In my final Fall quarter of 2011 at UCLA, I am very excited to do my theatre  internship at SIPA. “For over 36 years, Search to Involve Pilipino Americans (SIPA), which is located in multi-ethnic Historic Filipino town in Downtown Los Angeles, has served the impoverished neighborhood as well as the greater Los Angeles Filipino American community with mission-fueled passion and relatively little fanfare. SIPA continues to provide health and human services as well as community economic development and arts/cultural programs to the now diverse, multi-ethnic youth and families residing in the area as well as Filipino Americans all over Los Angeles County”( taken from SIPA’s website under its mission statement). I have had the great privilege to work with SIPA on numerous occasions hosting their benefit dinners to raise much-needed funds for the services that they provide for the Filipino American community. I am aware of the work that they do not only for the Filipino community but to all the ethnicities in their vicinity.

I have always wanted to work more in depth with the Filipino community and when the opportunity presented itself to personally spearhead an after school  activity that uses theatre as a tool to educate children about Philippine culture, I immediately proposed to the Executive Director Joel Jacinto that I would love to be involved in any capacity possible. I have been given the opportunity to develop, teach and implement two creative dramatic classes for SIPA's after school program for children. These two programs will be classified by age. The Young Artist Tier ( age 5-10 years old) and Pre-Teen/ Teen Artist Tier ( age 11-18). The children will then be given the opportunity to apply the skills they have been taught as they participate in a performance for the Philippine community during their Christmas Presentation.

I hope to gain valuable insight on how theatre can really help educate children and bring communities together through the arts. Working with children has always been something I have wanted to do and with this internship, I hope to learn through the various lesson plans that I will create what the children really absorb and then go back and reformulate the activities that I present so that I can develop more cohesive and structured theatrical and educational games. Using the theatrical skills I have learned as an actor from my professional experience and applying all the theatrical academic concepts I have learned at UCLA, I intend to create a program for children that inspires, motivate and involves  children in the Filipino culture. This will hopefully help shape their identities as they grow to be proud Filipino Americans here in the United States.

By using Filipino vocabulary words through various sensory, movement, pantomime, improvisation and characterization exercises to engage the children, I am hoping to expand their knowledge of their rich Filipino heritage. It is important that children of the new generation are exposed through a variety of stimulus particularly play and community, so that they may be able to understand the values and traditions of the Philippine culture.  Taking part in this internship will undoubtedly be a meaningful and fulfilling experience that will help me apply all my academic knowledge in a hands on environment where I have the capacity to affect and inspire young minds that are searching and forming their personal identities in this ever evolving, diverse world.

For inquires to join the program please contact Christine Calderon of SIPA at (213)382-1819 ext. 125. Classes begin on September 26, 2011. Mondays from 4-6pm or Wednesdays from 4-6pm.

                Search to Involve Pilipino Americans (SIPA) is located at:

                                               Temple Gateway Youth & Community Center
                                               3200 West Temple Street
                                                Los Angeles, CA 90026-4522
                                                Historic Filipinotown  

“One Flew Over a Cuckoo’s Nest: An Anti- Establishment Microcosm of the Turbulent Sixties”

           

This paper examines some of the reasons why One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest was such a landmark success when it was released at the time and the themes behind the film that serve as a microcosm for the antiestablishment feelings of the masses all through out the sixties and mid- seventies. The friction of Nurse Ratched and McMurphy are parsed out in specific detail in order to draw parallels to the feelings of society at large during the end of the Sixties.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is an independent film released in 1975 by United Artists. The lead producer Michael Douglas had received the rights for the film adaptation from his father, Kirk Douglas, who had starred and portrayed Randall Patrick McMurphy in the play version in 1963, penned by Dale Wasserman. The original source of the film prior to the play on Broadway was from a novel by Ken Kesey released in 1962. Kesey had been employed as an attendant at a Veterans hospital when he volunteered to be tested for the effects of a drug then called LSD. This premise is what served as the inspiration for his Kesey’s explosive novel that Milos Forman, a Czechoslovakian director adapted for film only after over a decade of the successful stage production on Broadway. Kirk Douglas spent many years in the sixties trying to get a studio to produce the film but to no avail as the content matter of an insane asylum was hard to sell. Finally, passing the baton to his son, Michael who took over the project, together with the Forman’s colleague and friend, Saul Zaentz, co-produced to raise an estimated $4.4 Million (IMDB) that eventually went on to reap $112 Million in the United States alone. Not only was the film monetarily successful, it also won several of the important awards and swept the Academy Awards of 1975. This had only happened once before in the history of the academies since the 1934 Frank Capra film  "It Happened One Night"( IMDB). One Flew Over a Cuckoo’s Nest won in all five of the top Academy Awards, for best picture, actor ( ack Nicholson), actress (Louise Fletcher), director (Milos Forman) and screenplay (Lawrence Hauben and Bo Goldman)(IMDB). The contenders that year at the Academies were heavy hitters by many auteur directors but nothing really fell into the genre that One Flew Over A Cuckoo’s Nest was in.

What kind of genre then does One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest fall under specifically? Certainly, the crazy antics of McMurphy to have the patients revolt against Nurse Ratched feels and looks like a comedy. Yet it is so much more than just a comedy as the film delves deeper into the subconscious when the viewer begins to recognize the film’s underlying message and starts to question the ways in which order and systematic obedience must be played out. Nominated for best picture that year contending with Forman’s film was Stanley Kubrick’s Barry Lyndon, which falls under the drama, romance ,war genre. The next contender was Dog Day Afternoon, a crime drama directed by Sidney Lumet, followed by Spielberg’s Jaws, a horror/ thriller and lastly, Altman’s Nashville, a musical black comedy. Just by taking a closer look at the films that were in contention for Best Picture, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is the only psychological thriller/ comedy that can sum up the turbulent decade that had past. The film serves as a commentary to millions of people in the United States that had gone through the culture wars that had them questioning entities that forced control over ideologies such as big corporations manufacturing culture as a commodity to be sold and profited from or government agencies that repressed freedom of communication.

Indeed, the objectives of the two leads in the film really create much of the ongoing tension in the film. Thus, a big focus of this paper will be the portrayal of Nurse Ratched’s iron grip and McMurphys’ rebellious character in association to one another in order to provide context for the discussion of how the film mirrors the antiestablishment feelings of the society after the sixties. The character of Randal Patrick McMurphy, superbly portrayed by Jack Nicolson is the antihero/ protagonist of the film. His character growth really moves the plot along as he enters the asylum with hopes of passing off as insane in order to get out of a working farm.  As he is subjected to the stringent policies established by the lead nurse, he openly becomes defiant of her rules that constrict not only him but also the other patients as well from enjoying menial joys such as a watching the baseball playoffs. McMurphys’ influence on the other inmates slowly becomes apparent when they begin to break out of habit, speak up and question Nurse Ratched. Nurse Ratched’s character is unbreakable, inflexible and manipulative to the point of driving another inmate to kill himself. However, she is the epitome of a passive- aggressive type of character.  According to divorce.com, passive aggressive behavior is actually considered a form of  ‘covert” abuse which is when a person is sly or underhandedly abusing another domestically. Nurse Ratched is without a doubt this kind of character, creatively portrayed with subtle yet distinct nuances by actress, Louis Fletcher. In one of the first scenes where a meeting takes place with the patients of the ward on McMurphy’s first day, A sign on the board behind Nurse Ratched says” If you wish to see Dr. Swivy, sign up at the Doctors station”.  Already a bureaucracy is set in place to see the person in the highest position, which is the Doctor. Yet to get to him, the patients need to go through the dominating and feared nurse, which then restrains the patients from seeking counseling from the Doctor.

Ken Kesey, the original source writer was actually fired from the film set and had vowed to never watch the film adaptation. The differences from the original novel source and the film adaptation must then be discussed. In the novel, the narrator was the mute Chief Bromden who in the film only really plays a secondary role to the development of the plot. His entire back story is cut from the film altogether, which is justifiable, as the medium must tell a story in a limited amount of time. McMurphy in the novel also goes through a lot more character development but that once again is to be expected, as there is less time on screen to portray a character arc. In the novel McMurphy’s character is calm and collected when first institutionalized into the psychiatric ward before becoming rebellious during the latter part of the story, but that may also be due to Nicolson’s portrayal of the character or the direction that Forman wanted to go with McMurphy’s character. Granted when a creative piece of art such as One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is portrayed in not just two but three mediums, which are book form to stage play to film adaptation, leeway for changes in the story have to be accommodated because of the nature of the different mediums. The various versions that are not quite similar in all regards can in many ways can turn off and alienate an audience, especially if they are fans of one kind of medium over another. It is important to remember that there has to be room for varied adaptations because the medium has to be taken into consideration.

Clearly, the audience of this film must be defined and possible reasons for why and how they were really able to identify and relate to One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.  Even though the setting is in a mental facility, the film is not really about the psychological problems of the inmates. Instead, the film tackles the lack of freedom of the patients because of the oppression they are facing in a closed system, led by Nurse Ratched, who has hindered their growth, independence and chance for normalcy. The demographics of the film are mostly men and some women who are probably older than 25 at the time of this release who have the maturity to understand the concept of being repressed in a society that curtails freedom of expression and independence. Even a review in the Variety from 1975 by critic A.D Murphy makes the same observation when he writes:

Thus, this long-delayed film emerges with a dual impact. To those under the age of, say 25, it will be a theatrically powerful but not especially challenging ensemble showpiece, which poses the now-familiar question, who is insane -- the keepers or the kept? To those over that age barrier, it is intellectual nostalgia…(November 18, 1975).”

This decade being discussed really fostered a confused identity among the masses and the demonstrations and protest that were so prevalent during the tale end of the sixties are proof of the ideological mayhem succumbing society at the time. People were no longer willing to be passive, much like how the patients at the institution are when McMurphy first arrives. At the start of the film, the inmates are bound to the regularity and repetitiveness of their schedule. No one dares to question taking pills or if they can watch television. However after being influenced by McMurphy’s attitude toward the system, the inmates slowly question the restrictions placed upon them. An example of this is when Cheswick defiantly questions Nurse Ratched for his cigarettes. McMurphy in many ways liberate the patients, particularly Chief Bromden, who eventually opens up and confesses his inferiorities to McMurphy in a touching scene when the Chief proclaims he is not as “big” in spirit as McMurphy. Chief at the start of the film keeps to himself and doesn’t interact or talk to anyone. He eventually opens up to McMurphy and actually starts talking and even engages with the other inmates in a round of basketball. Beside Chief Bromden, Billy Bibbit is another character that makes a progressive transformation in the film if only for a few seconds. Billy Bibbit stops stuttering and for a split second regains his confidence after he is discovered naked with Candy the prostitute. When the other inmates applaud his sexual act, he regains an ounce of confidence especially when he answers Nurse Ratcheds’ question of if he is embarrassed of what he has just done. Billy proudly proclaims that he isn’t. But his newfound confidence is taken away from him when Nurse Ratched manipulatively brings up how Billy’s mother is a good friend of hers and must be told of her son’s business, treating him like a child.

Other scenes from  One Flew Over a Cuckoo’s Nest that can provide an exhibit of a microcosm of society during the era known as the sixties are described below. However, some background on when and exactly what the sixties represent should be touched upon.

 The “sixties” has come to be known as a series of cultural, societal and political events that shaped and influenced ideology on a global level. Frederic Jameson, theorist says: “THE SIXTIES WERE IN THAT SENSE AN IMMENSE AND INFLATIONARY ISSUING OF SUPERSTRUCTURAL CREDIT… (Jameson)”. The social unrest swept not only the American nation but was a global movement  that began in the mid 50’s against organized establishments and the rise of decolonization, socialism and reform movements. The end of the sixties lasted well into the mid-1970’s with the decline of political forces such as the Black Panther Movement, Nixon’s fall from power because of the Watergate scandal, the end of “drafting” and the Vietnam War among many others. Uprisings against political and social ideologies became commonplace around the world( Greg Cohen[1]).

 Nurse Ratched on the surface poses as if she does want to help the inmates at the asylum get better and yet her objectives behind her iron grip and icy exterior are clear: She wants to control as opposed to truly find a solution to each individual’s problems. This character trait of Nurse Ratched is distinctly evident in the scene described above of her manipulative actions when she finds Billy with Candy.  In the meetings she holds with the inmates, she establishes an open trust policy and yet  she abolishes any sense of free will to question the stringent regulations she has set forth. Much like the drafting during the Vietnam War, the burning of the draft card was a regulation that was instilled to stop people from expressing their true and honest opinions of the way they felt about being drafted into Vietnam. In a landmark case at the Supreme Court known as the  “United States Versus O’Brien” case, it was heralded that the willful destruction of a draft card for antiwar demonstrations and protest was deemed illegal and not protected by the first amendment, which is freedom of expression. Antiwar demonstration became rampant in the sixties and many cases like USA Vs. O’Brien mirror Nurse Ratched and her inflexible policies for freedom of expression.

Secondly, Nurse Ratched is wary and keeps a keen eye about McMurphy’s interaction with inmates that are seemingly getting better because of McMurphy’s prompting. In the two scenes articulated below, instead of acknowledge a breakthrough in the individuals’ psychosis, she instead either dismisses or stunts the inmates recuperation. When McMurphy is playing basketball in the yard, Chief Bromden at first does not respond to his coaxing to play ball. There is a shot that zooms in to Nurse Ratched watching as McMurphy tries to engage Chief Bromden. Chief eventually starts playing basketball and when a vote needs to tilt Nurse Ratcheds’ decision to let the inmates watch the playoff’s, Chief Bromden raises his hand, even if he was considered deaf and mute in the beginning of the film. Nurse Ratched dismisses the Chief’s breakthrough  and tells McMurphy that the meeting has been adjourned therefore the Chief’s vote doesn’t count. The nurse disregards Chiefs’ progress and never even acknowledges how her patient is seemingly responding to outside forces thus getting better.

And Thirdly, in the scene that ultimately causes Billy Bibbit’s character to resort to suicide, Nurse Ratched manipulatively uses the very insecurities of the patient to control and instill fear in his heart. Much like the government’s tactics during the cold war, the ideology of communism was used as a ploy to get the nation’s support for the Vietnam War. The shaming and embarrassment that Nurse Ratched subjects Billy to is very similar to the HUAC proceedings that happened in the late 50’s. The House of Un-American Committee was an investigative group led by the United States House of Representatives that called upon many people from the entertainment industry and questioned their affiliation and ties with the communist party. Senator Joseph McCarthy who led this investigation condemned many people that in turn got blacklisted from procuring employment if deemed connected to the reds. The “Red Scare” had an early wave in the early 1900’s but really escalated after the World War II when the fear of espionage was heightened on a national level and became a societal concern for both foreigners and Americans. This kind of fear mongering is much like the tactics of Nurse Ratched when she discovers Billy with the prostitute named Candy after a night of copulation.  She specifically says shames him in front of the other inmates and treats him like a child. The use of fear to influence or bully another for a specific purpose is evident in the scenes of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest articulated above and parallels how the United States government used the same devices in the second “Red Scare” when communism was deemed as an ideological enemy.  In the case of the film, the patients’ courage to question the institution over their own lives is the main thread and concept that people from the sixties can relate to.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is a significant film because it sums up the power struggles of the American people in peril against various authorities who control and repress society during the era in which the film was released. The timing of this film is remarkably apt as well since American society as a whole was extremely receptive and ready to support and watch a film that dealt with these feelings of antiestablishment, which is evident by the success of film monetarily as well as the critical reception it garnered. However, Vincent Canby, famed reviewer for the New York Times disagrees with my argument and says:

“There are some unsettling things about "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest." I suspect that we are meant to make connections between Randle's confrontation with the oppressive Nurse Ratched and the political turmoil in this country in the 1960's. The connection doesn't work. All it does is conveniently distract us from questioning the accuracy of the film's picture of life in a mental institution where shock treatments are dispensed like aspirins and lobotomies are prescribed as if the mind's frontal lobes were troublesome wisdom teeth (November 28, 1975).”

The plot of the story makes it clear that the shock treatments and lobotomies were only used on patients that had caused friction or went against regulations. They were not performed on patients that followed the so-called “code” of Nurse Ratched. McMurphy, Chief Bromden and Cheswick only get electrocuted because Cheswick was questioning the rationing of his cigarettes. McMurphy only in reaction to Cheswick’s whining breaks the glass window to obtain Cheswicks cigarettes and then defends himself by punching an orderly. When he is on the ground, Chief comes to his aid and therefore is punished for getting the orderly off McMurphy. These three characters are the only people subjected to shock treatments in the entire film because of their conduct and misbehavior that was aggravated by the refusal of Nurse Ratched to find a compromising situation to Cheswicks request. McMurphy receives a lobotomy only after he tries to kill Nurse Ratched because of Billy Bibbits’ suicide. To say that the “lobotomies are prescribed as if the mind's frontal lobes were troublesome wisdom teeth” has no basis because McMurphy’s clear intention, had an orderly not pulled him off Nurse Ratched,  was to strangle her to death.

 In conclusion, a review by Roger Ebert proclaims that One Flew Over a Cuckoo’s Nest is on every list of favorite films and reaffirms my argument when he  states:

The movie's simplistic approach to mental illness is not really a fault of the movie, because it has no interest in being about insanity. It is about a free spirit in a closed system. Nurse Ratched, who is so inflexible, so unseeing, so blandly sure she is right, represents Momism at its radical extreme, and McMurphy is the Huck Finn who wants to break loose from her version of civilization ( Febuary 3, 2003).

One Flew Over a Cuckoo’s Nest is a film that upon deeper introspection provides definitive clues that parallel the power struggle of being dominated and controlled by an institution or establishment during the turbulent long decade known as the sixties.

---

[1] Notes from Film 112: Film ad Social Change: The Art of a Revolution Spring 2011 @ UCLA, conducted by Professor Greg Cohen.

Kubrick’s’ A Clockwork Orange: Ultra- Violence Becomes Entertainment

Stanley Kubrick, the auteur director creates a controversial piece of art with A Clockwork Orange, released and distributed by Warner Brothers in 1971. This paper examines the technical cinematic elements that Kubrick uses in the film to actually tone down the graphic, explicit and disturbing themes of Anthony Burgesses novel by choreographing scenes filled with sex and violence into a lyrical theatrical presentation.

The original source of A Clockwork Orange was a novel released in 1962 by writer Anthony Burgess, whose inspiration for the dystopian satire came about when United States Army men assaulted his wife during a blackout in London. The genre of the film adaptation is a cross between a horror, psychological thriller, sci-fi and crime drama. The novel explores themes of freewill and morality, quite similar to Kubrick’s film version. However, the differences between the novel and the film adaptation are significant to discuss because upon an initial viewing, Kubrick’s film version has been known to cause adverse reactions from the audience because of the perversity and violence that is omnipresent in the film. Yet Kubrick transforms the difficult and mature themes from the novel into a cinematic masterpiece by the use of his innovative camera angles, camera movement, the use of a classical soundtrack, lighting and choreography. The shocking nature of the subject matter of the novel not just become bearable to watch in the film adaptation but becomes a riveting piece of entertainment that transcends through the decades and cements itself as a film classic by no less then the prestigious institution known as AFI (American Film Institute).

Alex De Large ( Malcolm McDowell)  is the anti-hero of A Clockwork Orange and his character development can be broken down into three parts that are equally 45 minutes into the film. The first part of the film, Alex portrays a hooligan who has no remorse for his ultra-violent ways. He leads the “droogs” into all sorts of mischief purely for the fun of it. In the second part of the film, Alex is sentenced to prison and transforms his character into a very different Alex we saw in the first part of the film. He even makes a physical transformation; His hair is now neatly in place and his smirk is distinctly replaced by puppy dog eyes that portrays an obedient young boy looking to please his superiors. This part of the film really develops his character as it shows that Alex can really be good, if it benefits him and his cause of course.  Even when he becomes a willing guinea pig for the government’s new “Ludovico” experiment, he is courteous and looks seemingly reformed on the exterior, specifically when he addresses the head nurse and the doctor, even while screaming in terror during the treatment . And lastly, the ironic twist of fate happens in the third part of the film when Alex becomes the victim of the government because he is used as a media tool to boost the governments reputation because of the moral repercussions of the experiment. These three parts of the film really confirm the Stanley Kubrick’s direction of the character arc of Alex when he transitions from the portrayal of a hooligan to a deceivingly good-natured boy to ultimately the victim of the establishment.

 The difference from the original source of the novel and the film adaptation has to be discussed in order to understand how Kubrick tones done the “ultra- violence in this version of A Clockwork Orange as opposed to Anthony Burgesses version. Kubrick mutes the violence and perversion of some sequences by changing the context and nature of Alexs’ victims in the film. In the novel, the scene where Alex and the “droogs” attack Billy Boy and his gang, the victim of the camouflaged gang is a ten year old girl. In the film adaptation, Kubrick uses a well-endowed woman instead of a young pubescent girl. The pedophiliac tone is erased completely from what is depicted in the novel and Kubrick instead choreographs a somewhat lyrical and dancelike scene set on a theatrical stage that is sexy and titillating rather than perverted and sadistic. In the novel, Alex and the “droogs” violently beat up a schoolmaster who has books under his arm instead of the victim Kubrick as chosen for the film. In the film, Alex and the “droogs” chance upon an old beggar man who is drunk under a bridge. Instead of using a man that the society at large benefits from, Kubrick uses a man that has become a nuisance to society. By changing the context of the victim from schoolmaster to drunk old beggar man, the “ultra- violence’ becomes somewhat justifiable than the context of the original source from Burgesses novel. The record store sequence of when Alex meets two young girls sucking on phallic like popsicles is also a scene worth mentioning because in the novel, Alex intoxicates, drugs and rapes these girls however in the film adaptation, there is no mention of drugs or alcohol to lure the two females into copulation. The two girls in the film adaptation look like willing participants in the ménage e trios. From removing once again a contextual element such as drugs and alcohol, the character of Alex can be perceived in an extremely different way. Alex now seems to be a carefree, experimentally sexual and lucky man instead of a perverted and pathetic loser that has to resort to devices such as drugs and alcohol just to get women to have sex with him. And lastly, in the novel the cat lady is depicted as a much elderly lady then the nimble, middle-aged lady that Kubrick uses in the film. By establishing the cat lady in a sports outfit and having her do provocative exercise stretches before Alex’s arrival,  Kubrick adds a physicality to her which sexualizes her character. This in turn isn’t as horrific as watching an elderly woman being hit in the face with a phallic piece of art as opposed to the cat lady that Kubrick depicts in the film adaptation.

Scenes of the film where Alex distinctly engages in or is subjected to ultra-violence or sex so that Kubrick’s technical elements can be discussed in detail are the following. When the scenes are parsed out, one can see the ways that Kubrick uses his cinematic style to turn an otherwise horrific or erotic sequence into a fantastical choreographed scene that is otherwise extremely different from Anthony Burgesses version in the novel. The very first scene of the film is a very intimate introduction to Alex and merits a discussion as to why Kubrick chose to shoot the opening scene in this matter. Kubrick starts off with an extreme close up of Alex’s smirking face looking directly to the camera and then pulls back the camera to reveal Alex next to his friends, the “Droogs”, then continues to pull back even further to show the viewer the Kordova Milk Bar, where naked white mannequins in provocative poses serving as the tables for the customers are situated all along the far right and left of the walls. This is all done in one continuous shot and while most directors would establish a setting by providing a wide shot of the bar, Kubrick works in reverse. The effect of this shot tells the audience that right away, Alex is the main character of the film. By opening the film with the lead character first and providing the setting second, It also hints at how the lead character will be relating to the props around him. Alex is clearly in charge of his gang, since he is given more focus then the “droogs” that are sitting around him. Also, Alex’s relationship with women who are depicted in A Clockwork Orange is also hinted at in the opening scene. They are treated as less than human and merely objects, just like the white mannequins situated around the Kordova Milk Bar that serve as merely tables. They are used for decoration mostly than serving a real purpose.

The first scene where Alex and his “droogs” commit “ultra- violence” is their first victim, the drunk old beggar man under a bridge. In this scene, Alex pokes the man with a staff in his stomach from a top shot. The shot cuts off to an extreme close up of Alex’s profile right before Alex and his boys begin beating him up. When Alex and his boys do begin beating the drunk old man, the shot is a long shot with a strong backlight so all we see are shadows of the beating. It is important to note here that the first shot of this sequence was an extreme close up of the bottles of alcohol that sit beside the old beggar man. By Kubrick establishing that this victim is a drunk, there can be the possibility for an interpretation that merits Alex’s violence. Thus the “ultra-violence” is left in the shadows and the violence is justified because of the context of the victim, which reduces the cold brutality of the action of the scene.

The second “ultra violent” scene is the fight scene with Alex and his gang with Billy Boy and his Gang in an abandoned theatre/ casino. This scene may be violent when first watched but upon closer inspection, Kubrick uses cinematic techniques with lyrical choreography to make the scene very stylized therefore only suggesting “ultra violence” as opposed to graphically depicting violence. The scene begins with a close up of a painting on the top of the theatre. The classical song of Rossini called “The Thieving Magpie” plays in the background while screams can be heard. The camera then tilts down to reveal that five men in camouflage ( Billy Boy and his gang)  are dragging a woman across the stage. As her clothes are being ripped off, she is brought to a pile of old mattresses. Before anything further can happen, Alex and the droogs show up from the shadows in a reverse shot. The woman then scurries off before any act of violence can take place. The woman here once again, much like the mannequins in the Kordova Milkbar is only used for decoration.  What is important to discuss is the shot where Kubrick makes use of a “Point of View” shot. The camera is being shot from Alex’s point of view to give the viewer an impression that someone is watching what is taking place on stage. This POV shot also puts the viewer in the role of the spectator, which happens repeatedly in other violent scenes. As the fight ensues between the two gangs, lots of the standard stunt trickery for fight scenes are incorporated much like a Western saloon brawl. Many chairs are broken over each other and one gang member even goes through a window. The end shot is a full shot of all of Billy Boy’s gang on the floor while the “Droogs” stand on top of them. The lighting is backlit just like the scene before it on the bridge so we see more shadows of the final beatings instead of the effect that really bright lighting will do, which can highlight more of the show of brutality. There is only a medium shot of Alex hitting someone but you cannot see the damage. Even the music is syncopated to the action of the men striking down on each other which lends a very dancelike quality to the scene that mirrors the action of Billy Boy and his gang with the woman on stage earlier. So even when the two rival gangs are clearly hitting each other with full force, the impact of the scene is lessened because Kubrick uses backlight, a classical soundtrack and shots that do not frame the actual physical damage of the fighting. We the audiences are only supplied with the usual choreographed fight scenes with the breaking of chairs over each other and lots of aerial tumbles. By stylizing the scene with the rape and fight choreography and adding a classical soundtrack that is syncopated with the action with a very noir-esque backlight, the scene becomes less violent and disturbing and instead more riveting and entertaining to watch.

After the Durango- Horror Show sequence, the next lashings of “ultra-violence” is the scene where Alex and the boys enter the “HOME”, where a couple are living harmoniously. The scenes’ violence becomes subdued by a number of factors that Kubrick incorporates into the sequence. The color RED is a motif that Kubrick uses for this scene that creates a highly stylized look to the entire space. It is not by mistake that   a lot of books on the shelf, the typewriter of the writer, his robe, his wife’s jumpsuit and shoes, an ornament on the wall, one of the chairs and one of the “droogs” clown nose is red. The splash of red that is deliberately used in the space creates once again a feeling of methodical staging to the “ultra- violence” that is about to ensue. When Alex and his boys enter into the space, the husband is kicked and tumbles backward in a very choreographed manner. The camera also becomes handheld when the woman is put upon the shoulders and turned around. Then Alex starts singing the song “Singing in the Rain” while he repeatedly kicks the husband in the stomach and even slaps the wife in the face. Yet the effect of his singing this song with the action taking place makes the scene very comical and seems like an element to convey how nonchalant Alex’s character is to violence. After Alex cuts out the wife’s dress, he pulls down his pants, where in the camera is tilted up in a low angle. Then the sequence ends with an extreme close up of the husband. We never really see what Alex does to the husband’s wife, everything is just implied by the reaction of the husband in the close up and the close up of the wife in agony. So in closer analysis of this scene, the use of a dominant color, a cheerful song, and the use of camera angles and Kubrick’s chosen subject to focus in on are all cinematic techniques that can suggest a disturbing rape scene without really showing any graphic moments on screen.

The scene in A Clockwork Orange that uses Rossini’s William Tell Overture in a very creative way is the scene between Alex and the two girls whom he meets at the record store. The camera is static all through out this scene and never moves. For the first few seconds the space is empty and all we see is Alex’s bedroom. As the music crescendo’s, Alex and the two girls enter in rapid movement where the frames are speeded up and the action that takes place in the scene is syncopated to the soundtrack. As they get undressed and dressed, in and out of the bed, the tempo of the soundtrack gets faster and actually takes away from the graphicness of the nudity and simulated sex scene. We see everything but nothing all at the same time. This choice by Kubrick to speed up the frames is innovative because the ménage e trio becomes a game of sorts. The dizzying pace of the scene combined with the syncopation to Rossini’s’ music lessens the eroticness of the sex portrayed in the sequence. Again, Kubrick uses these cinematic devices that are less traditional to convey to the audience a sense of hallucinatory delight instead of an intimate moment of sexual revelry. The carnivalesque atmospheric tone is established by the choice of soundtrack and restriction of camera movement alone.

And lastly, the scene of the cat lady is Alex’s last victim before he is brought to prison.  In a wide shot, cat lady is established as a very limber middle aged woman. She raises her  hips into the air and then folds her waist over in a very provocative stretch when she is first introduced. On the walls are paintings of erotic art with women in very sexualized poses. When the doorbell rings, she lets out a curse: “Oh, Shit” from being upset from her workout being interrupted. From the few seconds we see cat lady, her character compared to the other females in the film is very different. She has her cats around her instead of a partner; she runs a health farm and is fascinated by erotic art. She is clearly an independent, healthy and mature woman that enjoys collecting sexualized memorabilia. When Alex enters her room, the painting on his right only suggests a woman in a sexual position as the frame cuts off the entire painting. What the audience does see is full frame is the giant phallic sculpture. However, it is the cat lady who  is the first to attack Alex with a small metal bust while Alex holds on to the giant phallic sculpture to block himself from getting hit. Kubrick switches to a handheld camera, which moves in a circular pattern as cat lady swings at Alex with full force. She eventually falls to the ground and as Alex is about to do her in with the sculpture, it is once again merely suggested that she is hit in the face, as we never really see the actual violence. Kubrick gives us a close up of the cat lady with the camera moving in and out, much like the direction of the sculpture and then it cuts to a painting of a mouth inside another mouth. There is an illusion that she has been violently struck in the face and yet the frame only cuts to this image, which implies she has been struck in the mouth:

Nonetheless, the film has gained notoriety and critical acclaim at the same time for it’s controversial subject matter containing violence and sex that Kubrick captures in a highly cinematic stylized way. Kubrick himself pulled out the film from distribution from Warner Brothers in Britain after his family received death threats and only in the year 2000, after Kubrick’s death has A Clockwork Orange finally been able to be shown in the country. According to press releases from the British Film Institute, a number of “copycat” crimes were linked to the film because of its sexual violence.  In the United States, there were censorship issues with A Clockwork Orange as well when its first rating was deemed an X rating. Kubrick reedited some sexuality explicit scenes and rereleased another version in 1973 that got an R rating (IMDB).

Granted the movie as a whole has some very shocking scenes and themes, however as I have gone into great detail in the earlier passages,  these violent and sexual sequences are heightened by the cinematic style that Kubrick uses to suggest an explicit and graphic scenario to the audience. Insomuch as most of the scenes containing sex and violence are mostly implied, it is still a film that pushes the envelope in terms of censorship and cinematic style. In no way am I discounting the magnanimous controversy or notoriety for explicit and graphic scenes regarding A Clockwork Orange. By providing a critical analysis of the scenes above, I am able to recognize how Kubrick seamlessly marries innovative camera angles, camera movement, the use of a classical soundtrack, lighting and choreography to allow the viewer to imagine the “ultra-violence” in their heads rather than see it on screen. In conclusion, Pauline Kael in a review for the New Yorker says it best that: “This picture plays with violence in an intellectually seductive way”( January 2, 1972). 

Blood Wedding: A Filipino Twist on a Spanish Classic

            On Sunday during the matinee showing of Blood Wedding at the Odyssey Theatre last July 3^rd, I had the immense pleasure of watching Federico Garcia Lorca’s classic play ( new translation by Tanya Ronder) directed by Jon Lawrence Rivera. The play is a tale about a young groom who weds his bride and the familial discussions about their wedding.  On the night of their wedding, the bride runs away with an ex-lover, who incidentally is married to the brides’ cousin. As the bride and lover proclaim their love for each other in the forest, the groom discovers them and the two men fighting for the brides’ love end up stabbing each other. The funeral takes place and the bride in her blood soaked wedding gown makes an appearance, much to the horror of the grooms’ mother.

This production was trying to communicate not only intense and profound feelings about the complications of love between a man and woman but also the intricacy involved when families , relatives and friends are invested in the marital union. The directors choice to  infuse the rich Filipino culture to the main characters ( Groom, Bride, Mother and Father)  and the play itself was a wonderful surprise and spoke directly to me, being that I identify with the culture.      In the opening scene the mother, as she sits removing the stems from some long beans sings a Filipino classic song entitled “Dahil sa Yo”, which translates to “Because of You”. This song is about unconditional love which foreshadows the love the mother has for her only living son. When the grooms’ mother and the brides’ father first meet, the heavy Filipino accent of the father is evident as they both salute their children’s’ union using even the props of a popular Filipino beer brand, San Miguel Beer. When the day of the wedding arrives, the bride, groom, mother and father all wear traditional Filipino garb, the long sleeved embroidered shirts made of pineapple fiber called the Barong and the women in their butterfly sleeved dresses. At the wedding reception a large roasted pig called “lechon” is also presented as the centerpiece for the table. When the bride goes missing, everyone moves in and out of the space and the father repeatedly says “ Anak, Nasaan ka?” ,which translates to “ Child, where are you?”. These examples given above serve as evidence that the director being  Filipino himself uses his culture to enrich the play’s structure through the addition of a Philippine song, props, costumes and tagalog (Philippine dialect) dialogue.

  I was so moved by the production I couldn't help but give the cast a standing ovation! The production of Rivera’s Blood Wedding successfully communicated the underlying tension and intensity of the character’s situations.  I was in tears during the show and was also giddy by all the Filipino touches the director infused. It was such a pleasure to watch because every moment was riveting! The blocking was simple yet lyrical, particularly when between the scenes, the cast moved in syncopated fashion utilizing wooden chairs. The casting  was refreshingly diverse and spot on and the actors-immensely talented. The nature of the play ( tragedy) makes it very easy for an actor to overact, however all the emotions portrayed were truthful  and honest. Derrick Mc Daniels’  light design was simply magical with streams of blood red  during climatic moments and hues of blue when the  full moon appeared. John H. Binkleys’ set design was eerie and very dramatic with a stage that was made of wooden slats forming a circular elevated stage and was brought to life by the actor’ full use of the space.

The productions’ attempt is without a doubt worth making because  the Odysseys’ Blood Wedding  suspended  my world from start to finish! The show is successful because it combined professionally superior elements of acting, direction, sound, lighting and set design into a believable and cohesive world. The one and a half hours I sat in that theatre was like a rollercoaster of emotions and for a production to be able to engage a viewer in that way makes for a very meaningful experience. I believe that the play will not only speak to people who are knowledgeable about the Filipino culture but also to people who understand the complications between the love of a parent and child or have felt the heartache that unrequited and forbidden love summons. These universal themes of tragedy are always present no matter what time or era but Jon Lawrence Rivera’s strong directorial approach combined with all the other elements mentioned beforehand eternalizes these themes to a hilt in this visually beautiful, heart wrenching and engrossing production of Lorcas’ Blood Wedding. It's still showing till the 18th of this month at the Odyssey Theatre in West LA!