MovieChat Forums > Larry Clark Discussion > Why does this creep have a career?

Why does this creep have a career?

posted 7 years ago by RazoulGoozleSmog (169)
6 replies | jump to latest

I have no problem with things like sex being explored in the world of film, but man, some people obviously do it to fulfill their own perverted desires. His connections with Weinstein in the mid-90s just make his intentions even more apparent, I know Kids was written by 19/18 year old Harmony Korine, and is a sort of observation of the groups of kids he spent his teen years with. But I feel like Larry Clark saw it as a perfect opportunity to get himself surrounded by under aged teenagers.

I honestly respect Korine a lot more, even though I'd consider his art to be apart of that whole self-indulgent scene that runs rampant in places like NYC. He at least has been able to come up with interesting films that are extremely memorable, a lot of people think Gummo is all over the place, but I feel like he really knew what type of world and atmosphere he was trying to capture with it. Trash Humpers (which if you hate the film, I can totally understand) I really love the idea behind it, and how bizarre it is. You can see Korine's love for human beings (the way they interact with each other) and eccentricity in all of his films, even if a lot of them usually end up having no point at all.

Clark on the other hand desperately wants to be like Korine to some extent, but can't keep his dick in his pants.

[–] atd8vii (592) 7 years ago

Yeah, I always got a sense that Clark was a perverted creep who used his films to indulge in his lust for underage/ barely of age girls and then use the "art' excuse as a means of defending himself.

[–] RazoulGoozleSmog (169) 7 years ago

He can't keep away from the subjects, even when he tries to something different. Like "Teenage Caveman" for example.

[–] hairbox (72) 7 years ago

I've actually really liked all the Larry Clark movies I've seen. It's only a few, "Kids", "Ken Park", and the best of them all, "Bully". He captures that whole skater-punk/juvenile-delinquent culture really well, and I'd love to see more of his films. Kind of hard to get a hold of though...

[–] RazoulGoozleSmog (169) 7 years ago

Probably because the "skater-punk/juvenile-delinquent culture" are full of idiots and are easily influenced. I know a dumbass skater guy in my town who loves Larry Clark, he's 24 and dating a 15yr old freshman in high school, what a coincidence!

[–] hairbox (72) 7 years ago

Yikes! I like aspects of the culture, as I used to be a skateboarder, but still mostly an outsider to that whole scene. Too much of an introvert, but I still find that kind of thing fascinating. I'm drawn to trashy things, so naturally, I love Harmony Korine, John Waters, etc. Larry Clark and his raw approach to angsty teens seems quality enough for me.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Because idiots think that anything that is shot in a pretentious style and pushes the envelope is art house, and therefore "brilliant." It's the same thinking that has everyone thinking that a piece of garbage like Salo, which was basically a torture porn movie from a creep with a shit fetish (no exaggeration) was high art. In any event, no matter how much praise was lavished on Clark for Kids, he pretty much gave the game away with Ken Park. There is no hiding what that movie was (exploitation) and what he is all about.

I don't think Clark is a pervert so much as a very sad pathetic old man who may have "missed out" on his adolescence (or his skewed idea of what he think adolescence is all about) and is trying to capture what he lost.

BTW, I was only just three years older than the characters in Kids, and that depiction of NYC life in the 1990s was crap. The skater scene then was predominantly black and latino (because this was the dominant demographic living in NYC at the time). And no way were NYC teens that reckless or nihilistic. It's so laughable to me that people watched this movie and thought it was so "realistic."