• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Just watched a Clockwork Orange

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Actually, a pretty common theme in his movies is to use nudity in uncomfortable situations. You see a female body but you find yourself disgusted, it really shows how powerful of a director he was. He takes something traditionally positive and turns it upside down.
Click to expand...
Word. I wanted to whack off to the rape scenes, but there were too many dudes.
 
One of my favorite movies, but definitely not for everyone. In fact I didn't like it at first, but continued watching it due to a school project I had at the time. I read the book later, there are some interesting differences, one of which is that the last chapter was cut from the movie. I wrote a paper back when I was in high school ('97~'98). For those wondering what the hell "clockwork orange" means, and those wondering what was the point of the movie/book, it may prove interesting (though perhaps "schooly"):
http://members.jcom.home.ne.jp/emazur/clockwork.htm
Now it will probably wind up on someone's paper mill, or turned in as an original by the atech high schoolers
 
Originally posted by: Evander
One of my favorite movies, but definitely not for everyone. In fact I didn't like it at first, but continued watching it due to a school project I had at the time. I read the book later, there are some interesting differences, one of which is that the last chapter was cut from the movie. I wrote a paper back when I was in high school ('97~'98). For those wondering what the hell "clockwork orange" means, and those wondering what was the point of the movie/book, it may prove interesting (though perhaps "schooly"):
http://members.jcom.home.ne.jp/emazur/clockwork.htm
Now it will probably wind up on someone's paper mill, or turned in as an original by the atech high schoolers
Click to expand...

Its a decent paper but I do not agree with your conclusions.
 
In what way? I made my conclusions based directly on what Kubrick and Burgess said, and put their quotes in to back it up.
 
Originally posted by: Evander
In what way? I made my conclusions based directly on what Kubrick and Burgess said, and put their quotes in to back it up.
Click to expand...

basically, how is it proved that the mind control techniques used on alex is harmful?

If burgess wanted us to feel that way, he could have used a protagonist with whom it would have been easier to identify with. it is still hard to feel sympathetic for alex because we know that he is an assh[/i]ole to start with. maybe, the viewer/reader even gets a feeling that justice is served,

Probably, burgess may have wanted to convey what you are saying, but if so, he ought to have done it in a more unambigous way.
 
Originally posted by: whitecloak
Originally posted by: Evander
In what way? I made my conclusions based directly on what Kubrick and Burgess said, and put their quotes in to back it up.
Click to expand...

basically, how is it proved that the mind control techniques used on alex is harmful?

If burgess wanted us to feel that way, he could have used a protagonist with whom it would have been easier to identify with. it is still hard to feel sympathetic for alex because we know that he is an assh[/i]ole to start with. maybe, the viewer/reader even gets a feeling that justice is served,

Probably, burgess may have wanted to convey what you are saying, but if so, he ought to have done it in a more unambigous way.
Click to expand...

no doubt alex was an asshole but he was a product of his environment. i think the reason it appeals to teenagers is because, despite the setting, it is a story of youth. while i never went around raping old ladies, i identified with the main character. this is one piece of a larger literary trend suggesting that youth culture was moving into territories that society would be unable to deal with, despite being responsible for its creation.
this has clearly come to pass. with mainstream white, middle-class suburban kids being involved in a subculture not unlike inner-city gang culture (for example, Shakur's Monster)

great book, though. all his stuff was good.
 
Look at the after effects on Alex, he is no longer capable of enjoying his beloved Beethoven music, he is incapable of defending himself when bullied, he has lost freedom of choice in his life, and he tries to commit suicide. Sounds pretty harmful to me. To quote Burgess:
".I am committed to freedom of choice... It is better to have our streets infested with murderous young hoodlums than to deny individual freedom of choice. ...The unintended destruction of Alex's capacity for enjoying music symbolizes the State's imperfect understanding (or volitional ignorance) of the whole nature of man, and of the consequences of its own decisions. We may not be able to trust man- meaning ourselves- very far, but we must trust the State far less"

The assignment was very open ended, simply write some essay on the book, topic didn't matter. I chose why he wrote it, but didn't give my opinion of his thoughts (hey, it only had to be 5 pages, double spaced). I will tell you that I don't completely agree with him personally, and have no desire to allow murderous young hoodlums infesting our streets. I have a "3 strikes and you're out" philosophy when it comes to crime. If someone commits a crime, they are effectively taking something a way from society, and should be punished and atone somehow by giving back to society, be it chain gangs picking up trash from the highway, slaving part of the day away assembling products, or whatever.
But if they repeatly do terrible crimes and don't reform, they should be dealt with by any means necessary, as resources are limited and we can't spend all our energy,time, and money trying to fix someone who may not be capable of being fixed. If mind control was such an available means to end, then so be it. Though Burgess would disagree with me.

I don't think it's unusual for a writer to be ambiguous in his works when presenting his views of social issues. Wizard of Oz is supposed to be filled with social commentary. I don't remember at all what this commentary is supposed to be though. When I watched it I simply considered it to be a fun fantasy movie. I don't think making Alex a more sympathetic character would have made for much interesting reading/viewing. And besides, if Alex didn't do anything bad enough to warrant the Ludivico therapy, then effectively the story would have to be completely rewritten (first half of movie = terrible crimes, second half of movie = paying for the crimes).
 
Originally posted by: Evander
Look at the after effects on Alex, he is no longer capable of enjoying his beloved Beethoven music, he is incapable of defending himself when bullied, he has lost freedom of choice in his life, and he tries to commit suicide. Sounds pretty harmful to me. To quote Burgess:
".I am committed to freedom of choice... It is better to have our streets infested with murderous young hoodlums than to deny individual freedom of choice. ...The unintended destruction of Alex's capacity for enjoying music symbolizes the State's imperfect understanding (or volitional ignorance) of the whole nature of man, and of the consequences of its own decisions. We may not be able to trust man- meaning ourselves- very far, but we must trust the State far less"

The assignment was very open ended, simply write some essay on the book, topic didn't matter. I chose why he wrote it, but didn't give my opinion of his thoughts (hey, it only had to be 5 pages, double spaced). I will tell you that I don't completely agree with him personally, and have no desire to allow murderous young hoodlums infesting our streets. I have a "3 strikes and you're out" philosophy when it comes to crime. If someone commits a crime, they are effectively taking something a way from society, and should be punished and atone somehow by giving back to society, be it chain gangs picking up trash from the highway, slaving part of the day away assembling products, or whatever.
But if they repeatly do terrible crimes and don't reform, they should be dealt with by any means necessary, as resources are limited and we can't spend all our energy,time, and money trying to fix someone who may not be capable of being fixed. If mind control was such an available means to end, then so be it. Though Burgess would disagree with me.

I don't think it's unusual for a writer to be ambiguous in his works when presenting his views of social issues. Wizard of Oz is supposed to be filled with social commentary. I don't remember at all what this commentary is supposed to be though. When I watched it I simply considered it to be a fun fantasy movie. I don't think making Alex a more sympathetic character would have made for much interesting reading/viewing. And besides, if Alex didn't do anything bad enough to warrant the Ludivico therapy, then effectively the story would have to be completely rewritten (first half of movie = terrible crimes, second half of movie = paying for the crimes).
Click to expand...


I agree with most of what you have said above. But, dont you feel that had Alex been an innocent man who was wrongly brainwashed, the impact on the viewer would have been far greater?


 
Originally posted by: virtualgames0
2001 a space odyssey was better imo..
Click to expand...

Different, I don't know about better. I think Clockwork Orange had much more even pacing throughout the movie. I enjoy both.
 
Originally posted by: Evander
One of my favorite movies, but definitely not for everyone. In fact I didn't like it at first, but continued watching it due to a school project I had at the time. I read the book later, there are some interesting differences, one of which is that the last chapter was cut from the movie. I wrote a paper back when I was in high school ('97~'98). For those wondering what the hell "clockwork orange" means, and those wondering what was the point of the movie/book, it may prove interesting (though perhaps "schooly"):
http://members.jcom.home.ne.jp/emazur/clockwork.htm
Now it will probably wind up on someone's paper mill, or turned in as an original by the atech high schoolers
Click to expand...

I do love this quote: "We may not be able to trust man- meaning ourselves- very far, but we must trust the State far less"
As true today as it was whenever he said it.
 
Originally posted by: YOyoYOhowsDAjello
Originally posted by: YOyoYOhowsDAjello
I didn't really like it. I watched it with some guy from my dorm that picked it out and my gf. She stopped watching it after about an hour and the other guy was really into it which kind of freaked me out.
Click to expand...

QFT
Click to expand...

YO! yo YO! Hows DA Jello?!

I laugh every time I read your nic.

And then you quote yourself for truth...
 
Originally posted by: HendrixFan


Actually, a pretty common theme in his movies is to use nudity in uncomfortable situations. You see a female body but you find yourself disgusted, it really shows how powerful of a director he was. He takes something traditionally positive and turns it upside down.

In Eyes Wide Shut, it was being billed as a NC17 porno with Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman. Ive read plenty of reviews where the movie was bashed because it wasnt "sexy". Most every scene with nudity in that movie was disturbing, which f'd with alot of people's heads who went to see a Cruise and Kidman soft porn.

Kubrick's power (IMO) was his ability to use film to convey his ideas to you, without you even thinking about it. In Clockwork Orange, you find yourself disgusted with Alex at the beginning of the movie. Near the end, you find yourself feeling compassion for him, which is something you wouldnt anticipate feeling for him given his previous actions. You dont think, you just "feel" with Kubricks movies while you watch it. And thats what gives you so much to think about after you have watched it.
Click to expand...

Talk about hitting the nail on the head. Nicely done.
 
Originally posted by: aphex
I dunno if i liked it or not.... Definately a very powerful and disturbing movie....

BTW, what is with Kubricks preverse use of nudity in his movies?
Click to expand...

Yeah, he uses it in almost all of his later movies. And it is always twisted in some way.
 
I really like CWO, especially the soundtrack to the movie. For some odd reason I like the 70s synthesized classical music. In fact I've got it playing on the iPod right now at work.
 
Originally posted by: aphex
I dunno if i liked it or not.... Definately a very powerful and disturbing movie....

BTW, what is with Kubricks preverse use of nudity in his movies?
Click to expand...


FMJ and Dr. Strangelove don't have nudity...those two and CWO are the only 3 of his I've seen though.
 
I agree with most of what you have said above. But, dont you feel that had Alex been an innocent man who was wrongly brainwashed, the impact on the viewer would have been far greater?
Click to expand...

Perhaps. Punishing an innocent man can certainly have a strong impact on the viewer. Two movies that come to mind are The Hurricane and Green Mile. But let's go to this quote from Burgess:
"it sincerely presented my abhorrence of the view that some people were criminals and others not. A denial of the universal inheritance of sin is characteristic of Pelagian societies like that of Britain, and it was in Britain, about 1960, that respectable people began to murmur about the growth of juvenile delinquency and suggest (that the young criminals) were a somehow inhuman breed and required inhuman treatment... There were irresponsible people who spoke of aversion therapy... "

A possible interpretation of Burgess' point of view is that Alex may have been judged guilty of a crime, but far worse- he was judged guilty of being human. We are all human, and if you want to judge Alex, then be prepared to be judged yourself. If not for a crime, then perhaps some other sin, or shortcoming, or guilty pleasure. You may well consider yourself innocent, but the state may judge you otherwise
 
Originally posted by: whitecloak
Originally posted by: Evander
Look at the after effects on Alex, he is no longer capable of enjoying his beloved Beethoven music, he is incapable of defending himself when bullied, he has lost freedom of choice in his life, and he tries to commit suicide. Sounds pretty harmful to me. To quote Burgess:
".I am committed to freedom of choice... It is better to have our streets infested with murderous young hoodlums than to deny individual freedom of choice. ...The unintended destruction of Alex's capacity for enjoying music symbolizes the State's imperfect understanding (or volitional ignorance) of the whole nature of man, and of the consequences of its own decisions. We may not be able to trust man- meaning ourselves- very far, but we must trust the State far less"

The assignment was very open ended, simply write some essay on the book, topic didn't matter. I chose why he wrote it, but didn't give my opinion of his thoughts (hey, it only had to be 5 pages, double spaced). I will tell you that I don't completely agree with him personally, and have no desire to allow murderous young hoodlums infesting our streets. I have a "3 strikes and you're out" philosophy when it comes to crime. If someone commits a crime, they are effectively taking something a way from society, and should be punished and atone somehow by giving back to society, be it chain gangs picking up trash from the highway, slaving part of the day away assembling products, or whatever.
But if they repeatly do terrible crimes and don't reform, they should be dealt with by any means necessary, as resources are limited and we can't spend all our energy,time, and money trying to fix someone who may not be capable of being fixed. If mind control was such an available means to end, then so be it. Though Burgess would disagree with me.

I don't think it's unusual for a writer to be ambiguous in his works when presenting his views of social issues. Wizard of Oz is supposed to be filled with social commentary. I don't remember at all what this commentary is supposed to be though. When I watched it I simply considered it to be a fun fantasy movie. I don't think making Alex a more sympathetic character would have made for much interesting reading/viewing. And besides, if Alex didn't do anything bad enough to warrant the Ludivico therapy, then effectively the story would have to be completely rewritten (first half of movie = terrible crimes, second half of movie = paying for the crimes).
Click to expand...


I agree with most of what you have said above. But, dont you feel that had Alex been an innocent man who was wrongly brainwashed, the impact on the viewer would have been far greater?
Click to expand...


It would certainly impact the audience in a different way, but the choice to make Alex a thug was intentional, and the subsequent intended impact then is different.

As I touched on a few months back in this thread, I was most amazed by the fact I felt compassion for Alex. Thoughtfully and logically I wouldnt feel anything, I would say he is getting what he deserves. I still feel that to this day. However, while watching the movie, I was taken out of my logical mode and felt compassion. Why? I still dont know. That is one of the more haunting things about this movie, and it certainly wouldnt be the case if he was innocent.

I personally feel that the true villian in the movie is society. That Alex is a product of his society (parents not watching over him, not instructing him or teaching him). He commits a crime and society "punishes" him for it. Alex's crime was imposing his will on others, through rape and assault. Alex get the same in turn when society's will gets imposed on him. But, just like Alex, society is unrepentant. Alex hasnt changed because of the "treatment", he isnt a better person. He is just physically unable to do wrong, but the motivation and desire is still there. To further stress this point, the "treatment" also inadvertantly impacts him during Beethoven's Ninth. He feels the same illness during Beethoven as when thinking of committing a crime.

In the end, the Prime Minister reverses the treatment and sets him free. Why? Because he was never concerned about reforming criminals. He proves this because he is faced with a realization that the treatment doesnt quite work, but he defends it anyway. He then lets Alex get off with the treatment reversed, and he is free to committ heinous acts again and again. He hasnt been "cured", but the Prime Minister is only concerned with society believing he has been cured.

By making him a criminal and putting him through the wringer, the statement is made that people dont care about the dregs of society. They dont care that prisoners get reformed, that people are made better. They just pay lip service to that fact and then go on their way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top