Reading Lolita in Tehran: Film Review

Eran Riklis’s Reading Lolita in Tehran is a well-intentioned and superbly acted but ultimately conventional drama based on real events.

It’s all very interesting, despite being conveyed in a rather conventional and at times disappointing way.

Reading Lolita in Tehran begins right after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, with a young couple, college professor Azar (Farahani) and Bahir (Reza Diako), returning to Iran with the hopes of finally being able to live as part of a democracy. Unfortunately, they soon realise things aren’t as ideal as they would’ve wanted, as Azar sees young protestors from her university being arrested after a protest. Soon enough, the government makes it mandatory for all women to wear a hijab, something she is not comfortable with.

Azar eventually decides to quit her job at the university, and after a jump to the early nineties, we see her making a bold decision: to start a secret book club with her all-female students, centred on classics of Western literature. As she starts to interact with them, though, she realises this kind of small revolution might not be enough to fix things. After all, women like Sanaz (Zar Amir) are being beaten by their husbands just for leaving the house once a week, and others, like Nassrin (Mina Kavani), are contemplating leaving the country. In fact, Azar herself is considering getting out of Iran, something that Bahir doesn’t fully agree with.

Essentially, Reading Lolita in Tehran is all about Azar and her struggles against an oppressive government; one that doesn’t believe in freedom of expression, women’s independence, or the questioning of traditions or religion in general. It’s interesting to see her, for example, having discussions with a male student who happens to be a religious fundamentalist and who gets angry whenever they have to read supposedly “immoral” texts in class. He’s the kind of person who cannot separate a fictional character’s motivations or characteristics from a novel’s message, and she is, of course, someone who enjoys questioning authority and thinking about the complexities of literature.

Reading Lolita in Tehran also makes it clear that, to some extent, Azar acts like this because she’s been Westernised. She’s lived in the United States, and her classes focus exclusively on books such as the titular Lolita, but also The Great Gatsby, Daisy Miller and Pride and Prejudice. The movie doesn’t end up being about a conflict between East and West, though, nor does it demonise every aspect of Iranian culture. What Marjorie David’s screenplay does is use these classics as a form of expression for Azar and as a way for her students to realise there are other ways of thinking; other cultures, with different dances, different philosophical concepts, and, of course, different ways of seeing women as part of a society.

Ultimately, the film is about being a woman in twentieth-century Iran. About having to wear a hijab, being unable to walk around the city with a male friend, being tortured for unproven crimes, being mistreated by their husbands, having to hide in order to read whatever books they want. Reading Lolita in Tehran is about oppression and about the idea that there should be a separation of religion and state. Azar isn’t against religion; as she says, her grandma, whom she loved very much and respected, was a devout muslim, and even some of her students are also religious. She is against women being treated as lesser citizens, and against religious rules being enforced and protestors being captured, tortured and executed.

Now, all of this might make Reading Lolita in Tehran sound quite revolutionary and potent, but the sorta-bad news is that it really isn’t. All those themes are conveyed through a rather conventional narrative, which doesn’t include a particularly strong personal conflict for Azar. Yes, the society she lives in is quite oppressive for women, but she herself doesn’t deal with anything too torturous; she sees the consequences of being a woman in Iran in her students and other people, but I believe the story would have worked better if she had really suffered through the consequences of her actions and choices. I know this might be due to David’s script being faithful to Nafisi’s novel, but making changes to source material is always valid as long as they are respectful to its overall tone.

Moreover, Riklis’ workmanlike direction robs the story of some of its potential emotional power. Cinematography and camerawork are quite flat and uninteresting, and the decision to include weird time jumps, with the story going from the late seventies to the nineties and then back to the eighties, makes the whole experience feel more confusing than emotionally rewarding. The performances are quite good though, with Golshifteh Farahani shining as a resilient, intelligent and kind Azar. She portrays the literature professor as someone who battles her constant nightmares and guilt with a desire to do good, convey knowledge and, to the best of her ability, help her students. Azar’s friendship with a bookworm colleague also manages to make her a bit more interesting and complicated.

Reading Lolita in Tehran is an interesting film. On the one hand, it does feel well-meaning, as it adapts its source material as a drama with a well-defined protagonist, a believable recreation of seventies and eighties and nineties Tehran, and relevant themes of feminism, sexism, freedom, religious extremism and authoritarianism. But on the other hand, the movie as a whole feels terribly conventional and has been directed with very little energy and a questionable structure. Nevertheless, Reading Lolita in Tehran still works; maybe not as emotionally as it could have, but at least on an intellectual level.

Reading Lolita in Tehran will be released in theaters in New York on July 10, 2026 and in Los Angeles on July 17, followed by a nationwide release. Read our review of Inside Amir (Daroon-e-Amir)!