Tough new inmate Carlin (superbly played with riveting intensity by Ray Winstone) gets sent to a British borstal for young offenders. Despite conflicts with both the guards and fellow inmates, Carlin soon becomes the new top con in the joint.Director Alan Clarke does a tremendous (and terrifying) job of presenting prison as an absolute claustrophobic and dehumanizing hellhole seething with rage, hatred, and violence in which the strong prey on the weak, only the fittest and most ruthless survive, and the venal staff prove to be every bit as savage and predatory as the hardened criminals. Roy Minton's hard-hitting script not only pulls no punches in its stark and unflinching addressing of such harsh and troubling issues as racism, corruption, and the abuse of power and authority, but also offers a frighteningly persuasive argument for exactly why prison reformation doesn't work due to the way it puts far too much emphasis on punishment and deprivation.The uniformly excellent acting from a top-rate cast rates as another substantial asset: Mick Ford provides several welcome and much-appreciated moments of delightfully brash humor as impudent intellectual anarchist Archer, Julian Firth contributes a heart-wrenching portrayal as the frail and vulnerable Davis (the sequence in which Davis gets rape by three boys in a greenhouse is extremely difficult to watch), Phil Daniels snivels it up nicely as weaselly loudmouth Richards, and John Judd impresses with his fierce turn as fearsome and pitiless head officer Mr. Sands. Phil Meheux's stark cinematography gives this picture a potent sense of documentary-like realism. Brutal and disturbing for sure, but still quite powerful and impossible to shake just the same.

Well? With an attention-grabbing, little title like "Scum", how the hell could one possibly expect to be treated like anything but dirt when it comes to viewing this decidedly nasty (and apparently) realistic look at the reform school system (for young, male offenders) as it stood in Britain in the 1970s? Clearly filmed for its sheer shock-value and its focus on brutal violence, I find it really hard to believe that "Scum" was initially intended to be a 1977 Made-For-TV movie. But, due to its fairly graphic depictions of suicide, male-rape & racism, the prudish BBC flatly refused to allow its release for public broadcasting.And so, Scum was eventually re-shot by its director, Alan Clarke, and it then made its theatrical debut (much to the public's gasps & shock) in 1979.The positive outcome of bringing Scum's brutal story to the immediate attention of the general public was that serious and dramatic changes (for the better) quickly went into effect by making corrections to the dismal conditions that clearly existed at youth detention centers all across the UK.Scum's fist-in-your-face story tells the tale of Carlin, a new reform school inmate who's already earned a fierce reputation as being a very bad-assed bad-boy.The lousy attitude of the authorities in charge at this particular "Borstal" make no attempt to reform or improve matters for the inmates. Instead they actively encourage face-to-face power struggles between new recruits and the "old hands".And here's where Carlin gets repeatedly challenged by Pongo, the toughest, meanest gang leader of the whole miserable lot. What follows in the wake of Pongo's taunts and harassment I'll leave to your imagination.Yes. Scum is most certainly chock full of endless hate, racism & profanity. (And, yes, there's an inevitable "prison riot" thrown in for good measure) And, yes, Scum is most definitely flawed & clichéd like any other film you'd see about life behind bars.But, still, 35 years later (even for the ultimately jaded viewer) it still manages to pack a considerable-sized wallop even if one has "been there/seen that" a thousand times before.

With several mixed reviews, it was essential that an open mind was kept. Released over thirty years ago it was expectedly dated. However the raw and poignant messages of the harrowing and hard life in British Borstals for young males were very clear. It is likely that you have heard the expression 'Treat others how you wish to be treated'; this disturbing and violent film shows, that in the 1970's, youth offenders were pushed to behave like scum as they were constantly treated like scum.Directed by Alan Clarke, Co- produced by Clive Parsons and written by Roy Minton in 1977, 'Scum' was originally deemed "too controversial" to be released and was therefore banned by the BBC. It wasn't until Borstals were abolished in 1982 that it was aired on Channel 4 (1983). The film clearly aimed to portray the brutality of life inside a British Borstal. Immediately from the onset; violence and corruption is shown as the warden's target the three new inmates; Carlin, (Ray Winstone), a re- offender with a bad reputation, Davis, (Julian Firth), a timid and scared first offender and Angel; a young black male. Carlin finds himself fighting with 'trainees' and 'screws' to gain ultimate hierarchy power to become 'the daddy'. Becoming the 'top dog' allowed Carlin to take advantage of the black market as he takes a large cut of any incoming money from the other trainees. The wardens bizarrely respect Carlins' leadership qualities as they expect him to keep the other trainees in order; in return he is given privileges such as a single- cell bed and the wardens even overlook his criminal behaviours.Borstals were introduced to Britain in 1902 to prevent young offenders from being influenced by adult offenders; aiming to reduce re-offending. They also aimed to reform young delinquents; focusing on routine, discipline and authority. One character in the film, who is determined 'not to be taken' by the system, is Ben Archer. This character is used to implicitly express the clear weaknesses of Borstals. Archer (Mick Ford) is a middle- class misfit who should have been sent to prison, due to his older age of 24; however he was sent to the Borstal and wanted to complete his sentence quietly yet causing as much trouble for the wardens as possible- being a vegetarian and atheist to infuriate the sternly religious Governor. Archer is extremely intelligent and it wasn't uncommon for some of the 'cons' to be better educated than the 'pigs'. There is a significant scene in which Archer has a conversation with warden Mr Duke. He states 'How can anyone build a character on a regime based on deprivation.. If it's not a con at me it's a screw.. More criminal acts are imposed on the prisoner's than criminals on society..' This was the sad reality. The aims of Borstals completely failed as violence lead to further violence. The film shows no evidence of rehabilitation or reform for these young offenders. Group meetings were held by the (female) Matron as she asks the young males to talk about any problems they might have. But no one wants to be the grass, right? She appears unsympathetic, showing no care or emotion, leading the trainees to feel further frustrated and psychologically strained. This is portrayed when an inmate becomes aware of his wife's death. She doesn't sympathise or offer any support or emotional help; this lead to his disturbing suicide attempt. The film also highlighted that each of the individuals' needs should have been separately cared for, as each individual is different. During the group session, the case of a fourteen-year-old boy is briefly shown. He is being held at Her Majesty's Pleasure for murder. He is socially isolated as he receives no family visitors and is always shown sat on his own. For such a young boy who committed such a serious crime it is most certain he needs to be psychologically treated- not physically punished. Inmates are stripped of their identity; "Matron? Can you not call us by our Christian Names?", and are labelled with a four digit number "You can't remember? That's all you are, a number!" This would have consequently affected their self-identity. Throughout, there is very strong language. Racial attacks; physical and verbal are explicitly shown; wardens isolate the young black males to single cells and racial fights during sports classes are shown- racism seemed to be the norm. Although racism in our current multi- cultural society has reduced through awareness and campaigns, it has by no means been erased. However, violent acts (such as racial or sexual attacks) between offenders; and between prison guards and offenders can be strictly controlled via CCTV. There is a horrifying and shocking scene in which Davis is gang raped by three older inmates whilst being watched by a corrupt, sadistic and callous 'pig'. Such changes allow protection or punishment for the offenders and guards in present prisons/ youth custodies.After being gang raped, Davis expressed he felt "lonely, scared and depressed" to a warden. He was ignored which lead to his poignant suicide. After a rebellious riot lead by Carlin the film ends with the 'screws' and 'cons' giving a minutes silence. Although some of the scenes are raw and cold- hearted, it does what it set out to; educate people of what life was like in Borstals; for both offenders and wardens. This film has been deemed to be significant contribution to abolishing corporal punishment and Borstals in 1982. They were since replaced with 'Youth Custody Centres' which have the necessary facilities and tools in place to successfully reform and rehabilitate youth offenders to their individual needs. Intensive community orders, Youth offending teams, restorative justice programmes and youth referral orders are other options available to suit individual cases and have been shown to have great success.

The 1979 film Scum, starring Ray Winstone, portrays life within a typical borstal in the 1970's. Scum was originally released by the BBC as a TV-film, but was soon banned due its raw, brutal nature, and released by Alan Clarke as a feature film to be shown in cinemas. The film follows Winstone's character Carlin, and his battle for top status of "The Daddy". Scum includes scenes of violence, rape, suicide and racism. It shows the inmates constant fighting, both amongst each other and with the wardens. The film is brutal, informative, disturbing and enlightening. One of the main characters, Archer, sums the film up by saying that the punishments given to inmates by the wardens were more criminal than the acts they committed that landed them in the borstal. For example, the audience are led to believe that the film's protagonist Carlin was transferred to the borstal for attacking two guards in his previous institution. Later in the film we learn that Carlin was actually acting in self-defence from a brutal beating by the guards. Borstals were originally introduced in 1902 by Sir Evelyn Ruggles-Brise. They were originally designed for offenders under the age of 21, but in 1930 this was revisited and they began taking inmates up to the age of 23. Borstals were intended to discipline in line with a military routine. The borstal wardens would take full advantage of their authority, and would not hesitate to beat up the inmates themselves, and turn a blind eye when fighting occurred. This was portrayed in the movie, especially when such incidents involved "The Daddy. The film not only shows what really happened in the borstals, it also highlights how ineffective the borstal system was. It depicts that the corporal, military routines that the wardens adopted may have been effective on a short term basis, but in the long run did not have any means of putting an end to juvenile delinquency. In retrospect, this form of punishment actually led to re-offending. Interestingly, just three years prior to Scum being released, borstals were replaced by Young Offender Institutions. The film clearly shows just how much the youth offending system has changed. While many would argue that our current system is too soft, and that we need harsher punishments, many of the methods used today are actually much more effective than corporal punishment ever was. For example, the introduction of CCTV cameras in prisons or Young Offender Institutions prohibit the abuse of other inmates, therefore the offenders are not re-offending whilst in a rehabilitation environment. In 1970's borstals, the inmates would often share dorm rooms with several others, allowing fighting and abuse to be readily available. The approaches that we have taken in modern day crime prevention are evidently not enough to put an end to youth offending; this can be clearly seen from the London Riots in August 2011. As the riots had such a big media following, it is evident as to why members of the public believe that our justice system is too soft and not effective enough. An example of our justice system being ineffective is the introduction of ASBO's. It is not uncommon to hear of a youth that looks upon an ASBO as some sort of status symbol – the more ASBO's you get, the "harder" you are. The film displays the clear fact that the system used in borstals did not work. The guards would abuse their authority by assaulting the inmates, and to basically ensure that the inmates "knew their place". The continuous abuse and violence from the guards built up in the film, ending in an explosive scene where the inmates retaliate and riot in the dining hall following the suicide of a fellow inmate. The constant turning of a blind eye to any violence did not help the situation either. This is particularly highlighted in the gang rape scene. A guard sees exactly what is going on, yet does nothing to prevent it from continuing. In a present day setting, this would simply not have happened. As previously mentioned, the installment of CCTV, and separation of inmates in all youth offending environments prevents this type of incident from taking place. Furthermore, the film does not show any sign of the inmates being reformed. There is no mention of any inmates being released for good behaviour, or adhering to the borstals policies. This differs substantially from today's systems, where each inmate would be treated individually. It may be effective for one to attend anger management classes, where another inmate would have no benefit from this at all – they may be more suited to a course to control drug addiction. Scum does not seem to have any particular process or treatments in place, and the inmates just seem to keep re-offending, whether to climb up the hierarchy ladder, or to disobey the wardens. It would not be absurd to suggest that perhaps a mixture of the two systems would be the most effective approach to reducing, and eventually putting an end to juvenile delinquency. Perhaps using the modern facilities of today's prison and Young Offender Institutions, combined with the regimental routines from the borstals would be the ultimate answer? Perhaps trialling an operation similar to a 1970's borstal on a group of young offenders, and examining the results alongside the results of the current justice system, to see which practice is more effective? Many people would argue that borstals were the answer to reforming young offenders, however many would counter argue that they simply turned young petty criminals into seriously angry men, who would only go on to re-offend, and more often than not, commit a much worse crime. Therefore, those calling for the return of corporal punishments on youth offenders should stop and think; is this really going to be an effective form of punishment, or are we just gearing the offenders up for a much more harrowing future?