Kubrick’s film simplified the psychological depth and literary nuances of Vladimir Nabokov's 1955 novel, adapting its themes and character dynamics to fit both the cinematic form and the censorship norms of its time. Constrained by the Hays Code and societal taboos of the 1960s, it toned down the explicitness of the sexual elements of the story. The was more overt humor and satire in the film, partly as a way to address the censorship regulations of the time. This approach changes the tone from the intensely personal and tragic to something lighter and more accessible, though still deeply disturbing.

Note that Nabokov was credited as the screenplay writer for the movie (Kubrick is uncredited). https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056193/fullcredits/

The criticism seems pretty fair. Not sure how filmable the book is especially given the constraints of the time.

The constraints of today would be much worse. I'd go so far as saying that making even Kubricks version today would be impossible.

That may be fair. Arguably different constraints. But would probably be pretty radioactive especially with a Lolita at an age faithful to the book.

How does that compare to 1997 "Lolita" with Jeremy Irons?

Well, she is a “nymphette” in the book. That novel is so well written and not even in the author’s native language.

Actually in the book she is really not. She is a 12 year old child being sexualised in the mind of the narrator. She doesn't act seductively, the narrator sees whatever she does in a perverted way.

There is a famous interview on French TV where Nabokov says as much (in French) [0]

[0] https://www.ina.fr/actualites-ina/mon-archive-preferee/mon-a...

I suppose that your interpretation would be dependent on if you are postmodernist or not and if you believe in the death of the author.

I have never read the book or seen the file but the work is very interesting to me as when it get brought up people will start claiming all sorts of things from it.

I think the most insane from my point of view was when I heard/saw(can't remember if online or in person) an argument that all men are perverted and want to rape children. The proof was quotes from Lolita....

I recommend you to read the book, I think that the film doesn't (can't?) do it justice. The book being written from the point of view of the narrator is crucial: the reader is put in the mind of a pedophile (we are told that he is in jail). I also suggest imagining the girl as a child, before puberty at the start of the story.

The case study of Lolita is interesting because there are two competing readings. The fact that the character is often associated to seduction and jailbait in popular culture is arguably symptomatic of a culture of blaming the victims of this kind of crimes. Obviously not all men are perverts but I sometimes wonder if those of us who aren't don't underestimate the number of those who are.

He refers to deviations from the book…I see what you did there…