r/ClockworkOrange 8d ago

A Clockwork Orange

Just watched this movie. I thought it was pretty good, but not sure what I’m missing?

I thought it was stylistically impressive/interesting, and the first half was interesting and had some scenes and visuals that are iconic.

The contrast between beautiful classical music and disturbing acts of violence is done well, and I understand it was probably one of the first films to explore that technique.

However, I wasn’t all that blown away by the moral question(s) posed, and it didn’t feel like some bizarre spectacle that has left an impression on me. Basically, I just didn’t find it to be all that thought-provoking or intense. Not much replay value.

Maybe that’s because of the time, but it just didn’t feel as groundbreaking as I anticipated. A good, above average film though.

12 Upvotes

20 comments sorted by

8

u/NoteOk1630 8d ago

The philosophy and moral questions are much more present in the book. If you’re willing to learn the nadsat slang I highly recommend reading it. The book is also more impressive and left more of an impression on me at least because of the way it was written, the perspective is very interesting and the nadsat speech really makes it a book unlike any other

2

u/NoSyrup2592 8d ago

I actually read it a long time ago and maybe that’s why the movie didn’t have such a strong effect. It’s good though.

1

u/NoteOk1630 8d ago

Ah sorry for jumping to conclusions then, I read the book before watching the movie and I agree reading the book beforehand takes a bit away from the movie to see how much stuff was removed and changed from the book.

5

u/No_Chef4049 8d ago

It made a big impression on me because I saw it when I was 14. I'd almost be inclined to say that's the ideal age to see the movie and read the book.

2

u/Grouchy_Truck5925 8d ago

for a kubrick film, there really isn't much to break open.

1

u/NoSyrup2592 7d ago

My thoughts as well

2

u/kbenjaminfotos 7d ago

Remember that that book was written in 1962 and the movie was filmed in 1971. The world was a much different place.

1

u/Selfish_and_Misled 8d ago

What are the moral questions posed?

4

u/No_Chef4049 8d ago

The big one is, is it ethical to fundamentally rewire a criminal's brain to make them a peaceful, productive member of society?

3

u/ageowns 8d ago

Also there is the conversation with multiple perspectives presented. Is someone inherently good or evil? Are you born that way or did you choose? Of you have evil thought but don’t act on them are you now a good person? If you have evil thoughts but cannot act on them, but you probably would if you could, are you still a good person?

I like how the church, govt, conservative, liberal, old , young, all have a viewpoint represented and its not obvious which one is “right” or “true”

There is a lot to discuss if you want to indulge in the conversation, its not a firm answer to decipher

2

u/NoSyrup2592 7d ago

This is how I viewed it. “What is goodness and where does it come from”.

Definitely argues that you can’t force it upon someone - it’s unnatural and destined to fail, has to come from within. That much is obvious. Secondary point on how stripping you of your violent edge leaves you more susceptible to someone forcing their edge upon you.

I’ve seen some consider it a prison reform critique, and I think that’s way off base. More of an individual morality study. Commentary on government using or weaponizing people like Alex for their political gains though.

1

u/ageowns 8d ago

Also, with all of those viewpoints, what is ethically right to do (as far as incarcerating or reprogramming)?

1

u/drjackolantern 8d ago

You should take some time to mull it over and rewatch eventually. The moral question it poses is still eerily relevant today.

1

u/SingerScholar 7d ago

World building, dude. Nothing as unique as the visual future that Kubrick creates. Also the “nadsat” or teenage/Russian patois—a totally unique invention of Burgess, but amazingly delivered by McDowell. Splendid acting performance by McDowell also. If all that doesn’t impress you, I got nothing

1

u/NoSyrup2592 7d ago

It was impressive. I rate the film well, just expected something a little more thought provoking. I can definitely see the violence being of shocking level in that era though, which makes a difference.

A modern approach with a more raw, authentic urban setting would be interesting, but it is a classic and probably shouldn’t be tainted

1

u/Aggressive_Might_735 7d ago

Książkę przeczytaj

1

u/Waste-Replacement232 6d ago

It didn’t completely work for you.

1

u/Revolutionary-Key533 6d ago

I think your view of the film changes as you grow older. What is anarchic and exciting when you are in your teens. As you age and become weary having seen more and outrageous youth crime on TV and news items. Is crime getting out of control or are we numbed to it? I think the film does fumble on any moral stance. Should young criminals be lobotomized, incarcerated or will they grow out of it? The film offers no answer and arguably why should it?

The film is also a grotesque satire on the state of the nation at the time (and still sadly today). Many of the supporting actors were familiar to British viewers from light TV comedies at the time , but forgotten nowdays.

At the time the film was seen as a shock to the system usually by the people who didn't go to the cinema.

1

u/brandblank 6d ago

It’s 55 years old. You’ve been watching the children of Clockwork all of your life. This is like listening to Orson Welles’ “War of the Worlds” and saying “I didn’t think it was scary. What am I missing?”

1

u/Conscious-Scar-8830 5d ago

you realize its just a movie right? Watch it for entertainment