Film Review of Clockwork Orange
Never far from controversy, Stanley Kubrick's 1971 classic 'A Clockwork
Orange,' over the years since its release, has sparked huge debate. Emotionally
charged language has perpetuated reviews, papers and simmering complaints
about the movie, whilst varied semantic devices and all levels of diction
have been utilized by many levels of 'scholar' trying desperately to put across
their points clearly on what is a complicated, and undeniably deep appraisal
of youth, society and the portrayal of evil. This essay will aim to contrast
two different reviews written on the same subject, outlining the different
techniques used and the overall feel of the two pieces. Whether through preconceived
ideas or just general skill with semantics and grammar etc. they certainly
strike different tones and studying the lexis, grammar, metaphorical and rhetorical
language and typographic features I will discuss the reviews, noting the similarities
and differences.
The two pieces themselves are both reviews, one professional from Yvonne Ng
from writing for 'Kinema', an online subscription journal that is clearly
aimed at the academic, the other by Cesar Alvia who scribes for another site
clearly as a fan of the film, rather than being paid for his opinions. Indeed,
the second site boasts that 'The reviews are written by fans who do it for
the love of it- Not for money! ' Both of the reviews set out a brief background
of Kubrick's motivation to produce the film, various techniques he used to
create the ambience of the movie and go through the events that unfold as
the story progresses. However, they both clearly attempt to engage their own
audiences, Ng with a well researched and referenced technical insight and
Alvia with his familiar tone, witty asides and obvious love for his subject
topic. Under the following headlines, I will explore in greater details, certain
issues in the writing.
Register: The real difference that first strikes one between these two reviews,
is the use of the register in the two pieces and the entirely different tone
that categorises and appeals to the two audiences. In Ng's 'Kinema' piece,
the formal style is prevalent from the very beginning, utilising referenced
quotes with a more mature and advanced grasp of semantics obvious: 'has acquired
a prominent place in the history of cinema' as opposed to the latter review
'If you've never seen A Clockwork Orange, then quit reading this review and
go rent a copy.'
Although it would be impertinent to state that Alvia cannot string some interesting
sentences together himself 'showcases all the standard Kubrick stylistic flourishes'
it seems obvious that his exuberant, and sometimes slightly misconceived use
of language, and thus more enthusiastic yet less formal register could not
be used within an essay for example, yet may appeal to someone wishing to
find out about the basic idea behind the film or simply glance over a view
of the movie for enjoyments sake without feeling overawed by lexicon and succinct
language.
Indeed, it seems to be that both of these pieces manipulate their use of register
to appeal to the specific audience that these two websites are obviously targeted
at. However, while I could imagine Ng's insightful piece appealing to the
observer of both domains, as it certainly does explore all sorts of aspects
of the film and could be of interest to the 'man on the street' who wanted
a full, literary, resource, I feel sure that Alvia's review would not be bought
by a journal, the register almost certainly not 'tight' enough to appeal to
those likely to read and subscribe to the more 'highbrow' publication. It
is a more personable tone than anything and acts almost like someone talking
to a friend or similar film buff. 'If you've seen the film, then you know
where I'm coming from'
Lexis: Again, intricately linked in with the overall register of the two reviews,
the lexis is another key indicator as to the tone and style of these two reviews
and, while the semantics used in both pieces undeniably show some sophistication
and level of level of originality, there are some major differences. In the
amateur review one may note for instance, that Alvia often overuses, repeats
and occasionally misuses adjectives 'a teenaged miscreant wandering the blasted
urban landscape' giving an enthusiastic yet 'slack' feel to the piece. As
well as this, he uses a lexical set of familiar terms and phrases to engage
the reader; 'And that's where we find,' 'I only hope that you all can indulge
me' pitching him as the jovial, and certainly humorous, fanatic happy to share
his experiences of the film. In tune with this, he utilises a large degree
of parenthesis in a similar way one may use spoken asides, double negatives
for example, as may be found in impassioned speech 'but not Kubrick. No,'
and arguably indulges in somewhat sensationalist choice of words. 'Savagery'
and despicable' for example. Of course, strong language also appears in the
professional review, it is after all a violent film, but this seems to be
slightly more in fitting with the lexical set and formed towards the highlighting
of a certain act in the text rather than scattered wilfully as in Alvias version.
For instance the sibilant use of 'sex-saturated' and image-laden 'vivid red
on the white walls' may be dramatic, but also wholly relevant and shows an
informed use of semantics in ideal places to mark its effectiveness. There
is also no 'chummy language,' the lexical set distinctly formal and appropriate
to the publication which, although full of insights and opinion does not thrust
its view of the greatness of the film on its reader except through referenced
quotes.
Grammar: As far as the use of grammar and sentence structure goes in Ng's
professional review, it is noticeable that well formed compound-complex sentences
are in evidence along with formally conceived comma parenthesis, marking out
asides as more important when they are lumped into brackets, although I believe
that it also showcases generally longer paragraphs that do not break the text
up as well as the amateur version. However, Alvia does seem to spend a lot
of time linking independent clauses together with commas 'beating a homeless
man, getting into a gang fight, stealing a car, and raping a woman while forcing
her husband to watch' which somewhat takes from the flow of the review. Not
only this, but there are minor grammatical errors through both pieces which
could do with being cleaned up.
Metaphorical & Rhetorical Language: There is no doubt in my mind that a successful
review will certainly contain a degree of metaphorical language and to some
extent both authors indulge in such practice; 'The result is a graceful ballet
of athletic prowess' and 'moral theme buried at its heart' are just two examples.
Such technique is vital to add a glittering originality to the reviews and
imbue visions of cinematic action into the heart of the reader, and there
is no doubt that Ng has provided some interesting metaphors amongst the flowing
text, and whilst occasionally possibly stretching the relevance in her point,
and thus perhaps cheapening the image that she produces, as in this example,
'the red-haired Mrs Alexander becomes an animated version of the white female
statues at the Korova' adds much to her reviews through these techniques.
Although once again, it would be fair to admit there is not as much candid
metaphor in the amateur review, and it could be said to contain a fair amount
of bombastic rhetoric, this ambivalent style once again characterises the
informal and personal approach that the reader looking for entertainment may
well prefer. Hyperbole, or at least potentially naive opinion, is certainly
evident 'While all of the man's films were incredible,' oxymoron's perpetuate
the description of the protagonist Alex, but actually may well be necessary
when writing about his split personality
Typographical features: The review from '70s fast rewind', whilst displaying
very little typographical elements, indeed only the words WATCH IT are highlighted
through capital letters, is however set out with a few interesting features
to appeal to a web browsing audience. Firstly, it contains an iconic image
of the cover of the film, an aesthetically appealing framework and title imagery,
an amusing rating system (smiley faces out of ten) and a highlighted advert
within the text, presumably as it is a free site to access and such adverts
are needed to recoup outlays. As a contrast to this, the professional review
contains none of the widely acceptable attractive touches that make a website
appealing.
No. It is a formal review and as such is based on content which it deals with
admirably and as one may expect. Firstly the introductory summary is set out
in bold, a device to highlight exactly what the essay is going to be talking
about, the author italicises the film titles and newspaper names with dates
where necessary, and sets out the reference points clearly and obviously in
a different colour.
So, in conclusion, I believe that the professional review is clearly set out
and technically written in a more formal and overall 'formal' style, much
as the audience of 'Kinema' would expect. The semantic ability is certainly
more cultured and consistent, there is not a sudden bunch of adjectives thrown
into the work and the metaphorical language and interesting uses of literary
techniques are certainly varied and impressive; sibilance, metaphor and extremely
vivid phrases are used to great effect. This is no sleight on the amateur
effort however, which while sometimes lacking in a flowing writing ethic and
without the lexical sophistication of Yvonne Ng's piece, I believe successfully
engages its audience with humour, personality and an interest and genuine
love of the subject that belies the authors inexperience. Using aesthetically
pleasing typographical effects, he has targeted the review directly to the
'browsing' internet surfers who will latch onto his enthusiasm and through
its familiar register allows the average reader to feel attuned to his ideas.
Both reviews are targeted specifically at their audiences and while Ng uses
more grammatical techniques, more complex sentence structure and a generally
more formally educated style of writing, both seem fairly successful in their
aims.
All of our sample essays were written by students and then submitted to us to display and help others. Thanks to all the students who have submitted their work to us.
See a list of other free English essays:
Free English Essays
Free English Literature Essays
![English Essays Phone Number](http://www.englishessays.org.uk/images/phonenumber.png)
Custom Essays
Use our custom writing services to excel in your studies and graduate with a 1st Class degree.
More about Custom Essays
Essay Marking Service
Improve your grades - let our qualified experts advise you on how to improve the overall quality of your own essay.
More about our Essay Marking Service
£5000 No Plagiarism Guarantee!
Detect plagiarism in our work and get paid £5000 and a free paper!
Learn about our Guarantees!
Our Press Articles
The Times, The Observer, BBC, ITN News, Sky News, The Independent. Read our press articles
Most Popular Pages:
Custom English Dissertations, How to Write an English Essay, Press articles about our service, Custom English Essays
How to write English essays?
Academic
English essay, Admissions essay, Cause and Effect essay, Conclusion essay, Comparison and Contrast essay, Definition essay, Descriptive essay, Expository essay, Evaluation essay, Narrative essay, Non literary essay, Literary analysis essay, Persuasive essay, 5 Paragraph essay, Photo essay, Scholarship essay
FREE English Literature essays
Free English literature essays written by students for students. English
literature essays
FREE English essays
Read some of the English essays we received from students. English
essays
English Literature in the UK
Colleges and universities that offer English Literature degrees. English Literature in the UK
Free Plagiarism Scanner!
Free scanning software to check for and detect plagiarism. Free
Plagiarism Detection Tool
Our Affiliate Program!
Sell our custom essays and get 15% commission! Affiliate
Program For Essay Resellers
Want to earn £5000 per month!
We are always looking for good research writers! Become
our research writer
Customer testimonials
We've helped many students achieve
better grades. Read our customer testimonials.