how many of these types of films bear no resemblance to the book whatsoever, but just make money on the schoolgirl/paedophilic ticket
vulpecula999 1 year ago
@vulpecula999 I agree. I think this just bastardized one of Nabokov's art.
morningstarscrew 1 year ago
@vulpecula999 this film adaption is pretty good at following the book's plot! It's missing a lot of the dark humor, but generally speaking it's a rather good adaptation!
becimarie 10 months ago
The girl has to act like a cock-teasing porn star slut all the way through it because we have to identify with Jeromy Irons' charector wanting to fuck her. However, it looks like she is acting like this deliberately, not by accident, so it makes her charector seem like a fucking insane nympho who needs to be pounded 10 times a day to calm her down.
fredericsnooks666 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Still i say..I can spend whole my weekend with her on my bed with her legs over my shoulders and my erected pennis in her heavenly whole and cumming 1000 times inside her till she get tired of screaming!!!
RaisingDick 1 year ago
I don't know why, but it makes me laugh when her voice squeaks @ 1.56, lol.
Can't wait to buy this! Yay! :D
lighthousedreamers 1 year ago
@thefortunatefish OMG are you kidding me?? I could barely tolerate three minutes eight seconds of her!!
MsLittle1105 1 year ago
aaaaaaaaaaaah she's obnoxious and gross!!!
MsLittle1105 1 year ago
She's Simply Fantastic!!
KenneThrasher 1 year ago
why the hell did he say she was his daughter after she put his arms around him :S That was just stupid.
Piccadillyo 1 year ago 13
@Piccadillyo yeah...:) u're absolutely right
TWILIGHTERS111 1 year ago 2
@TWILIGHTERS111 where is Lolita Deleted Scene 4 and 6???
NEWPARANOYD 11 months ago
@TWILIGHTERS111 not really. a lot of young daughters are playful and loving towards their fathers.
becimarie 10 months ago
@Piccadillyo because, unlike now-a-days, daughters could be affectionate with their fathers without anybody saying anything. If you read about the 50's it was common for a daughter to admire and almost worship her father, receive him with a kiss when he got back from work and see him as her hero.
Now-a-days, because of novels like Lolita and all the paedophilia panic going on, it's frown upon.
akissy 1 year ago 19
@akissy Very well said. Bravo. :-)
Bonzostar 8 months ago
@akissy no the book was written in the 50's a paedophillia only got massively overhyped in the media in the 90's. the media controls all.
WestEndDream 8 months ago
@WestEndDream I know when it was written, and when the boom of paedophilia started. XD The book as influenced a lot of the views people had about a child loving her father, no matter when it was published.
akissy 8 months ago