(This is all the picture he deserves)
Larry Clark’s kind of movies have a special place in the suck of my heart. He “directed” such movies as Kids and Bully. They’re supposed to be “shocking” and “realistic” and “documentary-like” and a whole other bunch of nonsense. Well, they’re not. They suck. Their 2 hour running times consist of the following: young teens ramble non-coherently about bullshit, they have bad sex, someone gets beat up or bludgeoned for no reason, more rambling, pre-teens have sex, ramble, beating, someone’s raped, more rambling, someone gets AIDS, end movie. The whole process really ends when Larry Clark accepts praise from people who mistake the film’s edginess for having some kind of intelligence.
It’s not that there’s anything wrong with shocking content. In fact, I tend to like profane movies. Michael Haneke in particular is pretty interesting. But there’s nothing to the statements that are made by Larry Clark’s movies. His teens are simply orifices, brain-dead vessels of violence, drugs and sexual thumping. And if that very statement is the statement Clark is trying to make, well… then it’s a boring one. It’s also not a very accurate one. I know plenty of dumb-asses who do bad shit. They’re actually pretty entertaining. God, Larry Clark. Is this really what you’re saying? It’s such a ridiculous statement to make.
It renders your movies pointless, lame, inane, and sucky. Worst of all, they’re boring.
There’s nothing more purposeless in life then a truly boring movie with a boring point. (Note: boring movies with interesting points are perfectly acceptable.)