Lolita

IT SEEMS TO BE QUITE AMUSING THE WAY THAT SO MANY PEOPLE GET SO

BENT OUT OF SHAPE ABOUT A MOVIE NOT FOLLOWING A BOOK EXACTLY.

THAT IS THE BEAUTY OF PROSE, AND THE WONDER OF CINEMA. WHY

SHOULD THERE BE A WORD FOR WORD VISUALIZATION OF SOMETHING

THAT ALREADY EXISTS QUITE HAPPILY? LOLITA IS A COMPELLING

NOVEL, A FASCINATION READ; IS IT WRONG FOR AN ARTIST SUCH AS

KUBRICK, OR ANYONE ELSE TO SUCCEED IN CREATING THAT AWESOME

WORLD OF HUMBERT AND THE HAYES LADIES? IS IT IMMORAL FOR YET

ANOTHER ARTIST TO COME ALONG AND WANT TO DO IT AGAIN, HIS WAY?

OF COURSE NOT. AND IF, FOR INSTANCE, A STUDENT LONGED TO ADAPT

LOLITA TO A THESIS, WOULD HE BE CRITICIZED? WELL, IN THE LAST

INSTANCE, PROBABLY, BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ENOUGH FAITH TO GO

AROUND FOR ALL STUDENTS TO TAKE ON A PROJECT SUCH AS THAT. BUT

THAT'S JUST THE POINT, ISN'T IT? WHY SHOULDN'T THAT STUDENT GO

ON WITH HIS IDEAS AND MAKE THE FILM HE WANTS TO? WHO HAS THE

ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY TO SAY THAT HE WON'T BE ABLE TO PULL IT OFF,

OR THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING HE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON RIGHT NOW?

IT'S A RECOGNIZED STORY THAT WILL GUARANTEE AT LEAST A LITTLE

BIT OF ATTENTION.

THERE ARE INFINITE POSSIBILITIES IN ART. CINEMA, PAINTING, WRITING,

PHOTOGRAPHY, THEY YIELD SUCH AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF FOCUS,

AND TALENT, AND DECISION; NONE REPEATS ITSELF.

WHEN INTERPRETATIONS ARE BRAINSTORMED, AND FINALLY REALIZED,

THAT IS SOMEBODY'S ACHIEVEMENT, HOWEVER PERFECT OR IMPERFECT

IN RELATION TO THE ORIGINAL. THERE ARE CRITICS WHO BELIEVE THAT

MASTERPIECES ARE MEANT TO BE WHAT THEY ARE, AND THAT REMAKES

ARE NOT WORTHY OF THEIR TITLES. BUT HOW CAN THIS BE, WHEN THERE

ARE SO MANY THINGS NEW, AND SO MANY IDEAS STILL UNPRODUCED?

TIME, ERAS, OUR PERSONAL EVOLUTION, GIVE US SO MUCH TO LOOK

BACK ON, TO PONDER AND QUESTION. YOUNG ADULTS TODAY WILL

READ LOLITA, AND WATCH THE FIRST MOVIE, AND THEN THE SECOND,

...