:
Roy Scammell,
Roy Scammell,
Malcolm McDowell,
more...
:
Stanley Kubrick,
Stanley Kubrick
see all cast/crew...
: 
: Warner Home Video
: Cult, Foreign, Science Fiction , Black Comedy, UK
: 137 min.
: English, French
: English, French
see additional details...
This title is currently out of print.
|
|
Stanley Kubrick dissects the nature of violence in this darkly ironic, near-future satire, adapted from Anthony Burgess's novel, complete with "Nadsat" slang. Classical music-loving proto-punk Alex (Malcolm McDowell) and his "Droogs" spend their nights getting high at the Korova Milkbar before embarking on "a little of the old ultraviolence," such as terrorizing a writer, Mr. Alexander (Patrick Magee), and gang raping his wife (who later dies as a result). After Alex is jailed for bludgeoning the Cat Lady (Miriam Karlin) to death with one of her phallic sculptures, Alex submits to the Ludovico behavior modification technique to earn his freedom; he's conditioned to abhor violence through watching gory movies, and even his adored Beethoven is turned against him. Returned to the world defenseless, Alex becomes the victim of his prior victims, with Mr. Alexander using Beethoven's Ninth to inflict the greatest pain of all. When society sees what the state has done to Alex, however, the politically expedient move is made. Casting a coldly pessimistic view on the then-future of the late '70s-early '80s, Kubrick and production designer John Barry created a world of high-tech cultural decay, mixing old details like bowler hats with bizarrely alienating "new" environments like the Milkbar. Alex's violence is horrific, yet it is an aesthetically calculated fact of his existence; his charisma makes the icily clinical Ludovico treatment seem more negatively abusive than positively therapeutic. Alex may be a sadist, but the state's autocratic control is another violent act, rather than a solution. Released in late 1971 (within weeks of Sam Peckinpah's brutally violent Straw Dogs), the film sparked considerable controversy in the U.S. with its X-rated violence; after copycat crimes in England, Kubrick withdrew the film from British distribution until after his death. Opinion was divided on the meaning of Kubrick's detached view of this shocking future, but, whether the discord drew the curious or Kubrick's scathing diagnosis spoke to the chaotic cultural moment, A Clockwork Orange became a hit. On the heels of New York Film Critics Circle awards as Best Film, Best Director, and Best Screenplay, Kubrick received Oscar nominations in all three categories. ~ Lucia Bozzola, All Movie Guide
You might also enjoy:
Romper Stomper
Hate, brutality and controversy -- fun for the whole family!
The Warriors
Walter Hill's cult classic on gangs and lawlessness
2001: A Space Odyssey
Made a few years earlier, Kubrick's one true sci-fi is a head-scratching masterpiece
|
| "I'm just singing in the rain"
by viciouscircle
February 25, 2005 - 1:25 AM PST
|
|
|
4 out of 6 members found this review helpful
|
In my opinion, A Clockwork Orange is Kubrick's finest film and it is one of my personal favorites.
I believe that the movie is neither mysogynistic nor trite. Those unfamiliar with Burgess' novel would do well to read it - and may find a repeat viewing of Clockwork more illuminating, though I feel it stands on its own merits just fine. Like most of Kubrick's work, much goes unsaid. He respects the viewer and does not undermine his message by attempting to give it literal voice and body. It is up to the viewer to consider and construct the message in her own terms and based on her own experience. I, at least, find the film expertly crafted and rich in commentary on politics, society, justice, and the human condition.
Narratively, we follow Alex and his group of three anarchist droogs as they pillage society. After a survey of their violence, including murder and rape (in Alex' own words "a bit of the ultra-violence") Alex is betrayed by his droogs and sent to prison. There he undergoes reconditioning to change him into a civilized being. We come to see that this reconditioning is a patchwork solution at best, and is yet further evidence of a world where crime resides so deep in the subconscious that it cannot be healed.
Thematically, the movie operates on so many different levels, it becomes difficult to summarize. On one hand, this an anti-utopian rendering of an all too possible future. A world where justice is a stopgap solution and violence is not so much a societal ill as a necessary product of a culture so ordered that freedom is non-existent. Thus, only acts of the unthinkable become an expression of free will. In this respect, the movie serves as a warning that extensive societal control can only lead to nihilism. We cannot have one without the other.
On another level, there is a distinct psychological element. The stylized world of Alex is one that we inevitably come to see through his eyes. The stylization of his violence should be simultaneously cathartic and repulsive. It is precisely because of his impulses towards violence that we see Alex as a human being - representing choice and freedom in a world without any. We do not want Alex to be caught. We do not want him to be betrayed. And we do not want him to be reconditioned, though we know according to our logic that this must be done. Through this pathos we personally experience the frustration and emptiness of this world - and we accoringly must confront our own impulses and desires. We are forced into playing out the role of both Alex and this horrific society with neither role offering any comfort. Which is worse, an anarchistic nihilistic killer or a dehumanizing societal order? Or perhaps, they are one and the same?
Stylistically, narratively, thematically, and theatrically this is simply one of the finest films ever made. |
| But... but... the Emperor's got no clothes!
by lividsnails
January 3, 2005 - 7:16 PM PST
|
|
|
7 out of 14 members found this review helpful
|
| I actually agree with the previous reviewer. I always thought this movie was overrated. Maybe my expectations were too high because it's so famous but I expected the movie to say more. Really all it says is that we live in a world of senseless violence. Ok, that's a good start but Kubrick needed to keep going to really say something interesting here. Speculate on why our world is so violent/absurd, for example. He just doesn't go far enough in my opinion. I mean, anyone can make a violent mysogynist film. Maybe for its time in the early 70s it was a real breakthrough but I suspect that this film has gotten so little criticism because people are afraid of being thought prude or something if they didn't like it. I didn't like it and I'm far from prudish. I think Tarantino does a much better job of critiquing our hyper-violent society and the absurdity of violence in Resevoir Dogs than Kubrick does in Clockwork Orange. |
| I don't get this movie
by GreenvilleB
January 2, 2005 - 8:45 PM PST
|
|
|
0 out of 15 members found this review helpful
|
It's about rapists and murderers.
This is appealing?
What is wrong with you people?
|
|
| >> more reviews |
|
GreenCine Member Rating
(Average 7.82)
2079 Votes
add to list 
|
 |
| Crash Course in Classic American Film (30s - 70s) |
|
|
| This list is from Austin360.com's article about Paramont Theatre's Summer Classic Film series. I thought their list and brief descriptions were pretty good so I put it up for all to enjoy. (Of course there isn't room for all the classics on one list.) |
etaviotal
|
|
 |
| The Brits' 100 Favorite Films |
|
|
| The 100 films with the highest attendance in British box office history. (This list reflects the popularity of the films rather than the growing price of movie tickets the way lists of the highest grossing movies do.) |
|
etaviotal
|
|
|
see all lists |
|
|
Your cart
© 2006 All Media Guide, LLC. Portions of content provided by All Movie Guide®,
a trademark of All Media Guide, LLC.