A Clockwork Orange to be remade?

[Ripper 0]

What an overated movie.

I agree, and I love Kubrick.

 

Outside of the ECW-esque brawl in the beganing and the previously mentioned penis beating...there isn't anything i would call AMAZING about the film. Good movie, but really REALLY overrated.

[nl5xsk1 0]

The movie is good, the book is great. Those of us that are fans of the book tend to like the movie by association.

 

They're pretty much in a lose-lose situation: Either they make this movie very comparable to the original, and get shit on for just remaking (compared to re-invisioning) another movie. OR they make this movie too dissimilar from the original book, and then it'll be a fucking farce that doesn't deserve the name A Clockwork Orange.

[Jingus 0]

Personally, I absolutely hated the original movie and think it's one of the most overrated of all time, but that's a whole 'nother argument there.

 

As for the remake, my first thought on reading about it was: isn't Ewan MacGregor a bit old to be playing a teenaged juvenile delinquint?

[razazteca 0]

Well it can be like the Psycho remake and get shit on or they can get Baz Lurhmann to make it into musical set in a different time period and city.

[justsoyouknow 0]

I can just see whoever is doing this movie tacking on some inane moral message at the end.

You mean like posing the question whether it's better to have free will and choose to be evil, while still having the choice to be good, or whether it's better to have the desire to be evil, but being forced into being good, thereby losing your freewill? You mean like using B.F. Skinner's theories on Behaviorism to talk about the weight of free will on society?

 

Yeah, that would suck. I hope they don't do anything like that.

[Guest El Satanico]

Ewan doesn't look any older than McDowell when he played Alex.

[Nighthawk 0]

It was a problem then. They should get a kid to play it. That would probably make it more controversial and interesting.

[Guest JMA]

I can just see whoever is doing this movie tacking on some inane moral message at the end.

You mean like posing the question whether it's better to have free will and choose to be evil, while still having the choice to be good, or whether it's better to have the desire to be evil, but being forced into being good, thereby losing your freewill? You mean like using B.F. Skinner's theories on Behaviorism to talk about the weight of free will on society?

 

Yeah, that would suck. I hope they don't do anything like that.

That's not what I meant. I meant having Alex "see the light" at the end and become a watered-down version of himself. You know, apologizing to his victims, trying to undo the damage he'd done, ect. You'll notice that I said an INANE message. A message that makes no real sense and is only there to make the audience feel good.

 

The original message was one that made you think; it wasn't inane at all. I fear that today's Hollywood would try to put in a tackier, "feel good" message.

[Guest JMA]

It was a problem then. They should get a kid to play it. That would probably make it more controversial and interesting.

Alex was originally much younger in the novel. Although I doubt the movie would get made if they had a thirteen year old raping women and commiting acts of violence.

[justsoyouknow 0]

That's not what I meant. I meant having Alex "see the light" at the end and become a watered-down version of himself. You know, apologizing to his victims, trying to undo the damage he'd done, ect. You'll notice that I said an INANE message. A message that makes no real sense and is only there to make the audience feel good.

 

The original message was one that made you think; it wasn't inane at all. I fear that today's Hollywood would try to put in a tackier, "feel good" message.

You mean like the theories of Pelagianism and Augustinianism present in the book?

[Guest JMA]

You mean like the theories of Pelagianism and Augustinianism present in the book?

I actually haven't read the book. I've read about some of the differences between the movie and book, but that's all.

[justsoyouknow 0]

Oh, well they're present in the movie, too. They're essentially theories that oppose each other: one claims that man can better himself through his own virtue, while the other claims that only through God can man make himself a better person.

[Jingus 0]

Ewan doesn't look any older than McDowell when he played Alex.

McDowell was 27 when he played Alex in the original, and he already looked a bit weathered for the part; more like a rampaging college dropout than a punk kid like in the original book. McGegor, on the other hand, is already 33; he's playing the "older veteran mentor" part of Obi-Wan already. I think he's way too old for the part.

[justsoyouknow 0]

I'm actually shocked that they didn't try to get Johnny Depp to play Alex.

[Guest El Satanico]

Ewan doesn't look any older than McDowell when he played Alex.

McDowell was 27 when he played Alex in the original, and he already looked a bit weathered for the part; more like a rampaging college dropout than a punk kid like in the original book. McGegor, on the other hand, is already 33; he's playing the "older veteran mentor" part of Obi-Wan already. I think he's way too old for the part.

I'm not talking about age. Ewan looks younger than McDowell did.

[Nighthawk 0]

It was a problem then. They should get a kid to play it. That would probably make it more controversial and interesting.

Alex was originally much younger in the novel. Although I doubt the movie would get made if they had a thirteen year old raping women and commiting acts of violence.

Just make him 15 or 16. That could get made. Most all of Larry Clark's movies were like that.

[Guest El Satanico]

But problem is finding at least a decent actor that can pass for 16

[Chuck Woolery 0]

...Zsasz could do it.

[Guest OctoberBlood]

ASHTON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111111111111111

[Guest El Satanico]

Leave Ashton out of this, but no he couldn't pass for 16.

[AndrewTS 0]

I'm actually shocked that they didn't try to get Johnny Depp to play Alex.

He looks quite young, but again, the age thing. He'd have to look way younger. That doesn't assume that the studios will care or if even Depp (who could really sink his teeth into a role like that) can save it. I've very, very unconvinced that will be any good.

 

As mentioned, an "update" kills a lot of the original's appeal. A remake set in New York. Ugh. I'm sure that decision was made based on some marketing surveys or some such garbage.

 

Plus, what director could possibly do any remake of ACO justice?

[Ripper 0]

I would want that little fucker from the Sixth Sense to do it.

 

I think he could pull off psycho. I get a psycho vibe from him every since he almost stabbed that lady in the eye in AI.

[AndrewTS 0]

I would want that little fucker from the Sixth Sense to do it.

 

I think he could pull off psycho. I get a psycho vibe from him every since he almost stabbed that lady in the eye in AI.

Oh, he's scarier and creepier than a barrel full of clowns, but isn't he about 10 years old?

[Ripper 0]

I would want that little fucker from the Sixth Sense to do it. 

 

I think he could pull off psycho.  I get a psycho vibe from him every since he almost stabbed that lady in the eye in AI.

Oh, he's scarier and creepier than a barrel full of clowns, but isn't he about 10 years old?

He should be around 15-16 now I think. Plus it would stretch those acting chops.

 

 

I say they should do a 360 and just get Dakota(sp?) Manning to play the part.

[godthedog 0]

there's a 21-year-old in our drama department who would make a frighteningly good alex.

[Ripper 0]

there's a 21-year-old in our drama department who would make a frighteningly good alex.

I'll be the judge of that.

 

 

How often does he beat people to death with ceramic penises.

[Guest Urine Sane]

You can't remake this, it's too unique, Kubrick's fingerprints are all over it.

[Nighthawk 0]

Ok, for the second time though, it's no more of a remake than Disney's Beauty and the Beast was of Cocteau's. Especially since the setting is completely changed. You can throw all consideration of Kubrick and his movie out the window.

[justsoyouknow 0]

Then why call it "A Clockwork Orange" if the entire film is going to be changed? If it's not true to the novela, why even throw the title on there?

[Nighthawk 0]

Yeah, but how accurate does it have to be to be 'true'? Kubrick's version wasn't acurrate either. Change a little, change a lot, it's all coming from the same place. The core issue of Clockwork Orange isn't the setting. Look at, say, 'O Brother Where Art Thou?' Changed everything, but that was still Homer's Odyssey. As long as the 'message' of Clockwork Orange is still there, it will still be Clockwork Orange. But unlike Homer's Odyssey, Clockwork Orange has name value. So they'd be well advised to use it.

Besides, this movie isn't even made yet. Let's not start splitting hairs too soon.