Still my all-time favorite novel. I thought the movie was shiat, so don't even bring it up. While I can appreciate how it was artistically sculpted, it held not even a faint candle to the brilliance of the written work. Anyone else read it?

I read it after you raved about it the other week and I have to say I would not read it again.
Sorry

I won't say I hated it and I am glad I read it as it is a 'classic' (though I am not sure why ) but I could have lived without reading it

Bah! I can't believe it! What didn't you like, the story or the style?

I thought the story was good but I found his style unbearable. The new language just made it too hard to read - maybe his intent was to make us consider the meaning of words, but that is not why I read

Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The movie was absolutely brilliant! But Stanley Kubrick had a very distinct style of filmmaking that was intentionally disturbing and art house. I don't think I've ever been so off put by a movie—and I've seen a number of movies that are psychologically disturbing and violent but none hold a candle to this one.

The book was amazing as well and ultraviolet but the movie captured a more visceral representation than I think the book ever could have, mainly because the reader has to invent a mental imagining of the violence in the book and there are some lines I think you just won't cross or elaborate on in your mental pictures. I don't think I'll ever watch the movie any time again soon though, it was just really...unsettling and a little torturous but that was the director's intent. I don't think we were supposed to like it, it was supposed to feel and be grating on the senses and leave you feeling not quite right at the end of it all.

It was good but I just live the book so much and they left so much out so my expectations were probably too high. I do live Kubrick's style though, agreed there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

There was a book?