Kids (1995)

I watched this movie with my dad. He did a bunch of stuff when he was younger, but kids weren't as amoral back then as they are now. The sad part for me was that nothing in the movie shocked me.I'd been there and done that in a few cases...but never to the extreme that those kids took it. I never hung out with people that acted like that, and i've never publicly exploited myself like many of those girls did. It was really sad for me to realize how accurate the movie was though. It makes the movie "Thirteen" look like a Disney movie. The movie makes me want to lock any future kids I end up having in a box, and not let them out until they are 30. It's definitely a movie parents should see. I've had way too many friends who's parents live this life of ignorance. They turn their backs and deny that their children could be doing anything wrong. It's true that you live and you learn, but the scary thing is is that not all of the kids grow up and wake up.

Fmovies: A low-budget independent film that shows us one day in the life of a group of New York teenagers, a life that comes down to skate, parties, alcohol, drugs and ultimately sex. I grew up in the nineties and I recognized a lot from my own puberty and surroundings, but however crazy we were, this is really extremely extreme. And yet, as much as this seems exaggerated to most of us, even to those who have really gone through all sorts of things in life, for some children this is a harsh reality. It's not a masterpiece of cinema, but it's a film that should be seen for a better understanding of the world we live in.

7/10

Larry Clark has created a true masterpiece of its time. Kids is an insightful, poignant and harrowing depiction of the life of angst ridden teens in New York City. There's Tully, the smooth talking, de-flowering (and HIV positive) teen, Casper, the cool, hyped up and not all there teen, and Jennie, the girl who is full of depression and anger for the de-flower man. The film doesn't have much of a direct screenplay (mostly dialogue you would hear while around friends) which is good for the type of movie being made here. The film gains much controversy by stating whether its true to life, or just a mindless depiction of what could happen in the city. You could decide that for yourself, but for me, I think this film has more truth, heart and drama (including great dramatic acting and scenes) that most films I've ever seen.

Kids fmovies. Disturbing, even all these years later. Taking us back in time to some all too relatable scenarios, fears and peer pressures, catapulting in the ultimate horror story, Kids was real life for too many. This movie stays with you long after the credits roll, so be prepared to think it over. A lot.

There are two highly, and deservedly, controversial movies dealing with the issues of drug and alcohol abuse, underage sex, lack of control, and the preteen and teenage minority of urban America. One of them is "Kids" and the other is "Bully." The former is a haunting work of art; the latter is a clunk of garbage. Both were directed by the same man, Larry Clark. I saw "Bully" first about a year ago and I was blown out of my mind by how offensive and atrociously cruel that movie was and how it redeemed itself in no way. I initially condemned Mr. Clark as a director and vowed never to see another movie of his again.

Then I happened to see the Siskel & Ebert review for his first movie "Kids" and after much deliberation, decided to give this controversial filmmaker a second chance. I am so glad that I did.

In many respects, "Kids" and "Bully" are much the same movie. They're both frighteningly brutal, appalling in their explicit content and vulgar dialogue, and they expose the nasty undercurrents in the younger generations of today, especially in urban cities where parental control (or control of any kind) seems all but present. So why is "Kids" a great movie and "Bully" an awful one? Because while "Bully" only pretended to have a purpose, "Kids" *has* a purpose and it never once dumbs down on that. It's a sick and disgusting picture, but it's also somewhat of a wake-up call. And I can fairly say now that as a reviewer and film-goer, I can forgive Mr. Clark.

"Kids" is set in the drug-riddled streets of New York. We see very little of parents, or adults for that matter, and focus on a group of rambunctious, vulgarity-spitting, lecherous teenagers who are devoted to getting drunk, abusing drugs, and giving away their virginity. The most sickening of them is Telly (Leo Fitzpatrick). Not because he can charm young girls enough to seduce them into deflowering them, but because he's simultaneously signing their death warrants with the HIV virus. One of his victims (Chloe Sevigny) discovers she has AIDS because of her one-night stand with him and as she slowly suffers, searches the city to confront him. Meanwhile, Telly is trying to seduce his next victim while he and a group of other nasty individuals roam unsupervised through a place as horrific as any drug underworld. More shocking is that this is just a day in the life for them.

Even more shocking is the daunting realization that this is one hundred percent accurate and we must commend Mr. Clark and screenwriter Harmony Korine, the latter in particular. His screenplay is the core of why this picture is so powerful. He writes his dialogue without any apparent flow or structure, as if the behavior of his characters are not even up to him. The actions of the characters are unpredictable, as they would be. I also really commend him for his choice to not close up with an obligating-style ending, but to choose a really haunting, crusher of one instead. And Mr. Clark shoots his film in a strong, visual-focused documentary approach with long takes from his camera swinging back and forth between the gossiping teenagers. He also pays good attention to their surroundings, showing the conditions and lack of concern from their peers and elders that resulted in their being this way. Because he has a screenplay that is focused and sharp ("Bully" did not) his movie has a purpose and even his seemingly pornographic shots have a purpose

This is not a super super film, but it stays with you, which was sort of the point - especially if you saw it at the time it was released, before the onslaught of "dark" teen movies over the decade following. This was the granddaddy of the genre and remains one of the darkest and grittiest of them all, in both subject and style. Perhaps in part because the subjects were an urban group of kids, rather than the angsty suburban set we've grown accustomed to seeing, there is a rare and truthful ferocity to the characterizations. The emotive mechanism isn't their redemption as mere children, but their total fallibility as young adults. Though obviously this represents a small sample of teenagers in the united states, it will make you think twice about how much earlier we seem to lose our childhood these days. Great ensemble cast with very believable performances. Its attempt to approximate the reality of a documentary is a unique success. In addition to stong dialogue and direction, credit should be given to the cast for that; obviously, chloe sevigny was a standout here. A really important subject for its time and a very credible portrayal.