A Clockwork Orange

<<

Catching Up

>>

"What in the hell IS A Clockwork Orange, anyway?" was the question I had to ask before going into this. Surely, there had to be some explaination within the film, but there really wasn't. I finally Googled it after watching, and came across something to suggest that the term has to do with a person who bears the appearance on a lively and colorful organism, but is really a "clockwork" toy to be wound up by "God, the Devil or the Almighty State". Upon viewing the film and figuring out what the title actually meant, things made a lot more sense.

Our story follows young Alex (Malcolm McDowell) who spends his free time with his "droogs", Georgie, Dim and Pete (James Marcus, Warren Clarke and Michael Tarn, respectively) as they go around living life on the edge, primarily getting their kicks from putting others in danger, be it by driving way too fast on a narrow road, or simply breaking and entering to perform some... shall we say... harsh and disturbing musical montages? Alex also leads with a sort of iron fist, making things go his way, whether his droogs like it or not. At some point, Alex gets caught and sentenced to 14 years of prison for murder, as his friends double-cross him.

While in prison, Alex learns about a new method of rehabilitation that would cure him of his own mind, and ensure that he wouldn't come back to prison ever again. However, after being subjected to the procedure and set free, Alex finds life on the outside not entirely welcoming. By the way, yes, the process is the famous scene involving Alex's eyes being forced open to watch horrible things on a movie screen - a scene that has been parodied in a number of different things.

So, how did I like it? First, I wanna just talk about McDowell in this. His performance consists of so much range here, it's actually kind of amazing. There are strangely enough a few times one may even sympathize with the character, even though society sees him as the worst kind of monster. His psychopathic look (like he gives in the corresponding picture there) is very reminiscent of Anthony Perkins' look from 'Psycho', and that's the character you pretty much end up taking away from the film. But there are moments he engages in rather serious conversation, cries, even shows tremendous fear. In my opinion, he was very overlooked for the Oscars that year.

The film was still nominated for 4 Academy Awards, which included Best Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay and Film Editing, but sadly never managed to carry home a single one. Nowadays, the film stands as a sort of cult symbol of film, with its fans mostly appreciating what I appreciated about it - Alex, himself. He has this sort of sadistic charm that can't really be explained. You like him for the same reasons you like The Joker, or perhaps a better comparison, Hannibal Lecter.

The only real problem I had with it was a bit of the language barrier. I thought I was pretty good at determining old slang, but this takes things to a whole new level with "Nadsat", which is composed of Slavic (mainly Russian), English and Cockney rhyming slang. He narrates the story with this, and I was often found trying to figure out just what some of the words meant - not the least of which was "droogs".

In the end, I have to admit to enjoying this enough to know that I'll be revisiting it one day. For as uncomfortable as it can get, there's just this certain intrigue that comes from following the mind of a psychopath. Further to that point, it's intriguing to see the mind of a psychopath at it's most vulnerable as well. On top of that, it's just visually well filmed with an interesting score of synthesizers and Beethoven, setting a mood as only Kubrick can. It's the kind of movie I enjoyed, but could grow on me with multiple viewings. Also, Alex is now probably somewhere in my Top 10 all-time movie villains list now. So there's that. I give the following rating with great enthusiasm.

4/5

---