Only one film can be considered "perfect".

Rating: 10/10 (7 August 2005)

And this is it.
What can a mere mortal say about this film? Stanley was a god among men, and this was without question his defining work. This story (not to mention his numerous other marvelous works) also cements Anthony Burgess's place as one of the greatest authors of the period. Honestly, if this film doesn't reach into the core of your being and make you think about what you are, there is nothing that will.
Burgess's story and Kubrick's vision are unmatched; a completely uninhibited and unfettered look at what makes a man and how fragile his humanity is. We can thank Burgess for bringing the viciousness and helplessness of humanity to light, and we can thank Kubrick for bringing it to our attention.
From the haunting scene of Alex in the milkbar to the ashamedly thrilling scene of Alex in his own personal heaven, Kubrick captures the very best and the very worst of what defines us as humans. The animalistic nature of man is presented beautifully among Alex and his droogs through the fight with Billy Boy and his droogs, the rape of the author's wife, and the murder of the cat lady.
Even more brutal is the attempt at Alex's reform, and that's where the message of the story and the film begin to make the reader/viewer sympathetic to the brutal force that is Alex. Until the realization of Alex's torture at the hand of the government it is impossible to sympathize with Alex's behavior, as it is simply despicable. But, more despicable is his reform -- death would have been a more humane punishment.
To try and explain or review the film is ultimately unfruitful. Each viewer will have his or her own takeaway, and it will either be revelation or disdain. It's simply a story that must be viewed with an emotional detachment to be accepted, and an emotional attachment to be understood. Thus, it's a film far too difficult for those unable to make the connection and disconnection simultaneously.
Kubrick's genius does justice to Burgess's own, and I'm left saddened that the two never directly collaborated. One can only imagine what the fruit of a collaboration similar to Kubrick and Clarke's on 2001 would have been. For that matter, one can only be disappointed by the omission of the 21st chapter of Burgess's work, but you must also wonder what the cost to the film version would have been, had Kubrick been made aware of the chapter. Honestly, I can't imagine the film being better than it is, nor is the novel complete without the view into the life of a mature Alexander de Large.
Perfection comes along a great once in a while. This is the very definition of the word, and I think that this film serves to segregate those who "get it" from those who don't.