Saturday, May 12, 2007

A puritan and a coward...

Delicatessen over A Clockwork Orange

I haven't seen it, but Delicatessen seems like it might be interesting. I found Amelie far too whimsical for my taste, but it was a well-made film, so I'd be willing to see something by its makers. Mainly, though, I'm voting against Clockwork Orange here. I started watching it with my friend Ruth one evening in college, and we had to turn it off, primarily because we were repulsed by the scenes of gang rape. I suppose thirty years ago, the shock value of Clockwork may have been necessary for, em, post-imperial Britain (yes, I just wrote that) hanging on to tea and decorum by the skin of its teeth. Today, its moral renegade schtick just seems a bit passe--in the same way I imagine Pulp Fiction will one day be (case in point, I really liked Pulp Fiction when it came out in the nineties). I'm willing to be firmly scolded and enlightened here, so, please, by all means. Perhaps it's just best understood as a period piece. But in the context of this tournament, premised on standards of timelessness, I'm forced to ask a timeless question: WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN??

Sweet Hereafter over Old School

Jeff is my friend, and I'd like it to stay that way--at least for the sake of free beer and Megan's sweetass vegan cupcakes. Thus, I have to place my vote for a movie that I think is kind of boring and not really that insightful over a film with everything from an incredible shot of Elisha Cuthbert's toosh in pink panties to a wedding singer who sings, "Every now and then I get little bit terrified, and then I see the fucking look in your eyes..."

Comments:
Even though A Clockwork Orange is one of my top three favorite movies of all time, I won't scold, because I think it is totally understandable to dislike the movie because of its graphic elements: not just one but MULTIPLE graphic rape scenes. Sure, it's for a thematic purpose, but I can definitely see thinking that it crosses the line. In a similar way, I thought the movie Irreversible crossed the line, and I truly think that NO ONE should see Irreversible. It's awful.

But for my part, personally, I thought A Clockwork Orange managed to get very close to the line without crossing it -- and for that reason managed to make its point all the more strongly. The main theme is about free will, and the way that free will is taken away from the main character is by showing him movies of graphic sex and violence so that it makes him physically ill; then, after the treament is finished, he can't think of violence without feeling ill, and so he becomes a good citizen. The graphic rape and violence shown to the viewer is supposed to have a similar effect on the viewer: You are supposed to get sick on the violence and sex. Justification? Not for everyone, but it worked for me.

The only other movie I can think of with a similar effect was Lolita (the old one). Of course, that one managed to do the job without ever showing a single breast, and so maybe it's more commendable.
 
Yes, that seems like a reasonable position.

Also, I just became a Christian because of this conversation.
 
Wait, did I just say Christian? I meant Mormon. I always get those two confused. They are very similar religions.
 
For the love of God, don't see Irreversible. Who knows what religion you'd join after seeing it.
 
I had Irreversible in my queue but I chickened out at the last minute and yanked it. Sounds like a good decision. I wouldn't want to see anything that I can't unsee.
 
When Irreversible was first in theaters (and I hadn't yet seen it), I was trying to convince a mixed group of friends and strangers that we should go see it, because I had heard it was provocative and interesting. I am so, so glad that I let someone talk the group into Mad Hot Ballroom instead.
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]