It's interesting Larry Clark's "Kids" is brought up as it's one of those films I can't bring myself to watch. I've mentioned fairly often how I don't like the sexualisation of the young or teenagers unless it's for comedic purposes. It could be because I had a very delayed and stunted sexual life (without going into too much detail), but whilst i'm OK with almost all forms of exploitation, that's the one of the few things I can't deal with. That said, I do quite like Harmony Korine's films (I believe he wrote 'Kids'?), so i'm pretty confused.
I'm not sure if anyone knows of a British TV show popular in the mid-00's called "Skins"? It's full of teenagers taking drugs, having sex and being miserable; whilst i'll give anything a go, that I had to give a hard pass (i'm anti drugs* for the most part). There was a scene where a young woman was giving a guy a blow job to a beautiful Sigur Rós song that tainted that song for me. I'll never forgive the show for that. That said, on the other side, something like "The Inbetweeners" i'm totally OK with (basically an English version of American Pie) as the sex scenes are done for comedic purposes and bizarrely sweet in some ways.
Hope this makes sense; i'm drinking some strong 8% beers after getting through Dry January haha.
*although I love stoner rock, 70's prog-rock and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, so what do I know?
Yeah, I get what you mean. I totally get what you mean. I understand why Larry Clark's work is so divisive. I mean hell, I got kicked out of my photography class in Year 11 because of his work. Well, it's a bit of a long story. Basically it was around the time that his film Ken Park had been released and I was doing a big end of year study on Larry Clark. We were told to study one artist and basically do a theory sort of thing studying their work and I chose Larry Clark because his work was very interesting to me as a teen.
Also, the film Ken Park had been recently banned in Australia at that time but was making it rounds on bootleg DVD's and you could find it if you knew where to look. So I had seen a bootleg DVD copy at that point. Anyways, I needed stills from said film for my assignment and the computer lab had DVD readers in their PC's. So I took my bootleg copy of Ken Park and was capturing stills from it. I was late for my next class and in a hurry to get to English and I left one screen shot on the monitor. It was the one scene involving James Ransone portraying auto erotic asphyxiation. And who should walk in to use said computer after I leave but a Year 7 student (year 7 being freshmen for those who don't know how Australian High School grades work)
He saw the rather controversial image. Reported it. I got called into question because I was the last person using said PC. Tried to argue my case that it wasn't pornography and rather something that was for a photography assignment. Basically got the ultimatum that I was to be suspended for a week from school and I pretty much wasn't welcome back to photography and had to change out classes. To be fair, I think my photography teachers wanted me out because I was that kid that always gravitated towards controversial artists and the photography teacher did not like my choice of study.
But anyways, anecdote aside. I understand why his work is divisive and why people would not be comfortable with it. It certainly straddles that same line that Cuties does. But I think I give it a bit more of a pass just because of the fact that I knows it's legal aged actors playing younger than they were when shooting. And like I said, Ken Park aside, I don't think he really tries to redeem his characters actions rather he paints them as sad, shabby and pathetic in a moralistic reminder that it's a cautionary tale more than anything else.
But my argument has always been that the sex scenes in his work come from a place of uncomfortable truth and that he is largely a moral film maker. Teenagers think about sex. We've all been there, we all know. His work simply is highlighting that uncomfortable truth and further more exhibiting the fractured side of America that one would like to sweep under the rug.
Ken Park is a perfect example. Every sex scene bar the finale menage a is abusive in nature. It's not meant to be a turn on of a film rather a deeply uncomfortable one. Hence why the final threesome in that film between the three kids is actually quite carthatic and almost sweet as its a sigh of relief from the onslaught of abuse that came before hand.
I mean, his book Tulsa was quite prominent back in its day as it was showing a side of life that society would frown upon and discussing it frankly. That and his shot composition was very filmic even back in his younger days before he became a film maker. You can see why Scorsese and the likes drew inspiration from his photos. It was a gritty truth at a time where society would rather sweep it under the rug.
Now admitedly, I think Larry Clark's work grew thin. I think once he made Kids, Bully and Ken Park, I was pretty much done with him as a filmmaker as I felt like I've seen everything I need to from him. I stand by those three films though. I do think there is merit to those three films. They do work as a sort of unofficial trilogy. Especially Bully.
Bully really is a fantastic film. It's a murder film that truly calls the bluff on films that pretend to be about murder and actually shows all the senselessness of the real thing. I think Bully really is his defining masterpiece. But I don't know if I need to see anything more from Clark. I mean he is good at highlighting wayward teens (usually skateboarders) but he really doesn't have much else left in the tank and there is only so much of that I need to see.
You know what? I'm surprised his name has never come up with this whole #metoo movement. When that broke out, I really thought his name would come up almost immediately involved with some scandal. But so far, to my knowledge, nothing has come out about him. But it is kind of strange to me that a lot of male actors involved with his films had their demons and are no longer with us. So I do wonder? Although, Leo Fitzpatrick is still with us and he considers Larry to be a father like figure. So maybe he is innocent? Don't know...always wondered about that though and if there is a scandal waiting to break about him or not.
I think Harmony is the more creative of the two. I don't like all of Harmony Korine's films. But I really adore Gummo, Julien Donkey-Boy and especially Spring Breakers. I think Harmony ended up being the creatively more interesting of the pair as time went on.
Anyways, that's enough rambling about Larry Clark and Harmony Korine.
I've never seen Skins so I really can't comment on that, but I do love the fuck out of The Inbetweeners
Absolutely adored that show. One of the best cringe comedies of the past decade. (I'm a sucker for cringe comedy, see my love of Larry David.)