I've known about this film for years but have never gotten round to viewing it..then after a friend told me a few days ago that it is something I should never watch as it has no redeeming qualities whatsoever, I decided to give it a watch. Having just finished 20 minutes ago, I felt the need to look up the user reviews on IMDB, and read whether or not the majority of reviewers felt the same way about it as I did.
I was mainly surprised at the amount of people who gave extremely positive reviews of the film, mainly stating that Kids is an accurate portrayal of teens today. Perhaps I lived too much of a sheltered upbringing, but I don't think I have ever been in company who have talked the way these kids talk. I was especially surprised by the scene in which the female friends discuss their sexual encounters..finding this not so much the language shocking but that girls so young or of any age would even think, let alone voice aloud these statements.
The way the male cast members act and talk, I genuinely cannot believe that this is accurate. The scene in which the character Casper dips a tampon into a red coloured drink then sucks the liquid out of it a couple of times is probably that which made me feel most disgusted.
During the party which closes the film, the scene where four extremely young boys sit squeezed into a small sofa also had an uncomfortable feel to it..not only because they were sitting smoking weed and talking as if they were 10 years older but for some reason because they all had their tops off..why?! All the male/female/child nudity seemed not unnecessary (as that would probably go against the point of the film) but just strange.
This was also true of the opening scene, where Telly 'deflowers' the 12 year old girl. This girl's body does not have the appearance of a 12 year old. Whether or not this is a case of over sexualisation of a young child I am unsure, but to me this was not realistic.
To summarise, Kids was clearly made to make the viewer feel uncomfortable, and to bring to attention issues that some of us don't want to face up to. However, although this is a decent subject matter, I find the way these kids think they rule the world too unrealistic to accept as an accurate portrayal of teenage life.
You know what this needs? More rage!
ReplyDeleteKidding. Honestly, though, I'm not a big fan of Kids, but I remember watching it when I was in college and appreciating how brazen it was. I knew kids in real life who leaned in this direction, and do think that for a subset of teens the film does ring true.
That said, a lot of the folks I've known who have really loved this film fell in love with it mostly because of the shock value. Sometimes when you're 19 you confuse shock with 'honesty' and grit, but sometimes what you're shocked at is its acknowledging of a dark corner of your life that you'd thought was hidden from everyone else.
Hehe maybe one of the first times I've instantly had to post straight after watching something?!
ReplyDeleteI did find the film compelling whilst being over the top and it made me feel the need to find other films with a similar 'shock value'...I think for me I am easily shocked and to contemplate that for some teens this is a grim reality is quite unsettling.
Thanks for your comment!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYou missed the point completely!! Ha ha! Kids is an incredibly accurate portrayal of a coterie of teenagers in pursuit of sex, and drugs in New York City. Gotta remember that Kids is set in the mid 90s at the peak of the HIV epidemic. Plus, you, or I might not act like that/talk like that, but I can assure you I know a few too many kids that do - no pun intended. I think a lot of people are disgusted by this film, because it's so in your face, and at times obtuse, and challenging. However if the film doesn't make you a little delirious, then it hasn't done it's job. That was the whole point behind the film, it's meant to make you ask questions. It's also such a bold subject matter, that it required an audacious director/artist like Larry Clark to be able to do it right. Larry Clark's earlier life is also plagued by drug use, and sexual experimentation (like the rest of us), before he made Kids he was (still is) a photographer, he published a book of his photography called Tulsa in 1971 that critics describe as "exposing the reality of American suburban life at the fringe and ... shattering long-held mythical conventions that drugs and violence were an experience solely indicative of the urban landscape." Which leads me to my next point - if Kids is so unrealistic and unbelievable, then why was it written by Harmony Korine, who at the time was 18! The cast were also mainly made up of kids who had had no previous acting experiences, most notably Leo Fitzpatrick (Telly) and Justin Pierce (Casper), who were able to identify with the script because it was so indicative of the skateboarding culture that they were part of. Which is why when Kids was released the majority of audiences thought that is was a documentary, because the cast gave such genuine, and relaxed performances.
ReplyDeleteKids is a film, that few critics praised, and too many audiences condemned, ultimately overlooking the point of the whole narrative, but as with all controversial material, the film invites misinterpretation. Kids wasn't meant to scare teenagers/virgins away from sexual intercourse, it was meant to outline, and show the potential dangers - that inherent sexual impulses can have literally dire consequences. If there is anything to take away from this film, it's this - USE A FUCKING CONDOM!
Yes I completely understand that was the point...I just didn't like it. My opinion.
ReplyDelete