Agnes Cziffra
If someone asked me what my favorite movie was, I wouldn’t even think for a second but say: A Clockwork Orange. If they asked me why, I would rather show them the film than say a single word. However, I am writing a film review now, so I ought to say a few words about this masterpiece.
A Clockwork Orange is a film all movie fanatics have heard of. It was directed by Stanley Kubrick, and saw the big screen first in 1971. It is based on Anthony Burgess’s groundbreaking novel entitled A Clockwork Orange. The film follows the plot and dialogue of the book so well that the novel could be taken as its script. The plot itself is divisive among people, as it is full of sex and violence. After it came out, young people were thought to be influenced badly by the film, so Kubrick asked Warner Brothers to withdraw it. It was released again only in 2001, after Kubrick had died.
The main idea of the story is that the government makes criminals good by a torturous technique, the so-called Ludovico technique. This literally prevents them from doing bad – even killing a fly – as they experience severe pain whenever they think of doing harm. This brings up the idea behind the title of the movie; a clockwork orange? What does that mean? We get to understand it from the film.
The movie starts out with a bright orange background indicating the title of the film, while loud instrumental music introduces the viewer to the actual story. In the very first scene, we see a close-up shot of the main character, Alex (Malcolm McDowell), then the camera slowly extends to show his crew: Pete, Georgie and Dim. The first thing that will surprise the viewer is the language. As Alex starts to introduce us to his droogs and give us some basic background information, he is speaking this weird language called nadsat. It is a mixture of English and Russian, and gives a unique vibe to the extraordinary setting. All this, with the effect of loud and distorted music gives the first scene a very grotesque feeling. This feeling passes along the whole movie. For instance, in one scene when this Ludovico vesch is being done to Alex, his eyelids are strapped to his head, making him unable to blink. Meanwhile a doctor is monotonously putting eye drops into his eyes so that they do not get dry. Malcolm McDowell’s acting is amazing throughout the whole movie, but especially in this scene. The mixture of his disgusted facial expression and the monotonic movements of the doctor gives this scene a grotesque, chilling vibe.
As the film progresses, we witness the taboos of the 70’s that the director breaks, like nudity, rape and even the simplest objects shown in a sexual way; ranging from popsicles through posters to a genital shaped sculpture. We also see a lot of violence; ultra violence as Alex refers to it. We get asked about the morality of what we witness on the screen, which gives a high level of intellect to an otherwise empty work of violence.
The movie and the ideas it represents are either ironic or controversial. Firstly, the film contains quite a lot of interesting plot twists, all of which I found very ironic. They made me shiver with anticipation, looking forward to how the story would take its next turn. Secondly, controversy can be found in the way we feel about Alex, who is an evil wrongdoer. Contrarily, we get to see the human in a person who acts inhumanely, which makes us feel connected to him. I was heartbroken when Alex couldn’t do the one thing he truly enjoyed –besides being violent – listen to Ludwig van Beethoven. His whole being is contradictory: he’s smart and can talk like a gentleman, yet he commits crimes and chooses to speak nadsat.
When we look back on the film as a whole, we might notice that we have learnt to feel sorry for a young criminal who we would condemn in the first place (well, if you’re not a psychopath). When I first thought of this, I felt like a puppet. How could I feel sympathy for a fearless criminal? It’s just nonsense. But Kubrick made me feel sorry for Alex; he made my heart ache for him. He brings out every positive characteristic of Little Alex; such as his quick thinking, sophisticated taste in classical music and mindfulness. He wants to make Alex look like a kid, not a viscous murderer.
Age is another factor of what is shocking in this film. Alex is only fifteen when he does these horrible things (and suffers other horrible things). The movie could also be interpreted as a conflict between the younger, rebellious generation and the older generation. We see numerous scenes of conflicts between youngsters and the elderly, including fights fought with kicks and punches, and verbal debates. However, it is up to the audience to decide whose idea they support.
In conclusion, this movie is full of action and moral questions of the age. It is far more than plain violence, as it makes the viewer feel something and try to answer those questions of morality. Yet, this all happens in an exciting and entertaining manner, while the visuals meet the expectations of the time. In one word, this movie is a must-see, but only if you’re above sixteen!
(2017)