Scum

Scum (the screenplay) was originally banned in 1977 - the year it was made - on the instructions of the BBC who had commissioned it. This was on the grounds of it being both too realistic in its presentation and simultaneously a work of fiction. The film follows the progression of three boys at borstal (prison for males ages 11-16) from arrival to the social dominance of one of them. It's a blackly humorous and scathing study of the (physical *and* mental) violence inherent in any social system, and particularly in the 'justice' system.

The screenplay was remade as a feature film in 1979, starring most of the original cast and featuring most of the original script, although a couple of scenes (featuring sexual abuse, though physical and racial abuse were deemed acceptable...) were presumably cut from the script because they wouldn't pass even the BBFC censor.

The original screenplay has subsequently been shown on UK television once. I happened to have the video running. With a high-quality tape in it. Lucky, that! It compares very favourably to the film, though the film format appears inferior (lower budget at the BBC), the quality of the performances is possibly better.

Scum is one of the most important screenplays to have been made, and shown, on British television, because it reveals the changing attitudes of the censors, and the nature of political censorship in the UK.

The film itself does not reveal this history.

Alan Clarke first released Scum in 1977 as a BBC TV-film, yet the BBC disapproved of the film due to the amount of raw, harrowing realism which had been packed into a short running-time. Therefore the BBC banned the version, and it was not until fifteen years later that the TV-version was aired on the UK's Channel 4. Though, to get around not being able to release the TV version of Scum Alan Clarke opted in for developing a remade, feature-length version to be aired at cinemas, this was released in 1979. The film sent shockwaves through cinemas across Britain, causing huge controversy from the media, government and British public. Some people saw the film as a "visceral image of a flawed system", while others saw the film as "exploitive trash in the form of a documentary".

Scum is a disturbing look at a British Borstal's futile attempt at rehabilitating young offenders, the inmates of the Borstal range from adolescent teen to young adult. Most of them (if not all) have little hope in achieving anything in their life, except for just moving from prison to prison for their antisocial crimes. The film focuses of on brutality of a flawed and corrupt system whereby the inmates have no hope of rehabilitation due to the infantile regimes. The film shows how survival through brutality is the only way of getting through the system and even then there is still no sign of release for any of the prisoners. Thankfully in today's Britain, Borstals are inexistent, since they were (as is quite apparent in Scum) deemed unfit for people, due to the despicable infliction of violence and vicious corruption.

Scum is undoubtedly a film which will prompt viewers to question to entire rehabilitation process used for society's undesirables. Scum makes you wonder whether it is morally incorrect for even the most disgusting of individuals to get such vile treatment. As the brutal treatment is only prompting the individual to become even more sadistic and inhumane. The film details what men will do to "comply" with a system they loathe and how they will form their own rules and beliefs to suit the system in a way which will benefit them. There is a strong element of wasted talent etched into the film, this is in the respect of intelligent men who have potential, yet do not know how to use it. Scum takes you inside a world where young men have been reduced to their most primitive form; a place where violence breeds violence and respect is shown through class and power, rather than morals. I beg of you to think about what Scum is attempting to say and question through its subtext.

The performances from the entire cast are pulled off with raw, natural intensity. Ray Winstone's debut performance as –nicknamed "the daddy"- Carlin is one of the most unflinching and uncompromising performances I have ever seen. It is a performance which bursts with adolescent rage and masochism. He is a boy who has been demoralised by the life he has grown up in. It is distressing to see a man of complex capabilities be destroyed by his primitive brutality, which has been forced upon him by the human instinct of survival.

The technical prowess of Scum helps to create and delve inside the bland, grim and unpleasant environment of the Borstal. Making the film feel even more genuine in its atmosphere through its documentary style editing and camera techniques, the use of long-haul, close-ups and tracking-shots add to the film's aggressive ingenuity. In some of the more violent scenes of the film the camera is held for longer takes, which helps to provoke more emotional power. The camera feels somewhat intrusive, this is because of how Alan Clarke is achieving to shed light on a conformity situation people were afraid to question and examine, yet Alan Clarke is unadulterated when it comes to presenting realism and so tries to make his film-making as tight as possible. There is no use of score either, nor any form of music to accompany scenes, making scenes feel all the more haunting and prolonged.

Scum is an engrossing, convincing and complex example of British film-making at the top of its game. It is a story you will never forget, and remains a film which contains scenes that once viewed will be etched into the depths of your mind. Scum should be compulsory viewing for everyone as it remains a highly affective film of searing emotional intensity.

Scum is an unforgiving portrayal of both physical and psychological abuse of the British borstal system; 1 hour and 30 minutes. The movie explores the borstal's hierarchy, analyzing both the wardens and the inmates ' actions and responsibilities, asking who is the worst. As Carlin (Ray Winstone) joins the borstal, the hierarchy is shattered. Carlin says he's looking for' no trouble,' but he's just as pugnacious or even more skullduggerous than the others. Scum describes the angry resentment of inequality in' correctional' institutions, much like' Cool Hand Luke' or' One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest.' Personally, I find few things worse than power abuse, whether in an institution or in a family. I'm sure that many would agree with me on that, and then make Scum an engrossing, resonant, and uncomfortable watch for everyone. Archer's protagonist, an articulate and apparently committed vegetarian who's out to make life difficult for the screws, delivers fragments of Roy Minton's script that beautifully examine the process and the angry men who staff these institutions-" Even though you've spent your life in jail, you're still just a simple cop. Now, who's got the stick for that? Us. Who's paying for that every day. Scum achieves what it aims to accomplish through convincing performance and blunt realism: portraying the reprehensible conditions of terrorism, discrimination and bribery in these institutions. One might wonder if the movie exaggerated these circumstances, but in 1982 government abolished the borstal scheme, replacing it with' Youth Custody Centres.' I assume it speaks volumes for the reputation of Scum.

Be warned that you should go into this film with your guard up. By the time the final scene has faded quietly out, you will probably be in a state of shock.

The film details life in a Borstal institution and the violence and racial hatred that runs rampant through both the prisoners and their wardens. There is nothing cheery here at all and that is precisely the point. Director Alan Clarke deliberately films with a documentary style and it is this realism that makes the film so shattering. Scenes of sexual and racial abuse are placed in front of the camera and no raw nerve is spared the touch of the film.

It should be shown to youngsters as a reason not to turn to crime.

I'd had the opportunity to watch Scum a long time before I actually did, and I was always turned off it by the very sensationalist box and taglines. I've never been a fan of "The film they tried to ban" and similar phrases being used as advertisement for a film, so when I sat down to watch the film today I was very surprised.

It doesn't need phrases like that to advertise it - it's bleak and horrific, and should be advertised as a serious drama rather than some kind of exciting gore-fest. As well as being powerful and thought provoking, it's gripping too, and you won't feel bored when watching it. Although there is a lot of stuff crammed in there, and some scenes are very prolonged, at just over and hour and a half it's the perfect length to achieve what it sets out to do. This is one film you won't be bored watching.

I'm actually surprised that this film doesn't have more of a recognition or following nowadays, and isn't seen in the last light as Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange" and Lindsay Anderson's "If...".