English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-12-11 23:45:15 · 10 answers · asked by arsenalsalam 2 in Entertainment & Music Movies

10 answers

Let's start by reviewing the plot of this movie real quick. A gang of teenaged thugs spend their free time beating and robbing homeless people, fighting other gangs, screwing hookers and generally doing nothing to contribute to society. The leader of this gang, Alex, is one sick but clever 17 year old. During a brutal (and fatal) gang rape (the woman is killed and her husband is beaten so badly, he loses the use of his legs [and his mind, as we'll see later]), Alex's posse betrays him and leaves him to be arrested by the authorities.

As a sociological experiment in prison, he is given drugs and behavior modification techniques, which have the effect of making him violently and physically ill when confronted with violence in any form, in effect, chemically turning a homicidal sociopath into a very vunerable and defenseless victim, turning him into exactly the type of person he himself preyed upon. It made Alex just as ill to hear the classical music of Beethoven, whom he had loved before the experiment, but could no longer bear to hear without suffering both physically and mentally.

After being released from this modification program onto a society which has no use for him (not even his parents want him back), he manages to run into (and be attacked by) almost everyone he ever committed a crime against. Finally, he ends up back at the house where he (and his original gang) raped and killed the woman and paralyzed (and drove crazy) her huband.
The Crippled man drugs Alex's drink, ties him up in a bed, surrounds him with giant quadraphonic speakers and proceeds to blast Alex with one of Beethoven's concertos. Alex gets free and jumps out the window, the aversion therapy he's undergone causing this reaction.

He wakes up in a state hospital, all traces of the aversion therapy gone, to the delight of the government, who feared public accusations of making robots out of men, for any reason. He is to be trotted out as a posterboy for the State at this point, considered "cured", but only of the aversion therapy. He is once again the "ultraviolent" sociopath he was at the beginning of the film.

I get several messages from this movie:

1. It's better to be a predator than prey-
2. Man cannot controlled. only killed-
3. There are two disciplines (for the purposes of this answer). There is Art and there is Science. Anything which can be expressed in mathematical terms is "Science", anything which cannot be expressed mathematically is "Art". "Crime Prevention", "Psychology", "Sociology", etc. are all ARTFORMS. Trying to quantify a human being in mathmatical terms is beyond our capability and maybe that's a good thing-
4. In the book, the man whose wife is attacked and killed is writing a book denouncing the very program Alex undergoes when he is arrested. This author is the one who ties him up later and uses the very program he denounced to try to kill Alex, or actually to cause Alex to try to kill himself. Message? No matter how enlightened a person is, he or she can be brought down to a primitie level when in grief or feeling vengeful-

WHEW! Sorry to be so long winded, but this is a great movie, it's an even better book (as much of a genius as director Kubrick was, there are scenes in the book NO director could have shown in theaters in 1971 -or 2006 for that matter-)

2006-12-12 01:37:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

It's not quite as clear in the film as it is in Anthony Burgess' novel (on which the film was based), but I've always assumed that the main theme of the film is that man's FREE WILL must be preserved at all costs, even if it means that some people will use that free will, like Alex, to victimize and assault society.

When the STATE takes away free will, it becomes every bit as evil as the criminal elements it is purporting to eliminate.

2006-12-12 01:28:32 · answer #2 · answered by shkspr 6 · 0 0

What sort of setting are you talking about? If you are talking about a zoo, then that signage is very serious. The food that animals at a zoo get is carefully balanced and monitored so you can screw up their diets and make them sick. Most of the food given or thrown to animals at zoos is innappropriate for them to eat. You can also make them sick by feeding them a toxic plant that happens to be growing nearby. Another very serious problem is the communication of diseases from you to the animal and from the animal to you. Especially with non-human primates, if you are carrying the measles and feed the animal the leftovers of your sandwich, that will kill the animal. They also have many diseases which are not serious for them but will kill humans. Finally, reaching your hand into an animals enclosure is never a good idea. That is their territory and they are very likely to defend it. I work in a zoo and can tell you dozens of stories of ignorant visitors getting seriously hurt trying to feed or pet the animals. They may look cute and cuddly, but animals in zoos are wild animals. Sorry for the tirade. Things may be different where you are from, but in the U.S. I do not understand why people ignore signs about not feeding or petting the animals. These signs are put up by people whose job it is to ensure the well being of the animals under their care and it is extraordinarily frustrating that visitors do not heed the signs. My zoo is actually going to be re-doing our "do not feed" signs, and I am looking for ideas on how to get more compliance from visitors (that is how I stumbled upon your question). If you or anyone else has any suggestions on how these signs could be improved upon, please respond to this and let me know!

2016-05-23 08:20:15 · answer #3 · answered by Beth 4 · 0 0

Never judge a book by it's movie.

2006-12-12 01:12:50 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 1 0

the message is that they will allow anyone with the money to make a movie...

2006-12-11 23:53:44 · answer #5 · answered by MELONIE T 3 · 0 1

Beware... you reap what you sow.... doing evil things to others is not a good thing!

2006-12-11 23:56:43 · answer #6 · answered by P!ss Ant 5 · 0 0

Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease

2006-12-12 00:53:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Drugs are bad, mmmkay?

2006-12-11 23:53:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

That you're gonna get your come-uppance!

2006-12-12 00:36:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

That you reap what you sow.

2006-12-12 08:40:41 · answer #10 · answered by Mooney 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers