An in-depth exploration of the root cause of violent tendencies, a society’s failed attempt to mitigate antisocial behaviours, and how these two intertwined issues create a self-perpetuating quagmire. Free will and autonomy are central themes of the story as it attempts to deconstruct individual evil acts vs systemic; giving an unflinching look at both in the process.
The film is set in a dystopian near-future London, England.
(Dir. Stanley Kubrick)
The main cast is comprised of:
Malcolm McDowell, Patrick Magee, Warren Clarke, Michael Bates, Adrienne Corri, Carl Duering
‘A Clockwork Orange’ has an extremely raw and visceral style for Kubrick; avoiding the decadence of ‘Barry Lyndon’ or ‘2001: a Space Odyssey’.
The picture opts for something closer to British auteur director Christopher Nolan’s earliest film ‘Following’. Both flicks feature gritty cinematography, less bombastic set-pieces and minimalistic camera setups, and although one is shot on 35mm film and the other on 16mm, they both utilize the same brand of camera (Arriflex) for a large amount of handheld shots. ‘Following’ uses the Arriflex 16BL and ‘A Clockwork Orange’ uses the Arriflex 35 IIC, along with other cameras of course. When it comes to ‘A Clockwork Orange’ there’s some more involved decisions around lenses to achieve grander shooting techniques.
For example, Kubrick came up with some ingenious solutions in regards to extended zoom shots:
“To achieve extremely long continuous zooms he requested that the Angenieux 20:1 zoom be used. However, since it was built for 16mm film, and they were shooting on 35mm, it needed to be reconfigured with a 1.6x extender in order to cover the 1.66:1 aspect ratio without vignetting.” [4] -IndepthCine.com
So, he modified a zoom apparatus meant for 16mm (to allow it to work for 35mm film) by adding an extender, neat!
The smaller cast and limited set design is closer to an approach taken by later lower-budget artisan productions à la ‘Reservoir Dogs’ or ‘Mulholland Drive”. Even with a 2 million dollar budget (adjusted for inflation: 15.6m) ‘A Clockwork Orange’ has some spectacularly beautiful shots, but it maintains a grounded aesthetic throughout. This barebones approach makes the viewing experience more realistic in a way, delivering nearly the same POV immersion as a found footage film.
Stanley Kubrick crafted this Criterion Collection favourite in 1971 – Malcolm McDowell stars as the glib and ultra-villainous Alex DeLarge – leader of a malevolent gang that he refers to as “his Droogs”.
At the time of its release, ‘A Clockwork Orange’ caused a media uproar due to its use of gratuitous violence. Stanley Kubrick did NOT shy away from showing us the absolute brutality of his protagonist’s actions. And in doing so he created a massive obstacle; nearly immovable; blocking the path of any viewers who might otherwise be able to relate or empathize with his film’s lead.
Taken on his own, Alex DeLarge is a vile person and reprehensible in almost every way imaginable – committing sadistic acts of violence, sometimes sexual in nature, and almost always unprovoked – with plenty of forethought and malice. Beyond a few hints of sophistication/possible intellect (Alex enjoys Beethoven, he reads well, becomes a model inmate later in the film) the character is only shown to be charismatic or genial when it serves him, and has no concrete positive traits; no sense of loyalty or love, no value system, he lacks respect for his gang even; instead seeing them as playthings rather than what they are: his only friends.
Alex DeLarge is the definition of malignant narcissism.
“It’s sensationalist” – “it’s a sick and depraved work of art” —- “Kubrick’s going to ruin his career with this filth”; was the general response from pro-censorship advocates of the time.
See below quote:
“During the sixty-one weeks that it played to the British public, it preoccupied the attention of politicians, the media, the church, the so-called protectors of morality as well as the youth, police and local authorities of towns up and down the country before its director, Stanley Kubrick, in the face of this pressure finally banned the film from public exhibition.” [1]
–The Kubrick Site (nonprofit)
A reaction that clearly mirrors thematic elements of the film; specifically, how the mainstream media attempted to censor, deride, and unfairly criticize the graphic nature of Kubrick’s vision reflects the overreach of the UK prison system (and the politicians) in ‘A Clockwork Orange’. The use of the Ludovico technique to reprogram Alex is censorship of his very personality, destroying his love of classical music along with any inherently destructive thoughts. The technique also renders him utterly incapable of defending himself…
Alex DeLarge is not a hero and even declaring him an anti-hero – at least in the traditional sense – is a long stretch of the imagination. For comparison: a more sympathetic anti-hero “Tony Soprano”, (created by David Chase) who’s complexities made for some seriously delicious, weekly HBO drama – highlights the differences between the two. Alex DeLarge has almost no redeeming qualities whereas his contemporary is seen as a family man, a provider, and wholly capable of friendship… Instead it’s the abuse Alex suffers by the authority figures within his orbit that create the conditions necessary for empathy from the viewer. This is the brilliance of Kubrick’s adaptation and by extension Anthony Burgess’ novel.
Simply stated, it’s the way Alex DeLarge is mistreated in the latter half that creates an emotional response from us. Not an easy task for a film that spends its first half subjecting you to the unspeakable misdeeds and atrocities committed by said character.
And this mistreatment (or karmically deserved punishment, depending on how you look at it) comes in the form of a Trojan Horse – after having been incarcerated for a time – Alex is offered release in exchange for undergoing a radical new procedure that promises to excise the violent parts of his nature. He accepts, unaware that the Ludovico technique involves the most evil psychological torture imaginable.
The depiction on screen is gut-wrenching to say the least; a team of doctors strap Delarge into a chair, applying an apparatus designed for optic surgery to hold his eyelids open while they assault him for days and days on end: with vividly violent imagery. During these sessions a drug is administered in hopes of making him intolerant to aggressive/negative stimuli; whether it be external or internal. This invasive form of brainwashing is portrayed with vicious grotesquery. The scene sticks in the mind; indelible. The acting behind it was nearly as torturous as the fiction created – McDowell went temporarily blind during the day of filming as he had to physically have his eyelids held open for many, many painful takes. Assumedly, in an era before CGI this was the only way to accomplish the shot.
Malcolm McDowell:
“I did scratch my corneas, that is correct. My eyes were anaesthetised so I couldn’t feel those lid locks scraping down my eyes. The doctor was a real doctor from Moorfields eye hospital who kept putting in artificial teardrops because you can’t leave your eyes dry too long, you have to keep them moist. That was his job. Stanley decided to put him in the scene and give him a line, which was a big mistake…I mean, Jesus, doc, it doesn’t matter, just get those drops in.” [2]
-Quote from ScreenRant.com
Kubrick was also known for making his actors do an outlandish amount of takes, (rare instances upwards of 90) in an attempt to “break them” and receive a more raw or unfiltered performance.
Unwavering dedication allowed for a scene which transformed the villainy of Alex Delarge into utter wretchedness, easier to pity than hate.
Quotes:
“(Kubrick) doesn’t print anything until at least the 35th take,” Duvall recalled to The Hollywood Reporter.”
“One of the movie’s most famous scenes features Jack stalking a sobbing Wendy up a staircase as she clutches a baseball bat to protect herself from her suddenly deranged husband. Kubrick made Duvall and Nicholson shoot the scene 127 times.” [3] -Today.com
Before I call it a day, here’s a quick list of lesser known facts about ‘A Clockwork Orange’:
- The novel was authored by Anthony Burgess, a British writer & composer.
- Originally Burgess sold the film rights for a paltry $500 to someone other than Kubrick. That production never panned out in the long term.
- Mick Jagger was set to star in that same cancelled production.
- “Nadsat” is the fictional language that Burgess invented for the novel; it was carried over to the film. The language is an eclectic mix of English, Cockney slang, and Russian.
- Stanley Kubrick was shown the novel by then co-writer Terry Southern on the set of another one of his pictures —- ‘Dr. Strangelove’.
- The incorporation of Russian words into NADSAT was an attempt by the author of ‘A Clockwork Orange’ to prey upon fears of the Cold War which were rife in the 1960s.
- Ultra-violence is a term used in the book and film which the characters use to describe their crime sprees.
____________
Sources:
[1]
The Kubrick Site has been established as a non-profit resource archive for documentary materials regarding, in whole or in part, the work of the late American film director and producer Stanley Kubrick (1928-1999).
The Kubrick Site
http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/0012.html
[2]
Malcolm McDowell Addresses Lasting Impact Of Injury From Filming Stanley Kubrick’s 1971 Classic
https://screenrant.com/clockwork-orange-malcolm-mcdowell-eye-injury-impact
[3]
Shelley Duvall and ‘The Shining’: What she said about her experiences
https://www.today.com/popculture/movies/shelley-duvall-the-shining-rcna161391
[4]
How Stanley Kubrick Shoots A Film At 3 Budget Levels