Hmmmmm ....

Rating: Null/10 (21 February 2003)

I have always been puzzled by the cultish fan base this film has inspired. Yes, it is one of the truly great films, but you don't see many of the others on the list--CITIZEN KANE or CASABLANCA, for instance--drawing such a passionate crowd.
At this point in the game, it seems a waste of time to discuss the plot, although I will touch on it briefly. The real genius of the film, I think, comes from author Anthony Burgess and his wonderful little allegorical tale about a society so obsessed with order that it will deny its subjects the freedom to make a conscious choice over good and evil. I especially like the complete draft of Burgess's novel, with a final chapter in which the "cured" Alex reaches a point where he realizes it's time to start choosing good. But Kubrick's film--based on a draft of the novel that didn't include this chapter--doesn't go that far.
Why are people amazed by ORANGE? Perhaps it is because it took so many daring chances for 1971, touching on levels of violence that today seem tame. Perhaps it is because Kubrick, originally a photographer, has such an amazing visual style that we're willing to forgive his deficiencies as a storyteller (I've always loved the look of Kubrick films if not the flow; the moment in ORANGE when Alex brutalizes his "droogs" in slo-mo is still haunting and beautiful). Or perhaps, as I have argued many times, it is because of the charming performance by Malcolm McDowell as Alex, a rogue so affable that it is easy for us to forget he is a villain (I first saw this when I was 16 and was shocked years later to see Alex listed in a book of great movie villains).
I do enjoy this film and reccommend it to all film buffs, but I am concerned by its fan base. Those fans I have met seem to be more in tune to its violence--violence made more palatable because the enchanting McDowell commits it--and many of them mistakenly think Kubrick advocates the use of force through this film. Nothing could be further from the truth, but this is the risk one runs when elevating acts of terror to an art form.
This film is like a lush, gorgeous painting of the planes hitting the Towers on 9/11--it has great aesthetic value but unless you understand the context the message may be lost on you.