On Monday 28 Aug Tony Williams asked us to consider Kubrick's perspective: >If you directed a complex film with overtones of violence would you want your work smeared on the front page of Rupert Murdoch's THE SUN (along with the NEWS OF THE WORLD, THE STAR, DAILY MIRROR and all the mind-polluting tabloids in the U.K. - plus the abysmal level of market-forces television now endemic) and see it distorted, defiled, trashed out of all recognition without having the benefit of an intelligent discussion?< If I directed a film that I believed in, then frankly my dear I wouldn't give a damn about what the likes of Murdock's mind-numbing minions thought. And like I said; every artist runs the risk of being misunderstood. But don't get me wrong. Let me say that I agreed with Kubrick's action originally - especially in the light of what Mick Broderick says about the decision to withdraw the film stemming from repeated death threats against Kubrick's family (by rightwing 'moral watchdogs') and a legal defence "mounted by thugs to try and argue in court cause-and-effect after watching the film."(Tues, Aug 29) Kubrick's gesture was to treat the UK with the childish punishment it deserved - slap their hands and take the ball away before more windows are broken (to extend my metaphor). As for what Tony Williams calls "a British society now noted for crudeness, vulgarity, viciousness, and right-wing reaction." This is true from inside the UK, but after spending some time in the US I get the impression that it is viewed as a quaint little enclave that actually believes the Murdock comics that other countries (yes, like America) relegate to the supermarket checkout queue. Despite the British electorate's obsession with voting in the same people who have been punishing them (by striving to keep things the same) for the last 15 years or so, things have moved on apace since 1971. Oliver Stone, for example, did not suffer from having NBK - a work that is arguably just as complex, and with more than a smattering of violence contributing to claims of copy-cat violence - smeared by the British "mind-polluting" tabloids. Stone plays Murdock at his own game (and perhaps there is an inherent danger here). And, lets face it, the violence in ORANGE is going to seem pretty tame to 1996 audiences, which will have the benefit of hindsight to aid an interpretation of its polemic. It may be old, but maybe it still has the power to change things. So my point is that the effectiveness of Kubrick's original gesture has worn off, and the "benefit of an intelligent discussion" is only being prevented now by Kubrick himself. "Perhaps he is waiting for a change in society???" Hey, Stanley, how about having another go at trying to make it change. Norman Taylor Bristol UK ---- To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]