Gratuitous violence

Rating: 1/10 (21 January 2012)

Someone needed to tape my eyes open just so I didn't fall asleep during this movie. If I could give this movie zero stars, I would, no let me take that back, if I could give this movie negative stars I would. The crux of the story is really a question, does being good count if you didn't choose to be good out of your own free will? Everything is quite blunt to the point of literally being stated. Everything is done to the extreme to emphasize the question. You can't just be kind of bad here, you have to be a raving psychotic killer and rapist, no nuance. The simplicity combined with the pacing made the movie quite boring. The question at the center of the movie also didn't fully sing since it is being asked about a psychopath - to me it didn't matter if his motivation for being good is the right one or if his free will has been taken away because his free will should be taken away by the prison system. He shouldn't be allowed back into society. And even what should be the purpose of prison isn't really explored, is it rehabilitation, punishment, or sequestering those unfit to live in society? The question at the heart of the movie would have been more interesting if it were asked about someone who is good only out of fear of say the law or God. Let me add, I know this is a book but I haven't read it.
Even without this next complaint, I didn't think the movie was good. This is why I would give it negative stars. What I really hated was how the violence towards women was presented. The rape scenes are quite graphic with out conveying the gravity of situation. They had too much of a light feel and the movie seemed to not just enjoy them at times but revel in them. The first rape scene of a woman just being tossed around as a group of men tear her clothes off verged on comical when it should have been repulsive. I just felt that rape was too serious an issue to be treated so lightly. Not to mention those horrible mannequins (which I could have lived with and maybe even appreciated if the actual women in the movie weren't also just props)? Being a morality play, women are only present as an object of violence. Edit: If you think I'm seeing something that isn't there, Kubrick said how Alex, the main character, "represents the id, the savage repressed side of our nature which guiltlessly enjoys the pleasures of rape."