I watched "Bully" again tonight for the first time in years. That, with "Kids" fresh in my memory, and knowledge about "Ken Park," (though I haven't seen it yet) leads me to one conclusion: I have to think that no movie fan can possibly not have an opinion about Larry Clark. I figured it'd make for a good discussion, so let's have it...what do you think of his films?

-JP

Larry's films are not art; at best, they are (barely) intellectualized pornography. His storytelling is trite and uninspired, his characters are inscrutable, and his visual style is dull. For films about teenagers fucking and killing themselves and each other, they sure are boring.

Boy...I sure can't disagree with that.

I never really thought of it like that until now (to a certain extent)...........good point. I also knew I wasn't the only one who kept trying to see what the big deal is with this dudes movies.

I didn't care much for Bully or Ken Park but KIDS was an amazing genius of a film. It caputred so much of normal everyday life for inner city kids. Just the frank conversations and dialouge alone were great.

He's a one trick pony that has had nothing to say beyond Kids.

I don't know. I liked Kids when I first saw it but it ended up really growing on me and I now think it was stellar. Agreed that Bully was basically soft core porn and didn't think much of it while viewing it, but after it was over, I couldn't stop thinking about it and even went out and bought the book of the true story. So I'm not sure if I think the movie was good, or maybe the material had the chance to be good and it didn't come across well on the screen. I will need to finish the book and watch it again to see what I think. One thing I can say is that I would never recommend his films to anyone.

I thought Bully was decent, and I thoroughly enjoyed Another Day in Paradise. He's no master filmmaker, that's for sure...but I wouldn't exactly call him a one trick pony, either...especially when he doesn't have one particularly "standout" feature.

-JP

Ahem, I dunno...SEXUALIZING TEENS perhaps?

In the context of his post, I assumed he meant a "one hit wonder."

By the way, save your sarcasm for somebody who'll appreciate it. Thanks.

-JP

Sarcasm? I was simply correcting you. Geeze, lighten up...

Completely agree. Larry Clark wanted to make a point with KIDS and did it, but thats pretty much all he did worth noting. IMO of course.

Ahem...I dunno, you could've worded it differently perhaps?

-JP

Time to ressurect this thread for a bit.
I just finished watching Ken Park after hearing so much of it. I've watched Kids before, but that's all I've seen of Larry Clark. I keep trying to see something in his films, but I just can't. I wouldn't completely rule out Clark's films as smut, as there are a few redeeming scenes in both films I saw (such as the cab ride in Kids). I can appreciate the portrait of these dysfunctional teens he's trying to capture, but it just seems incredibly shallow. It often feels like Clark is just exploiting the taboo topics his films play with. Nevertheless, I'll still rent Bully and maybe Another Day in Paradise but I'm not too sure about Teenage Caveman. I just feel it is my duty to expand my film knowledge until my head breaks off and floats away.

His films have steadily declined. Kids was disturbing, depressing, well made, and had substance. Bully much less so, although it had relatively interesting characters. Ken Park was utter trash; pornography masquerading as contemplative existentialism.

I always see comments like these, and I'm led to wonder why people typically fail to mention what I consider to be his best film (Another Day in Paradise). Is it just that people haven't seen it, or heard as much about it as these three? I can understand not mentioning Teenage Caveman because, well...come on. But I thought Another Day in Paradise, though not spectacular, was the best I've seen out of Clark...and that, if included, it would alter a lot of posts like the one I quoted above.

-JP

"Another Day in Paradise" is an anomaly in Clark's filmography. I started watching it one time, and just didn't find it interesting; perhaps I stopped prematurely.
The point is that his dubiously motivated focus heretofore has been closest to the three films of his most often mentioned.

Ahhhahaha. So, earlier, I'm flipping through the channels. I see what I assume is some good softcore porn on HBO...and at 3:00 in the morning, who can resist some good porn? Well, not I. So, I start to watch...for the story. No, seriously. Then, I notice a face that looks familiar. Now I have to finish the movie, to see where I've seen this guy before, and what he's doing in a cable channel porn.

I watch the movie, and it's greatness. I mean...greatness. People exploding, sex out the wazoo, drugs and drinking, severed heads, everything that's missing from the dull films of those Fellini and Godard characters.

Anyway, the credits roll. The guy is named Andrew Keegan. I check out his filmography on ye ol' IMDB, and what do you know, the supremely wonderful cable channel b-movie softcore porn that I just watched was none other than Teenage Caveman.

-JP

Tiffany Limos tricked me into watching that lovely film several times.