Kubrick, An Optimistic Clairvoyant

There was a Double Kubrick matinee at my local movie theater, one I could not miss: A Clockwork Orange (1971) and 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). I’ve seen both before on the big screen and in video format, but who can pass on a chance to see them back to back on the big screen again? How fabulous both these films are in their very disparate ways! They hold in common the outstanding art of this director as well as his vision for the future, almost clairvoyant in many ways, as we can attest from the “future” of 2016.

But what an optimist Stanley Kubrick was, in so many ways!

Malcom McDowell, Warren Clarke, James Marcus in A Clockwork Orange

When A Clockwork Orange was released in the Peru of the 70’s, where I first saw it, it was considered scandalous above all for the violence and sex it contained; multiple stories circulated about half the theater goers walking out, some even becoming physically indisposed watching the film; something that would only pique the interest of a film enthusiastic teenager. It wasn’t, however, the violence or the open (horrifying) sexuality of rape that is shown in the movie that caught my attention, and that of the millions of followers this film has since gained, but how exceptional Kubrick was in taking the (then) rather underground and complex look at society that was contained in Anthony Burgess’s dystopian novella to the screen, actually improving his work, and creating his own piece of art.

The original book was a complex look into a future where some of the budding issues Burgess regarded as negative in the world would prevail, with the dire results that are so brilliantly visually summarized in the film. There was the political system that would try to solve its social problems by shifting the “moral” responsibility from the individual to the state, as it removed individual choice, contained in the figure of the Minister and the political system; there is the American popular culture that was fostering homogeneity, passivity and apathy in youth  so well represented in middle class Alex and his pals; the justice system that was violent, corrupt and, ultimately quite ridiculous, marvelously portrayed by the Chief Guard and the probation officer, Deltoid in the film; and finally even the psychological movement of “behaviorism” , popular at the time the book was written and also a part of Burgess’s critique.

Michael Bates as the Chief Guard in A Clockwork Orange

Taking this to the big screen, in particular, the dystopian world resulting from all these criticized tendencies, was a task that probably only a capable filmmaker like Kubrick could achieve so well. The set and costume design, to the last detail, is fascinating to see, while disturbing; the music is quite brilliant, including the “Old Ludwig Von”, and the casting, in particular Malcolm McDowell in, most definitely, his best film to date, are all part of the brilliance of Kubrick. What ends up a paradox, so many years into the future, is how Alex and his Droogs, a violent, hedonistic and nihilistic group of young men if there was one, creating a chaotic future, now pale when compared to the gangs, drug dealers, and terrorists of today. The cautionary tale of a future with the wrong moral choices certainly was outdone by our reality. The most violent scenes that led people to walk out of the theater back in the 70s are quite innocuous when compared to the violence contained in many television series and movies today. For example, the beating up the old drunk tramp in the movie is probably one of the more brutal scenes of a Clockwork, along with the rape scenes, of course, but he’s the same tramp Alex encounters later on, quite in one piece, with all his teeth in place; how benign this now seems when compared to a man getting his head bashed off by a car door, or another broken to pieces by a bowling ball, scenes from the very popular now televised series Daredevil!

2001: A Space Odyssey

2001: A Space Odyssey, filmed in 1968, had us on commercial air travel (Pan American) to the moon and beyond that year so, yeah, a bit optimistic on the timeline. When we see this film, however, from the perspective of filmgoers that have since been through 7 episodes of Star War films and countless other space movies that have since come out, we can only marvel at the storytelling and design that Kubrick perpetrated way back 48 years ago! The space suits, the pods, the space stations: there has been nothing new under the sun since this ground-breaking space film. Everything looks quite recent. But he outsmarted all the other space travel and alien films that have come since in making sure to never show an alien life form on the screen, beyond the monolith that represents them in the movie. They are, therefore, both more of a “menace” to humans than shown in any other movie since they were here since the dawn of man and continue into the future and beyond.  Are they the Gods that Prometheus has us searching for still?

Watching 2001 you realize how many directors have borrowed or imitated Kubrick since, not just Steven Spielberg with the Star War films, or the Star Trek ones, with the gadgets, but also films like Terrance Malik’s Tree of Life, Alfonso Cuarón’s Gravity and even Christopher Nolan’s Inception and Interstellar. If it’s not Kubrick that is being borrowed from, it’s Ridley Scott and his Alien and Blade Runner, also made over 40 years ago.

And this is probably the biggest feeling with which I left the movie theater after that double feature: how unoriginal, linear and formulaic so many movies have become! How very predictable and already “chewed” the plots are, how terribly FX and digitized fantastic scenes have become, to the point of numbing the audience towards their presence. Maybe I’m being harsh and most movies have always been like this. Maybe these were always just rare gems in the mines of cinema; if so, we have to value them all that much more for their rarity.