Product: A Clockwork Orange (1972)
Rating: 1.0
Kubrick Overreaches In Tale Of Young Thug In Future
In all honesty, I wanted to give Clockwork Orange zero stars, but there can be no denying the effectiveness of Malcolm McDowell's performance or of Stanley Kubrick's presentation. They present the film's story with tremendous effect.Therein lies what makes the film horrible. McDowell plays Alex, a thug who spends his days raping, robbing, and otherwise violating the lives of innocent people. He is arrested and subjected to a government experiment to make thugs into clockwork oranges - drugs and hypnosis rob Alex of his aggression and make him repelled by sexuality, and thus unable to commit any further crimes. But the experiment blows up in the face of the government; by robbing Alex of his aggression, they've also robbed him of his ability to defend himself, so when his victims come calling, you don't have to imagine the vengeance they exact. Thus horrified, the government turns Alex back to his normal degenerate self.There is supposed to be a moral lesson here, but we're not sure what it is. Kubrick establishes Alex as a worthless punk, but we are meant to be more horrified that he would be made docile and thus unable to defend himself when his victims get even with him. Provocative, yes, but such a theme also insults the viewer's intelligence; why should we sympathize with a man who deserves to be brutalized? Is Kubrick against the idea of punishment of criminals?The film earns brownie points for looking at its subject with audacity, but ultimately fails because of a very real moral illiteracy.