Posted on 09/21/2021 10:59:26 AM PDT by Cronos
In a recent interview, veteran actor Malcolm McDowell has revealed he cannot stomach rewatching his 1971 dystopian crime film, A Clockwork Orange. The film was adapted from Anthony Burgess's 1962 novel about a disturbingly violent gang of youths in an alternate near-future Britain. McDowell played the violent delinquent Alex DeLarge in the infamous and controversial film directed by Stanley Kubrick.
It follows Alex, leader of his gang known as the Droogs. Following a series of drug-induced fights with another gang and various disturbing and brutal assaults, Alex is arrested and imprisoned for his crimes, before being subjected to an experimental form of therapy to make him averse to his former violence. A Clockwork Orange celebrates its 50th anniversary this year with a 4K rerelease, but originally, the film was met with bans upon its release due to the levels of violence and brutality on screen, an aspect which its star still struggles with.
McDowell revealed that he still finds it difficult to rewatch, stating that he cannot stomach sitting through the film despite the time that has passed. McDowell elaborated that despite any updates in quality the film might have received, it still holds the same violent content that made the film infamous upon its release, though he is proud of the impact it has made since last time he watched the film was during a screening at the Cannes Film Festival to celebrate its 40th Anniversary alongside Warner Bro's executives, before saying how glad he was that he could avoid similar screenings for the latest milestone.
...Despite becoming a film of historical significance , A Clockwork Orange had a complex and controversial history. Upon release, the film was met by polarizing reviews for its depictions of graphic violence and sexual assault, as well as condemnation from different groups,
(Excerpt) Read more at screenrant.com ...
Suggestion: “Cure” McDowell of what ails him by forcing him to watch his own film ad nauseum, with Beethoven’s 9th blaring in the background.
Good point...and that one was way better...uh I mean worse
Barry Lyndon? Sounds like a movie about the 1964 presidential election.
“Another movie that I’d highly recommend is ‘Brazil’…”
Absolutely!
bookmarking an excellent thread
Brazil,,
On my list-thanks!
A little bit of the Ultra Violence
McDowell makes this movie. His ‘droogan’ sidekicks, for example, are lame, whiney 1-dimensional characters. Dim, for being the token blockhead dolt, comes closest to emoting anything interesting.
I find it odd that people find the violence so objectionable. By today’s standards, it’s not very graphic. At least not the way we get so much blood and gore in some action flicks in our era. I found the rape scene difficult, mostly because of the outrageous musical performance by McDowell which seems to render such violence seemingly that much more egregious by making it trite and jovial.
I think that the plot actually seems to explore violence and aggression as a psychological topic. I think that is why it doesn’t bother me like it does some, who probably think the violence is being celebrated. It also transitions to debating the topic on a sociological and political level when it is questioned whether the ‘therapy’ is either moral or effective.
Gene Kelly Was Not
Happy Either!
Mark Steyn said the only good thing about Eyes Wide Shut is that it kept Tom Cruise out of the country for a year.
I have film friends (conservative ones, even...) who swear that EWS is a Kubrick masterpiece... and I was so disgusted by it, I was laughing at the end.
Kubrick’s masterpieces? In my opinion, that’s like asking to choose my favorite children (and thankfully, I have just my daughter to choose from.) Personally, Dr. Strangelove, Clockwork Orange, Paths of Glory, Barry Lyndon and The Shining are the finest films I’ve ever seen.
Full Metal Jacket is a fun one, too. But... those four are just amazing.
Okay...I must watch that movie again...:)
“The only redeeming part of that ‘80s version of ‘Dune’ was seeing Sting die in the end.”
________________________________________
I got ill (literally) watching the actions of the Sting’s character and that of his brother and father. Death was kind to each of them. Horrible, evil, vile cretins.
I have not been able to watch Dune again, neither the old or remakes.
A young lady I had recently started dating was supposed to watch this film for a college class, so it was our first movie date. We both thought it strange (well, I did like the milk dispenser). Oh, yes. We’ve been married 47 years...
The 21st chapter was omitted from the editions published in the United States prior to 1986.In the introduction to the updated American text (these newer editions include the missing 21st chapter), Burgess explains that when he first brought the book to an American publisher, he was told that U.S. audiences would never go for the final chapter, in which Alex sees the error of his ways, decides he has simply gotten bored of violence and resolves to turn his life around.
At the American publisher's insistence, Burgess allowed their editors to cut the redeeming final chapter from the U.S. version, so that the tale would end on a darker note, with Alex becoming his old, ultraviolent self again – an ending which the publisher insisted would be "more realistic" and appealing to a US audience.
The film adaptation, directed by Stanley Kubrick, is based on the American edition of the book (which Burgess considered to be "badly flawed").
Kubrick called Chapter 21 "an extra chapter" and claimed that he had not read the original version until he had virtually finished the screenplay and that he had never given serious consideration to using it.
In Kubrick's opinion – as in the opinion of other readers, including the original American editor – the final chapter was unconvincing and inconsistent with the book.
Huxley’s novels are all phenomenal. Kubrick’s movies - I agree with you.
Though we do call activities in which we play even a minor role as “ours”.
They key to Barry Lyndon is sympathizing with the narrator and not the characters.
I agree with this review...
“An object of widespread derision when released in 1975—anyone remember the Mad magazine parody, “Borey Lyndon”?— Stanley Kubrick’s magisterial Thackeray adaptation now stands as one of his greatest and most savagely ironic films, not to mention one of the few period pieces on celluloid so transporting that it seems to predate the invention of cameras. At first Ryan O’Neal, then Hollywood’s reigning male ingénue, seems too contemporary a presence for Barry, the 18th-century Irish scoundrel who marries into fortune after a string of picaresque wartime adventures—all rendered with the director’s usual high regard for military posturing and institutional bombast. But O’Neal’s gauche inability to fit into the surroundings ultimately suits the role, especially as Barry’s circumstances take a severe and irreversible turn. With a god’s-eye omniscience, Kubrick uses slow reverse zooms to move from the human dramas at the forefront, long discarded by history, to recreations of the landscape paintings that endured. The film’s greatness can make a viewer feel like a speck in the cosmos.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.