Favorite Scene Friday! A Clockwork Orange: Yarbles

Our final Oscars appreciation FSF is by none other than Nick Rehak from French Toast Sunday!

When people think of A Clockwork Orange, they tend to think of a woman being brutally raped by a gang of bizarrely dressed men while the leader sings "Singin’ in the Rain" and kicks the woman’s husband, who’s being held down and forced to watch, repeatedly in the stomach. I’m not talking about that scene… today. Instead I’m discussing something that happens earlier in the film. In today's Favorite Scene, a woman is nearly brutally raped by a gang of possible neo Nazis and is somehow rescued (I use that word lightly) by a gang of bizarrely dressed men. But when you really sit down and watch the scene, it becomes apparent that it doesn’t belong in the film. Yes the juxtaposition of classical music over moments of violence are there, the hedonistic and sometimes animalistic tendencies of man are there, but this moment is unlike any other that happen in the film.

By Wikipedia

The moment begins after a quick introduction of Alex and his three droogs, that is, Pete, Georgie, and Dim. We cut to a classic style painting still life of roses in an assumed marble vase. We hear screams over the french horns, oboe and violins of Rossini’s "The Thieving Magpie". The camera pans down and we find we are in an old derelict theater, even though Alex refers to it as a casino. A gang of men, dressed in World War Two garb, is clawing at a woman, ripping her clothes off in hopes of bedding her. Ugh that sounds gross. Doesn’t that sound gross? Bedding. Yuck. Anyway, they pull this woman over to a pile of old disgusting looking mattresses when out of the darkness steps Alex and his droogs. Distracted, the gang pays no attention to the woman and she makes her escape. Alex then tosses some very light, almost elementary school level insults. Very tame in comparison to the rest of the Oscar nominated X-rated film.

But here’s where it gets interesting. For most of the film, anytime Alex is on screen, he is in control. When the film begins, it’s on his face and as the camera pulls back, it looks like he lifts a glass of moloko drencrom to us, toasting us as guests of honor as he guides us through this hellacious dystopian future. But in this moment, as Alex hurls insults at Billy Boy, we don’t see Alex. We see Billy. The camera is holding on Billy and comes across looking like a moving portrait. Billy doesn’t blink or flinch. Steadily chewing gum, for nearly ten seconds, then lifting his switchblade to show Alex he’s ready for a bit of the old ultraviolence. Why does this happen? In any other film, the camera would be on Alex and it would cut between members of the gang as they snicker in agreement or grimace in denial. Is it to strike fear? If we look at Billy’s attire, he’s wearing a Nazi Officer’s cap along with an Iron Cross medal. Clearly he’s the bad guy. In strolls Alex in all white, a metaphorical savior, even though he’s just as bad as Billy, if not worse. Is this an overall metaphor for society? That every country has a violent history of raping and taking, it’s just the name they claim it in is different. It’s a lot to read into in just ten seconds, but it’s the only time in the film this happens.

In the rest of the film (SPOILERS) we see Alex go from criminal to reformed man to a broken man on the verge of returning to his primal nature. But every time he’s on the screen, he controls the scene. Your attention is on him. Yeah, I get it, he’s the main character, it’s his story, but if he has such disdain for Billy Boy, why hold on him for so long? Why not further degrade the guy and show everyone else but him? These questions are abruptly forgotten as we spill into violence. But it’s not the ultraviolence this film is known for. Instead we get something that looks and feels like a standard bar fight in a western. Somebody spills something on someone or steps on a toe and suddenly bodies are flying through tables and windows, and chairs are being broken off left and right. The EXACT same thing happens here. It’s almost a Looney Tunes level of violence that gets further downplayed by the juxtaposition of "The Thieving Magpie". A man literally dropkicks another through a table.

But as soon as it begins, it’s over as Alex takes control of the narrative. He whistles to his droogs like a trainer to his dogs. We see now they’re not Alex’s friends or companions; just his droogs. Just people he has around to do his viddy well bidding. The best line though comes from Alex as he challenges Billy, “come and get on in the yarbles! If ya got any yarbles.” It’s wonderful and I wish it was cool to use that slang. It’s a shame the film didn’t take home the Academy Award for Best Picture in 1972. I believe the film is absolutely more deserving than The French Connection. Thing is, people see this film as nothing but shock violence with a boring second half. This film is so much more than that. It’s a satiric meditation on human nature and the inherent violence we grow up with. It takes a fun house mirror and points it at society, showing us where our priorities lay, rather than where they should. Now there’s something you can wrap your rassoodocks around for a few hours.

Note - this week's scene contains graphic nudity and violence. NSFW.

What's your favorite scene from A Clockwork Orange?

LAMBcast #244: 2001: A Space Odyssey

It sure has been a while since I've done a write up on a LAMBcast episode. Not sure why I'm calling myself out, because I don't really have an excuse. Anyway, Jay and I were joined by Jess and Nick from French Toast Sunday for a conversation on our movie of the month, 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Source

We had a really fun discussion on Kubrick's masterpiece and we definitely talked about that zero gravity toilet. Listen to the episode below!

2010: The Year We Make Contact

It's easy for sequels to be overlooked and overshadowed by their predecessors. 2010: The Year We Make Contact, is a great example. The film takes place nine years after the events of Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece, 2001: A Space Odyssey. How to compete with that film, a movie that's almost universally recognized as a classic? In 2010, Dr. Heywood Floyd (Roy Scheider) is on a joint US/Soviet mission aboard the Leonov to discover what happened to astronaut Dave Bowman (Keir Dullea), his ship the Discovery, and the murderous computer that ran it, HAL 9000. 

2010 on Facebook

One big aspect about 2010 is the creepy vibe throughout the film. For instance, the film starts with a deep, distorted voice (which, it turns out, belongs to the missing Dave Bowman) saying "My God, it's full of stars." This line is in reference to the monolith Dave discovered at the end of the first film. Interestingly, this line isn't in the original film, but does appear in the book. Also notable is a scene where a probe is searching for signs of life on Jupiter's moon Europa. The probe's on-board camera pans across the surface as the crew looks on. I don't particularly remember a creepy factor in 2001 (suspenseful, sure), so I think it's notable that it's so prevalent in this sequel.

Pinterest

Also notable in 2010 is the US/Soviet relationship. The film was made during the Cold War amid tensions between the two countries. This factors heavily into the movie's plot, despite the fact that it was, at the time, portraying the future. This quality definitely dates the film. In fact, the film's ending is a bit preachy, with a cosmic message that the Earth's inhabitants need to live in peace. The US/Soviet subplot does add a bit of political intrigue to the film, however, so it's not a complete waste of time.

The cast is one of the film's strongest suits. Scheider is the film's star, and he's a little more grandiose than Jaws' Chief Brody (oddly enough, both characters are members of a team on a ship, hunting for something...hmm). Helen Mirren is great as the Russian Captain Tanya Kirbuk (Mirren is actually of Russian descent despite being known simply as a Brit) and Lithgow turns in a solid performance, portraying a nervous American engineer named Walter Curnow. Bob Balaban plays Dr. R. Chandra, Hal 9000's creator.

With the special effects of today's films, you may think that 2010 looks dated. And it does, to an extent. But there are some beautiful cosmic shots, such as a scene where the crew's ship is sent hurtling towards Jupiter after they attempt to "air brake", a process where they slow their velocity by using the planet's atmosphere. There's also a great Gravity-esque scene where Lithgow's character travels from the Leonov to the Discovery while tethered to a Russian member of the crew.

Reflections on Film and Television

At the end of the day, 2010: The Year We Make Contact is a smart, engaging sci-fi flick, overshadowed by its predecessor simply because of the high bar set. Seek it out if you're looking for a thoughtful, well-acted space drama.

3.5 Out Of 5 Stars

This review is part of Forgotten Films' 1984-a-thon.

REDRUM: Not Just Your Average Caribbean Club Cocktail

Sorry about yesterday's post - just a little Halloween prank. Now here's the real deal.

The Shining: Nick's Take

So what’s the big deal about The Shining?  What sets it apart from other Stephen King movies or other horror movies for that matter?   Why are we honoring it this Halloween?  I can answer all three questions with one answer:  Because it is one of the greatest horror movies ever made.

Everything about The Shining makes you feel uneasy in some way.  Whether it be the godawful carpet of the haunted hotel or Jack Nicholson making out with a corpse – we’re talking full tongue, here – or the face of Shelley Duvall or the whatthefuck scene I posted a few Fridays ago, this movie has got it all and that’s why we, among countless other blogs, lists, people, ghosts, etc., are giving it the illustrious Open Hatch approval.  Which by now obviously means gold – opinionatingly speaking.  Anyone who’s both read the novel and seen the movie knows that the two stand apart in great respect.  I’m willing to bet that Kubrick was pissed once he finished reading the novel simply because he didn’t think of the idea first.  The similarities are without a doubt plain to see, but the differences are monumental comparatively speaking; an axe vs. a mallet, a maze vs. a zoo of animated animal hedges, the survival of the hotel vs. the burning down of the hotel (there are only two references to a basement boiler in the movie whereas the novel has it as a major plot point; so major in fact that the hotel burns down at novel’s end due to the overheating boiler  . . . I could go on and on.  I won’t say which I prefer because both are great in their own right.  I did however see The Shining for the first time when I was about 11 or 12 and have watched it many, many times since.  I didn’t read the book until I was in college, roughly 19, and I haven’t read it since, so I guess I’d have to admit that the movie does sort of hold a special little place in my warped mind.

Courtesy of Wikipedia

As I mentioned before, everything about this movie is creepy.  The collective beauty of the cast alone is enough to make you not want to waste your time.  Tiffany mentioned at one point that she thought Danny was a cute little boy and I bit my tongue.  The mop of hair on that poor boy is ridiculous.  I should mention though that the boy in the TV miniseries remake is even worse.  A bowl cut of bad acting is about as nice as I can be.  I also find it terribly amusing when we’re taken down to Scatman’s Miami hotel room . . . the naked afro’ed ladies on the walls are pure delight in a “Whoa!” kind of way.  A slew of scenes are merely images seen from Danny’s point of view of the various hotel ghosts fiddling about.  I hadn’t seen a haunted movie done so well until I watched Insidious.  Being released in 1980 meant Jack, Shelley, Scatman, and the rest of the cast were making their last ditch efforts to save '70s fashions so even the comforting thought of I’d look good in that escapes you entirely.  I think the fairy tale vomit of Shelley Duvall’s first outfit is top ringer for scariest Halloween costume ever.  You guys know what I’m talking about.  Being the younger brother of twins, I can fully attest that twins are odd and the scene(s) of Grady’s twin daughters only proves my point.[1]  The “Gimmie the bat!” scene is incredibly awesome on both a freaky level (Jack Nicholson) and a comedic level (Shelley Duvall) and I absolutely adore The Simpsons’ Tree House of Horror take on it.  Don’t be surprised if it winds up on a Favorite Scene Friday in the future.

I can’t list all of what is terrifying about The Shining, but I would be remiss if I didn’t at least mention what Jack Nicholson brings to the table.  Watching him speak to Lloyd (the bartender) about breaking Danny’s arm is alarming on a number of levels.  To get my meaning, I’d advise you to watch that scene over and over, each time paying full attention to a different aspect.  For example, at first focus directly on his eyebrows while he speaks and next time focus on his arms and next time the tone of his voice, etc. etc.  Absolutely incredible.  Another good one is the scene where he talks to Wendy from inside the walk-in pantry.  It’s like you can feel the madness breaching the locked door and striking Wendy in her big ‘ol bug-eyes.  When I read Stephen King’s idea of The Shining, I tried to place Jack Nicholson’s image into the “Jack Torrance” character as King wrote him.  Let’s just say I can see why Kubrick went the route that he did.  Nicholson makes a much creepier madman with an axe.  He’s off-kilter throughout the entire movie, to see him try to redeem himself by letting Danny escape (novel reference) just wouldn’t convey as well on screen.  That’s not to say I think Kubrick’s “Jack Torrance” is better.  King hits you on a much deeper level with his “Jack Torrance” because we read him as “under control (for the most part) to mad to ‘love over hate’ to full blown wickedness.”  It’s hard to convey that on screen.

This movie is on nearly every Top 50 Scariest Movies lists, but I don’t think it’s often listed as number one.  I’m not so sure I agree with that.                

[1] I wrote this on purpose to prove a point that my brothers don’t give a shit about reading the blog.  Thanks, guys.

The Shining: Robert's Take

If I can engage in understatement, The Shining is an excellent horror film. Nick points out that every aspect of the film is scary, and I completely agree. It might be the most unsettling flick I've ever seen. And is there anything scarier than someone you love losing their mind and trying to kill you?

I read something about The Shining once and it's always stuck with me. I can't remember where it comes from – a review I think – and for the life of me I can't find it online. If anyone can help me attribute this to the comments' originator I would appreciate it. It goes something like this – The Shining is a great horror film because it's every horror story rolled into one. The film has ghosts. It has a haunted house and a madman. It has zombies and even a werewolf in a way. Indian burial grounds, possession, poltergeists, skeletons – you name it.

I love this movie. I love the performances and the tone of the film. I love the unsettling beauty of the opening. I love the behind the scenes stories that I've heard over the years – the trademark obsession and intensity of director Stanley Kubrick, the dissatisfaction Stephen King – who wrote the novel the film is based on – felt with the finished product. I shudder to think of the borderline torture Kubrick put his cast and crew through, particularly Scatman Crothers and Shelley Duvall.

One of my new favorite things about the film is the debate about what actually happens to Jack Torrance. You might believe that Jack is continually reincarnated and drawn to the hotel, or you might think that he was pulled back through time and absorbed into the hotel's past at the end of the film. Whichever of the two theories you believe, the film provides evidence for both, and I think that's a great thing. I do, however, personally believe the reincarnation theory. At one point, Jack says, "When I came up here for my interview, it was as though I'd been here before." I also recall a scene where Jack tells Lloyd the ghost/imaginary bartender that it's good to be back.

The Shining is the type of film that really makes me think and I'm glad that the talented group of people behind it came together to produce such a great piece of art and entertainment. The effort obviously involved more work than play, but the finished product is anything but dull.