Original
documentation
'Kids': The Oral
History of the Most Controversial Film of the
Nineties - 20 Years Later
Editor's
Comments
1:46
Official Trailer
1:26:47
The Movie
Park Life
Larry Clark's controversial
film about New York City adolescents walking the
AIDS tightrope is also an unblinking look at the
dehumanizing rituals of growing up. But it really
doesn't add up to more than the sum of its various
shocks--virgin busting, skinny-dipping, male
callousness--overlayed with middle-class
disapproval. Clark is hectoring us for cutting kids
loose at a terrible time in modern American
history, but so are a lot of other people, who also
offer alternatives and ideas. The film does nothing
to push us toward new thoughts, new solutions, new
dreams. It is more like a window onto our worst
fantasies about what our children are doing out
there on the streets. --Tom Keogh
Powerful and passionate, colorful and
compelling, Larry Clark's KIDS is 24 frenetic hours
in the life of a group of contemporary teenagers
who, like all teenagers, believe they are
invincible. With breathtaking images from one of
the world's most renowned photographers, KIDS is a
deeply affecting, no-holds-barred landscape of
words and images, depicting with raw honesty the
experiences, attitudes and uncertainties of
innocence lost. KIDS gets under the skin and
lingers, long after it is viewed. The kids at the
core of the story are just that: teenagers living
the urban melee of modern-day America. But while
these kids dwell in the big city, their story
could, quite possibly, happen anywhere.
1995 KIDS Rated R
Editor's Comments
The was a GREAT movie because it (1) woke parents
up to what their kids were into and (2) it woke
kids up, who were allowed to see the movie, to the
dangers of unprotected sex when schools couldn't
promote safer-sex. I saw it in Marin County,
California where the proprietor of the Mill Valley
Cinema open the doors for anyone to see it. At the
time, every kid in American should have been able
to see it. There was a huge influx of kids going to
the San Rafael Free Health Clinic to get tested for
AIDS, many under 13 when, I believe California law
required anyone under 13 to have their parents
permission to get tested. I guess the purpose of
the law was to keep uninformed parents of what
their children are actually doing. To me it had the
reverse effect. What 10, 11, 12 year old wants to
go to their parents to tell them they had sex. So
many went under ground and didn't get tested but
remained in fear that they might die. A sick law
that doesn''t protect children and sets up some
forced adult control over their children's lives
that doesn't work. The movie, in the end, brought
out the hypocrisy of parental control. The same
thing happened with the "Bully" movie. It was
originally assigned an "R" rating in the U.S. It
finally got knocked down to a PG-13 because it had
too many swear words in it (all coming from kids in
bully situations.) Canada, on the other hand, saw
the importance of the movie, knew that swear words
are part of a mjiddle-schoolers experience, decided
not to be the Morality Police, and gave the movie a
G rating. I know because I have a copy. Again,
parents who are failures at parenting trying to
impose laws on their children that only make their
kids go further underground and separate from
trusting their parents. There's too much
"aggressive parenting" sanctioned by our society,
control from faith-based morality, that's simply
wrong. Lower the rating. Let kids experience the
movie, and then review it from their perspective,
not yours.
Most parents have no idea if their kids have
ever done drugs like ecstacy or roofies,or
Jager-bombs or other alcohol, inhalants, watched
pornogaphy, done sexting, self-injury, been bullied
or depressed. I bet if you asked your kid if they
know what a Jager-bomb is, they can tell you if
they trust you. - Gordon Clay
* * *
Movie
Ratings, Other
Movie Reviews
Contact
Us |
Disclaimer
| Privacy
Statement
Menstuff®
Directory
Menstuff® is a registered trademark of Gordon
Clay
©1996-2023, Gordon Clay
|