Intellectual... or just confusing?

Rating: 5/10 (26 March 2002)

I often enjoy movies that comment on society and the nature of man, and I loved other Kubrick flicks like Full Metal Jacket and The Shining, with Dr. Strangelove being possibly my favorite movie of all time. I was anxious to see this one, having heard it praised as a true masterpiece, and I must admit I was quite disappointed.
*** SPOILERS AHEAD ****
A lot of people who praise this movie say that it raises the question of whether Alex is truly reformed after his treatment or not. Frankly, I don't see how that's a question at all... to me, he was obviously not the least bit reformed, and only restraining himself because of the "punishment" he would receive if he acted out.
Another point often brought up is the disturbing, shocking, nature of the film, and the effect is has on the viewer, but frankly, by today's (2002) standards, the violence is hardly anything special, and the sex only a bit less so. Silly, pointless movies like "The Cell" have disturbed me a lot more than this one.
Many particular elements of the movie didn't sit well with me. The "sickness" that violence or sex induces in Alex during the second half of the film is really quite silly, it mostly consists of him holding his head and burping repeatedly. Even Alex himself describes it as, to paraphrase, "the feeling that something horrible is going to happen to me". So... this punishment makes you paranoid? That's it? I imagine the scene where he's locked into a room and forced to listen to Beethoven (which induces the same sickness) was supposed to make you feel badly for him, but the ridiculous nature of this sickness made it more comical than anything to me. I kept wondering why he doesn't just stuff something in his ears, or break the door down (it looks like a very flimsy door). I realize that you can similarly question any movie, but I wouldn't have noticed these things if I hadn't been, by that point, pretty bored.
Some elements of the movie particularly baffled me. There are many things that flat out SCREAM "Look, I'm symbolic for something!", but for the life of me I can't figure out what. Why does Alex's mother (and later the psychiatrist) have purple hair? Why does the same elderly mother wear outfits of red leather and thigh high boots? Why does the gang that Alex's group fight in the beginning wear Army uniforms? Why is there such a strong homosexual innuendo (Alex's teacher grabbing his crotch early on, the chaplain making a pass at him, the old man at the end living alone with a young man, etc) throughout the film?
One thing that confused me in particular, and this is an element most viewers will miss, is that the movie often uses Russian words. I notice only because I know Russian, as the words are easy to figure out through context. Alex and his friends go to a "Moloko" (Russian for 'milk') bar. Alex repeatedly uses "Malchik" (Russian for 'boy') to describe young men. Same with "Devochka" (Russian for 'girl') to describe the women. Near the end, Alex talks about eating "Lomtiks" (Russian for 'slice' or 'piece', usually in reference to food) of bread. As this movie is made during the height of the Cold War, is this some sort of attempt to associate Alex's mindless sex and violence with Russian culture?
I can see no real message to this movie, besides that the treatment that Alex was given obviously doesn't work. But I fail to see any sort of point to that message, as this treatment obviously doesn't exist. If the message is against psychiatric rehabilitation in general, as opposed to incarceration, I don't think it makes the point very well, considering that the few years Alex spends in prison don't even seem all that bad, and certainly don't change him. He says that he endures horrible beatings from the guards, all we ever see him do in prison is sit around, fantasize about sex/violence and quote the bible to please the chaplain. If the film was supposed to comment on how ineffective rehabilitation in general is, I don't see why there's an attempt in the second half of the movie to make Alex a sort-of sympathetic character. Shouldn't it show him as the monster he still is?
I talked about this movie with a friend earlier, and he pointed out to me that at the time this film was released, the violence and sex was probably most shocking, and that there was a heavy movement towards psychiatric rehabilitation of prisoners at the time. If that's true, then this is simply a reactionary period piece, dealing with one very particular issue.
Don't get me wrong, this is by no means a very bad movie. But I can't really say it's a very good movie either, and certainly doesn't compare with other Kubrick films that I've seen. This is by no means a classic, as it fails on the one crucial test: it does NOT, at least for me, stand the test of time. I give this movie a 7/10 for the first half of the film (up to the part where Alex goes to prison), which is surreal and often darkly hilarious, and 3/10 for the rest of it, which I found boring, lacking in coherence, and, frankly, often quite silly and overdone. That averages out to 5, which is, I think, the right score for this movie.
NOTE: I have NOT read the book, but if I can't understand this movie without reading the book first, it is, IMO, simply another flaw of the film.