Take the 2-minute tour ×
Movies & TV Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for movie and tv enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The ending of the film perplexed me a bit. The main hero says, quote, "I was cured alright".

While that could be interpreted as honest and truthful, the final scene (the fantasized orgy) makes me think, he might have been sarcastic with that last remark, and maybe he pretended to be cured to get out of the therapy program. Is there any (other) significance to that fantasy? Was Alex honest when he said he was cured?

share|improve this question

4 Answers 4

up vote 28 down vote accepted

One thing you have to understand is that the book this movie was based on had a missing last chapter in American books. In the American books, the last chapter mirrored the last part of the film. In the UK version, the last chapter shows that Alex was 'cured' as much as possible, in that he ultimately gave up on violence of his own free will. See the Wikipedia article here.

In the movie, as it stands, the 'cure' is that Alex was able to think for himself again, society be damned. The implication of the ending of the movie is that the politicians were willing to let Alex be his old self again, as long as it made them (temporarily) look good (not to mention that they used Alex's conditioning and subsequent rehabilitation to settle a score against the writer who drove Alex insane). So yes, he was being sarcastic, in that he was cured, all right - he was back to the same guy he was before.

share|improve this answer

IMHO, the final scene in the movie shows Alex's priorities have changed: he formerly enjoyed being a criminal who operated outside of society, but now he looks forward to a more socially acceptable lifestyle -- while still retaining some of his wild nature.

Note the scene appears to be a fantasy Alex experiences just after he agrees to play along with the government's explanation of what happened to him. In effect, Alex has just made a deal with society in which he will be rewarded if he controls himself to some extent. In a sense, he has matured.

Accordingly, this change is evident in the final scene's fantasy depiction of a man (presumably Alex) having sex with a woman as a crowd of well-dressed "normal" people watches and applauds. Note how Alex's fantasy-life has changed: The sex seems a bit wild, but it is monogamous (contrasting with an earlier threesome) and it is consensual (at least in comparison to earlier rapes) -- which is apparently enough to earn the approval of society (versus the condemnation of society that Alex used to earn).

enter image description here

share|improve this answer
shane finneran hit it in the head...i'd also add that alex's comment at the end was indeed sarcastic in the sense that he was "cured" as in "he gave in and conformed to society," which is pretty nuts in and of itself...if we want to refer conforming to society as being cured, it is indeed pretty twisted, is it not? :) anyway, loved the movie!! –  user5674 Aug 5 '13 at 4:54

What Barry says could be correct, but I doubt Mr Kubrick would show anything that goes against proven science. The conditioning shown in this movie is also known as Pavlovian conditioning. In short, Pavlovian conditioning says that once your mind is conditioned to perform certain activities in the presence of certain stimuli(external or otherwise), it will continue to do so involuntarily.
Read the the Pavlov dog experiment for more details.
In this movie, the example would be the scene when Alex throws while indulging in violence after the conditioning is complete.
So I think, that when Alex says 'I was cured alright', he means that even though he is willing to continue his violent lifestyle(read conscious remains uncured) he cannot do to so because his body betrays him(read subconsciously cured(from society's perspective of preventing violence))

Just my tuppence worth.

share|improve this answer
A very interesting view on the matter, and certainly food for thought. Thank you. –  OddCore Dec 29 '11 at 7:41
Extra info: Something interesting is that Mr Kubrick might have misinterpreted the original work of Burgess: The book I am best known for, or only known for, is a novel I am prepared to repudiate: written a quarter of a century ago, a jeu d’esprit knocked off for money in three weeks, it became known as the raw material for a film which seemed to glorify sex and violence. The film made it easy for readers of the book to misunderstand what it was about, and the misunderstanding will pursue me till I die. I should not have written the book because of this danger of misinterpretation. –  Lelouch Lamperouge Dec 29 '11 at 7:54
This is important - have you read the book yourself? I would love to gain some insight into what the original meaning, feeling and interpretation behind the book is, and how the movie misdirected the viewer's perspective on the story. –  OddCore Dec 29 '11 at 10:06
I really have not, although I would definitely love to –  Lelouch Lamperouge Dec 29 '11 at 11:17

Personally, I don't think its positive for "our narrator" when he says 'I was cured' and then has that mad look on his face lets us imagine he is cured from being able to use his own will...and bad things are still going to happen to him.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.