Defending and Attacking Larry Clark's 'Kids'

I watched a slew of movies last week, but I'm writing about one I didn't enjoy as much as the others: "Kids." The film is a great example of uncompromising vision. Whether it's good or bad, people talk about and remember this shit.

If you look through the reviews on "Kids," you're going to find a lot of people calling the movie pornographic. I knew about the movie's controversial reputation, so I was expecting something truly fucked up last week. Well, I got something truly fucked up but not because of the reasons everyone had proposed.

"Kids" features teenage actors and actresses having simulated sex. While these scenes can't be ignored, they are still restrained in that there isn't much nudity or anything arousing about the circumstances of these scenes ... I don't see how a boy giving a girl HIV could be that arousing to many people, and the scumsuckers who might find this arousing are probably too busy with their sick routines. In other words, pornography is designed with an audience in mind, so I don't get the argument that director Larry Clark was disguising child pornography as art when he made "Kids."

Indeed, while watching "Kids" I could not divorce the thought that Clark considers himself a very serious artist (check out this interview for evidence that supports my theory). The film obviously has a message: kids are, quite frankly, fucked up. And Clark uses a documentary style in an attempt to give his message levity. Whereas pornography is, by definition, something with no message other than "Jerk off to this" or "Finger yourself" or ...

But some might still ask, "Would you consider it borderline child pornography [and therefore irresponsible]?" My serious answer is I don't know because I can't define "borderline child pornography." I don't watch child pornography and therefore have no idea where the line is drawn. Now, if you had asked me whether Stanley Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut" is borderline titty porn, I could respond because I have watched ...

This entry is probably making everyone uncomfortable at this point, but I'm almost finished. "Kids" is not pornography from my perspective, but it is troubling, and I mean outside of what the filmmakers wanted me to feel. Chloe Sevigny's character Jennie, for instance, doesn't seem to have much of a purpose other than being a punching bag. First, she learns she has HIV even though she's had sex only once. Before the film ends, she is raped. After the rape, you don't see her again.

It's a cold movie, and it's cold because Larry Clark and screenwriter Harmony Korine care. They want us to see how kids really are. But wait a minute. Not every kid is this fucked up.

And that's why I don't get "Kids." I was supposed to have my eyes opened, but:

1. I already knew this shit happens because I was a kid. Duh.

2. Reality isn't this bleak.

On the other hand, any film that provokes as much thought deserves a chance. Try it if you haven't.

(Another criticism against "Kids" is that Clark was exploiting his young cast. Yeah, I'm sure Clark was thinking about the big bucks he was going to make off his Hollywood blockbuster, "NC-17 Teen Drama with Rape Scene.")

'Zombieland': Did it need the damn Twinkie jokes?

Fuck, I know. It looks like I'm about to take a big piss all over everyone's Fun. But that's not what I'm trying to do. I'll start by saying "Zombieland" is a decent comedy/family lesson/action film. I enjoyed it, and I wouldn't mind watching it again. My three favorite scenes:

3. The scene where Woody Harrelson (he pretty much outclasses the remaining cast members), Jesse Eisenberg, Emma Stone, and Abigail Breslin are taking turns talking in the front seat. Well-directed comedy.

2. The Zombie Kill of the Week. Or whatever the hell it was. It reminded me of Quentin Tarantino. By the way, Ruben Fleischer directed "Zombieland." Yeah, there is no wikipedia article on Fleischer, so don't even try now.

1. The scene where Woody is on a rollercoaster shooting shit. Great action directing.

Honorable mention to the slow-mo opening credits.

Were these scenes worth $8? I don't know, but the movie didn't completely shit the bed. But goddamn it, I despise advertising. When commercials come on, I stop paying attention. When people ask me if I've seen a particular "funny commercial," I have no idea what they're talking about. Total ignorance. And in this case, it makes me feel good.

On the other hand, it's hard for me to ignore a commercial when the product plays a central motherfucking role in the motivation of a character played by Woody Harrelson. Yeah, he really likes Twinkies, and just in case you can't remember, Twinkies are made by Hostess. Yes, he loves Twinkies.

The last two sentences are the summarized messages I received from "Zombieland," and the kinky part is that the movie wanted me to laugh at these messages. Honestly, it made me uncomfortable. For one thing, it wasn't funny to me in the slightest. I'm not unflexible on product placement or questionable advertising, either. "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" is one of the few television shows I enjoy. One episode from its fifth season featured quite a bit of questionable advertising (the show was clearly sucking off Dave & Buster's), but I didn't mind because I laughed at the show's jokes. Maybe I need to see "Zombieland" again to get the elusive Twinkie humor, but it sure as hell didn't work on me the first time. And the number of Twinkie jokes was too much. I could have casually forgotten about one comedic misfire.

I would like a Twinkie right now, but that's not a good idea at the moment. So there you go. I'm not going to bitch about how lame Jesse Eisenberg's voice-over was or anything else, just offering a simple question:

Did "Zombieland" need the damn Twinkie jokes? Surely something funnier could have motivated Harrelson's character. Something that wouldn't resemble a commercial at all. Something that wouldn't make me hungry.

Everyone Should Be Required to Watch the Last 15 Minutes of Cronenberg's 'The Brood.'

I should explain myself. I used to write this blog. My last entry was more than three months ago. I kept telling people I would update. I kept telling them I would write about "Inglourious Basterds."

Well, I'm a fucking liar. I'm not writing about "Inglourious Basterds" now, but when the DVD comes out in December, I hope to get an entry for it.

Enough sincere apologies, I want to talk about watching movies for Halloween. I'm three days too late, but I don't think anyone has read The Truth about Halloween movie watching--assuming you've been reading the same stuff I've been reading.

You only need about 15 minutes, perhaps less, and a DVD of David Cronenberg's "The Brood." Unless you want to risk boredom or dissatisfaction, do not attempt to watch this film in its entirety. It has really shitty dialogue and acting. Alright, you got the DVD already? Skip to the scene where a man is confronting a woman and start watching. You may stop the movie when you see enough.

I realize not everyone will be inspired to find "The Brood," so I'll motivate you with these three words about the film's climax: bloody fetus licking.

So the next time someone recommends you a "great horror film you have never seen," remember this. The ending of the "The Brood" is probably more disturbing, and you only need about 15 minutes to fuck your sensibilities.