|
|
a_clockwork_orange
|
|
|
nemo
|
clockwork_orange
|
011209
|
|
... |
|
|
screwing for virginity
|
i want to own a clockwork orange
|
021013
|
|
... |
|
|
pipedream
|
wasn't that a movie? or a book? yes, definitely a movie. it sounds great...clockwork oraaaanngeee...kind of like the clockwork mouse in enid blyton's amelia jane stories, but more modern.
|
030307
|
|
... |
|
|
Piso Mojado
|
anthony burgess wrote the book.
stanley kubrick directed the film.
what's it gonna be then, eh?
|
030307
|
|
... |
|
|
jane
|
there is a korova milkbar on avenue a & 12th
|
031108
|
|
... |
|
|
Whitechocolatewalrus
|
That book was depressing. I liked how he always used the word freakshow, though.
|
031108
|
|
... |
|
|
littleidiot
|
wasn't it 'horrorshow'?
in any case...
awesome book, awesome movie.
|
031108
|
|
... |
|
|
ampad
|
an organic object with no real will of its own.
anthony burgess wrote the book after having an experience similar to the central event..
|
031109
|
|
... |
|
|
Helicala
|
Real horrorshow.
|
040119
|
|
... |
|
|
Helicala
|
Greatest book ever written. Greatest character ever created.
|
040119
|
|
... |
|
|
magicforest
|
I viddy another malchickawick who has been tolchocked by the glory of Anthony Burgess's goloss...or was it voloss? I almost mixed those two up. But I am disgusted by anyone who sees the movie, never reads the novella, and thinks they know ACO. Read the book. The movie was great as it's own entity but a different fucking thing than the book, particularly because the two had different endings.
is real horrorshow with ultra-violence
|
040119
|
|
... |
|
|
zeke
|
an I'll scrap with you any time, Dim
|
040119
|
|
... |
|
|
lokkust
|
see: yarbles
|
040119
|
|
... |
|
|
zeke
|
synthemesc
|
040120
|
|
... |
|
|
Jaspin
|
I'll only read the book if I can get a british copy of it, because there is a chapter in the british copy that was left out in the american version, the very last chapter in which Little Alex meets with one of his old Droogs, can't remember which one, after many years of being a music critic, or something to that effect. I'm not sure, but I saw it on a website a little while ago and I lost the url O.o
Viddy well, little brothers and sisters, viddy well.
|
040121
|
|
... |
|
|
misstree
|
the removal of that chapter changed the book from a novella to a fable; no moral development. the american publisher said that americans didn't want the moral development. burgess also wrote the book with three repeating cycles of seven chapters, and chose 21 chapters precisely because of the number's relation to the age of maturity. i believe that all the most recent printings have the 21st restored.
|
040121
|
|
... |
|
|
KONTROL
|
your pissing me off chris but then i'm not supposed to have emotions i dont want to play these games
invent something new
|
040729
|
|
... |
|
|
KONTROL
|
Control with a K
|
040729
|
|
... |
|
|
falling_alone
|
i found myself wishing alex would break free of the brainwashing, and go back to pillaging old ladies.
the book was real horrorshow, i have yet to see the movie.
|
040730
|
|
... |
|
|
pipedream
|
the moive was great...weird and freaky, but darned cool...i vont to read the book now. i hate it when books and movies DEVIATE so much from the other :P
and why are british versions and american versions of books different? the american version of restaturant at the end of the universe calls dent a euphemistic 'knee-biter' instead of the 'asshole' that he is orginally called in the british edition. what a sellout, 'knee-biter' isnt even HALF as funny as 'asshole' was. tsk tsk.
|
040731
|
|
... |
|
|
silentbob
|
the movie isn't really different from the book, i mean there's parts here and there, and its been stanley kubricked but... other than that the sequence of events and a lot of the dialog is very similar.
as for american versions and brittish versions being different, i think its just a matter of meeting publishers wants. burgess didn't care about holding out for what he had originally written until later, after it was too late. because he needed money.
|
040731
|
|
... |
|
|
pipedream
|
rrar...money...
|
040801
|
|
... |
|
|
.lauren
|
i think it's unfortunate that kubric used the american version. the british ending is what makes it a classic piece of literature. the american version is just a really good story. the english is an accomplished literary work. i remember writing my junior thesis on the linguistics of nadsat. that was hard.
|
040812
|
|
... |
|
|
pipedream
|
oo..sounds interesting, lauren...do tell
|
040815
|
|
... |
|
|
silentbob
|
Actually, in my class, we ended up deciding that the usage of the final chapter seemed to ... not justify his actions, but at least excuse them.
As if burgess was saying, "He may be a monster, but he grows out of it"
and its true, he does grow out of killing people, but within the text of the book he doesn't feel bad about it.
he just stops because he's bored.
and if that is what he is saying about all violent people, that we should not tamper with their chemistry because they'll grow out of it eventually, then cutting out the last chapter leaves it on a forboding kind of "oh man, i wonder whats going to happen, its open to interpretation" kind of ending.
but this way its like saying, 'Yes he's a monster, but don't worry, he actually is normal, because he stops.'
my class also concluded that they felt the ending was poorly written, as if it was kind of hurried and like he just tacked it on there like he felt obligated to end it somehow, and that was cheap.
However, he has claimed he purposely wanted 21 chapters because thats the age of maturity... but alex doesn't reach 21 in the book, so why is that important anyway?
There's also a strange mirror effect my teacher was showing us.... like the fourth chapter in the first part mirrors the eighth chapter in the second part..... thats a bad example because i don't know right off hand what ones go together, but with 21 it makes sense and with 20 it doesnt.
i don't really know how i feel about this.
I think they have a point, but i do find it interesting that after i saw the movie there ended up being another chapter.
|
040815
|
|
... |
|
|
seventeen
|
I read the book (full 21 chapters) first and then watched the movie, very recently (last night with paste!)...
I think the last chapter feels necessary because it gives the character growth. but,
you know, I can't decide which I like better. I just like knowing the last chapter instead of being blind to it, and I like being able to see the movie AFTER reading the book, so my interpretation felt pure.
|
040816
|
|
... |
|
|
silentbob
|
totally
|
040816
|
|
... |
|
|
pipedream
|
hm. now i really really want to read the book, but i like burgess' ending...and even in the movie, the kid and his gang were so horrible mainly becuase their lives had nothing else in them...yep...now to go a-bookhuntin' :)
|
040817
|
|
... |
|
|
LXmacNtosh
|
Xcuse me for intruding on your intelligent and mostly non-capitalized discussion with something completely irrelevant, but here is an interesting observation I don't think Steve Jobs had in mind when he did his little 1984 Superbowl commercial-"Apple Computer" could be a pun on "A Clockwork Orange". I don't intend to be pro-IBM (Infinity forbid) but I just want to point out that they are both technologically modified fruit. Who knows, it could be the future of GMO's. "Hello, I'll take a dozen banana cell phones." Controversy_what_conroversy ?
|
050715
|
|
... |
|
|
LXmacNtosh
|
Xcuse me for intruding on your intelligent and mostly non-capitalized discussion with something completely irrelevant, but here is an interesting observation I don't think Steve Jobs had in mind when he did his little 1984 Superbowl commercial-"Apple Computer" could be a pun on "A Clockwork Orange". I don't intend to be pro-IBM (Infinity forbid) but I just want to point out that they are both technologically modified fruit. Who knows, it could be the future of GMO's. "Hello, I'll take a dozen banana cell phones." Controversy_what_conroversy ?
|
050715
|
|
... |
|
|
clumsy mathematician
|
How the 1134 did it get there twice? I can't erase it and it's embarrassing... I hate computers!!!
|
050715
|
|
... |
|
|
epitome of incomprehensibility
|
Very original, says epitome without excessive quotation marks. Now go and be a parody of YOURSELF, whoever you are. Hmmm... I might be persuaded to write something on said book, given that I just read it a few days ago. La la. Violence and imaginary language, how shocking. It wasn't as complicated as I first expected it to be...the story was quite fast-paced and easy to follow...but it leaves the reader with lots of things to think about, does it not? It wasn't as realistic as say, the book 1984, but it was quite frightening by times. Well, here's to free will and the power of choice but I advise people not to be violent. Especially, don't destroy library books. That's all that's really important, you know.
|
060118
|
|
... |
|
|
misstree
|
"Violence and imaginary language, how shocking."
This book was written in 1962. Check your frame of reference. This book was groundbreaking on a number of levels.
And the art of both was not in their presence, but their use. Violence presented as utterly normal, and painted with a language that is at once vivid and distancing.
I'll refrain from any personal epithets, but look beyond your own nose when commenting on commentary.
|
060118
|
|
... |
|
|
e_o_i
|
Don't take issues with my phraseology; i have a tendency not to take things seriously and i wasn't trying to make fun of your post. Peace, love, and smiles?
|
060214
|
|
... |
|
|
oren
|
95
|
060307
|
|
... |
|
|
triplesix
|
6 double 5 3 2 1
|
061111
|
|
... |
|
|
They call me Truth
|
I want to read this book!
|
081110
|
|
... |
|
|
epitome of incomprehensibility
|
This early post exemplifies my suckiness at communication, but never mind... current goal is to re-read books I read when I was seventeen. A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man is done, so this one's next... I always found Alex's voice fascinating, the style of it not just the nadsat words, he's one of the best sympathetically evil narrators since H.H. from Lolita.
For me the movie didn't really capture the tone of the book, but maybe it was only my version of what that tone was, maybe for Stanley Kubrick it was different, but I remember being offended that poor Alex would sing Singin in the Rain before he raped people because... well, dammit! It's offensive! He liked CLASSICAL music, not jazz!
(I told the above to a friend from music class and he looked at me strangely.)
But seriously it seemed the movie was a weird blend of raunchy teen comedy and trippy art film. It was very good though. Malcolm McDowell when young - blue eyes, evil grin - didn't fall for him like I did for Elijah Wood as Frodo though. Irrelevance, irrelevance, I know, but I just remembered an article reprinted in a collection of Anthony Burgess' essays talking about The Lord of the Rings. He said inventing a language (Elvish, in this case) was a rather childish schoolboy trick. Hypocrisy, much? Or just more humour that my little mind does not comprehend?
|
110815
|
|
|
what's it to you?
who
go
|
blather
from
|
