U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-30-2017, 12:29 AM
 
1,841 posts, read 631,601 times
Reputation: 548

Advertisements

Oh yeah, I've seen Paths of Glory and love that one! Love the camera work in it as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-30-2017, 08:43 AM
 
5,422 posts, read 8,387,165 times
Reputation: 5210
For the time period, the movie blew your mind! It was an exploration of new imagery and even a new language, while at the same time being a profound and ironic commentary on trends in psychology and social engineering. That being said, for today's viewers (and those of us who saw it then, and watch it again) it comes across as heavy handed.

But the ending? Alex is right back where he started, with the blessings of the government. Very funny. But that wasn't the original ending! The movie is of course based on Anthony Burgess' book from 1962. But when Burgess (who apparently hadn't been consulted by Kubrick) saw the movie, he was perplexed, because he thought the ending was missing. In the book, Alex gets rehabilitated at the end, and becomes a responsible adult. But the final chapter was omitted from the American publication, because the publisher thought Americans would prefer that Alex remain a bad boy! And Kubrick went along with that--or didn't know there was a longer version. So Burgess never got his true ending into the movie, and that might explain why the movie seems to end in mid-air. But maybe the publisher was right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 09:25 AM
 
4,851 posts, read 4,302,227 times
Reputation: 7143
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyNameIsBellaMia View Post
Love it, and funny it's mentioned as I just bought it off Ebay a couple of days ago.
I have no idea why I love it. Probably because of the sacrilege done to the music.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
+1
Add to that great camera work, brilliant use of music, and a fantastic adaptation from the Burgess novel.
A great movie by a great director.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt View Post
Wendy Carlos' score is one of the greatest things to happen to film music. The (year) 2000 CD reissue Clockwork Orange (drops the A) is a must, but it's also OOP now and you won't find it on the cheap. It's all the music Carlos did for the film.
When I first saw Clockwork Orange (while I was in High School) I loved the soundtrack and bought the album. It was the electronic (Moog) synthesizer by Carlos (she also did the soundtrack for The Shining).
The novel in the US did not include the final chapter prior to 1986 (check out wikipedia for the
final chapter).
As for Beethoven, Alex was injected with drugs and was strapped to a chair watching extreme
acts of violence. When I saw the film back then and a few years ago, I always thought, since
the series of violent films were silent the music of Beethoven was an unintended consequence.

15 Things You Might Not Know About A Clockwork Orange | Mental Floss
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Baker City, Oregon
3,318 posts, read 5,299,830 times
Reputation: 4979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Fork Fantast View Post
........... In the book, Alex gets rehabilitated at the end, and becomes a responsible adult. But the final chapter was omitted from the American publication, because the publisher thought Americans would prefer that Alex remain a bad boy! And Kubrick went along with that--or didn't know there was a longer version. So Burgess never got his true ending into the movie, and that might explain why the movie seems to end in mid-air. But maybe the publisher was right?
Originally the book didn't have the happy ending final chapter. It wasn't omitted from the American version, it was requested by the British publishers and added to the British version.

As meticulous as Kubrick was, I'm sure he knew about the British version.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 11:27 AM
 
Location: Colorado Springs
15,963 posts, read 7,543,711 times
Reputation: 15856
Quote:
Originally Posted by English Dave View Post
Try this Kubrick movie for interesting camera work.........


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gyyGHHXfck
Yes, this is a VERY powerful movie. I didn't realize it was by Kubrick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 04:34 PM
 
3,065 posts, read 875,988 times
Reputation: 3512
I'm going to guess that it was remarkable in that:
-it was beautifully photographed
-it was a striking production
-it was a story totally unlike anything that had been scene
-it successfully incorporated violence into a serious movie
-it followed a revolting anti-hero in a compelling way


That's off the top of my head.


By the way, since it's from a novel, it's more difficult to fault the movie for plot elements you don't like.


I don't love it, but it's certainly notable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 04:42 PM
 
Location: SC
7,581 posts, read 4,398,429 times
Reputation: 10512
You (the OP) are reviewing a movie that is 50 years out of context - this never makes for a good review unless you have some special insight into the period the film represents. You may not have thought it was great when first released, but you most likely would have been appalled by the amount of violence and the films commentary about the "justice" being applied.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
33,367 posts, read 31,138,917 times
Reputation: 47978
You can't watch old movies and judge them on your 2017 movie values. In its day, Clockwork Orange was original. You have been numbed by movie violence since 1971. It's no longer edgy.

I really liked the book Salem's Lot by Stephen King when I read it when it first came out in 1975. A gazillion vampire books by a whole bunch of authors since then and maybe Salem's Lot would be ho hum if I read it today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 05:51 PM
 
1,841 posts, read 631,601 times
Reputation: 548
Quote:
Originally Posted by blktoptrvl View Post
You (the OP) are reviewing a movie that is 50 years out of context - this never makes for a good review unless you have some special insight into the period the film represents. You may not have thought it was great when first released, but you most likely would have been appalled by the amount of violence and the films commentary about the "justice" being applied.
But I don't think I am judging the movie based on 2017 context. I really like The French Connection and Dirty Harry for example, and those were considered groundbreaking for 1971. I like them, and it's still 2017.

I liked The Wild Bunch and that was considered to be a groundbreaking movie for 1969.

So I feel I do take the time periods into contexts when it comes to movies I like, and I like several other movies from the time.

My reason for not getting what was so great about A Clockwork Orange, had nothing to do with how original or edgy it was for the time, I just felt it came apart in the act. What good is originality and edginess with not having a good solidly structured execution to back it up, if that makes sense?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2018, 07:16 AM
 
17,291 posts, read 15,537,686 times
Reputation: 9112
I always felt that " Citizen Kane" was a very over rated movie. I remember watching it in a film class in high school and how brilliant Orson Welles was supposed to be with the techniques he used. But I thought that was what made it lacking, his use of filming and direction techniques were too deliberate and obvious. The film lacked depth, IMO, the story and characters and acting didn't rise to the level of greatness that so many other movies did.
Now some movies we never see any more and they were in a similar vein of " A Clockwork Orange". Those would be " Soylent Green" and "Rollerball" and " "1984". Dystopian futures which seem to be all too similar to where we're headed today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:01 PM.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top