puntiniCAZpuntini

DeRank : 14,44 • DeAge™ : 7944 days

  • Contact
  • Here since 21 october 2003
Voto:
Anyway, you can see that Enea, you didn't take all the acids that Kubrick had eaten, you're too moderate and you don’t see how to justify his exaggerations. I have a very tragic view of the future, and most likely if I had been alive at the release of Clockwork, I would have judged Kubrick as a messiah or a seer. Today I would realize I was wrong, but back then I would have agreed with him.
Voto:
I don't follow you on the paradox. I follow you TODAY in 2005, but a film from the 70s should be judged with the eyes of the 70s. In the 70s it wasn't paradoxical, so it isn't a paradox now either, but just a TRAGIC vision, as I said before. If you want to talk about how A Clockwork Orange appears in 2005, you're right, but discussing A Clockwork Orange as it appears in 2005 seems stupid and pointless to me; I TRY to evaluate it with the eyes of the time. Of course, I can't fully succeed, but at least I try.
Voto:
Ah well Enea, so you think like me. If he exaggerated a bit more with "the tragedy," my little machine would light up with "mavaffanculo imbecille che cazzo dici?", but it only went to first gear. Oh, anyway, whenever you want a vaffanculo or a one-star review, just say the word, eh. I have to admit I haven't read even one, Dalla Battisti Stewart really don't knock on my door, I let them be. :)
Voto:
But what did I win? One thing you said correctly: I still don’t understand.
Voto:
(The Kubrick was not intended, I always get it wrong) - On A Clockwork Orange, I insist on my thesis. It is not pushed to the paradox; it is what Kubrick thought would really happen. In the years when drugs were spreading as a cure for ills and the negative effects were still unknown, many thought, like Stanley, that if those people (the Freaks) had children, only beasts would be born. In that film, Alex is the victim as a child brought into the world without parents who could teach him how to live, and thus at the same time he was giving the young people of the time a hard time, depicting them as old in Alex's brain-dead parents.
Voto:
And the references to tragedy are indeed present in this rec, final line -> In all its tragic essence. <- To me, (TO ME) it makes me think it’s a tragic film, but I don’t know.
Voto:
I call out anyone I consider a fool; to me, they don’t deserve any rating, so I won’t give them one—simple as that. I never rate randomly; I always point out what I think is worthy of a one star. I remember Candy Candy very well, and I explained above that I associated it with this review precisely because this is a review of a tragedy, not of a misanthropic film as it should be. Trust me, I remember Candy just fine; I’m the only male born into my family since 1969 (no porn references) onwards, the rest are all females. And when Arthur fell off the horse while bringing her roses, a part of me died too. Ah, what a great babe Terence’s mother was, not to mention a fantastic theatre actress.
Voto:
A Clockwork Orange, that is a tragedy. The tragedy of young people born and raised in this violent era who passively absorb such violence and actively unleash it because they are prisoners of it; they were born into it and it becomes automatic to be part of it. But the system, instead of recognizing its own mistakes, condemns them and puts them in jail. Shall we talk about the ex-hippy drugged parents who raised Alex without giving her any education?... they are the guilty ones, Alex is the victim. Barry Lyndon is just a materialistic jerk, and Kubrick treats him as such.
Voto:
We're talking about Kubrick, Stanley Kubrick. If you know Kubrick, you understand this film and root against Lindon; if you don't know Kubrick, you write shitty reviews like this one.
Voto:
So what you say about Candy Candy is right, but Candy Candy, being a tragedy, has nothing to do with this film, and since this review really resembles Candy Candy, it sucks all the way through.