Being acquainted with Larry Clark's work, i went to see Ken Park. I was disappointed although the movie had all the hallmarks of Larry Clark's work: troubled teenagers, irresponsible adults and a lot of naked bodies.My issue with Ken Park is the focus on the dark side of humanity. Not that it doesn't exist in real life, but there is absolutely no light in the darkness of Ken park apart from indulging in sexual intercourse and masturbation. It left me with a feeling that the scenario was written by someone who hasn't left teenage angst behind him. In a way, this was true, since at least one version of the scenario has been written by Harmony Korine in his mid-twenties.I feel sorry for anyone who had to go through anything similar to the stories told in Ken Park. Yet, it seemed to me how the authors piled everything up only to make us feel bad about being alive...

I do admit, I had rooted for "Ken Park" prior to having seen it. Mainly because Larry Clarks nihilistic "Kids" is still one of my favourite movies. In "Kids" Clark (with more than a little help from Harmony Korine) caught the essence of a nihilistic, hedonist youth-culture, that was almost a little too close to home if you watched "Kids" for the first time and where in a similar age-range as the main-figures. Prior to viewing "Ken Park" I had very little knowledge of the story, but presumed that it would be in a similar vein as "Kids". I was not altogether wrong, but felt vaguely confused when I discovered the film in the adult-section of my local videostore.Now, do not get me wrong on this: I'm neither prude nor opposed to pornography. I've worked in adult-videostore in my young years and probably seen most this side of legality from this genre. Nor am I opposed to using elements of porn in mainstream movies, if those elements serve a point or further the main-story. However, at no point of "Ken Park" did I ever get the feeling it did any of that sort. I watched 'real' Porn and felt less of a voyeur than when I watched "Ken Park". I do not wish to accuse Clark of anything, but my impression was that of a "wily old goat" who transferred his own fantasies unto celluloid.If we take all the "infamous" sex-scenes out, we're really left with very little that Clark hasn't already shown us in "Kids". There are no real new insights or realisations. Sure, we all get the point: there are some messed up aspects in the society that "Ken Park" shows us, that will leave many of us (who are from a healthier environment) feel grateful not be have any part of. The viewer understands that the lives portrayed here are a mess, but there seems to be no real intent in exploring why that is. Nor does the film offer any solutions (perhaps because Clark thinks there is none?) That's not to say that "Ken Park" is technically a bad film. I'd give it 6/10 but as far as the exploration of angst-ridden, depressive lives of teenagers in Americana goes, "Kids" or Harmony Korines "Gummo" are by far the better films (and don't even have the need for explicit, seedy and un-simulated sex).

First off, before I get into any detailed discussion, I would like to state that from my research on this title, and Clark's signature sub genre in general, I did manage to locate the age of all the actors ( who portray American legal-minors well enough to rise eyebrows across the globe)in this film. And let me say, none of them were still unwrapping 18th Birthday presents, and all were very legal adults during the filming of Ken Park. If not, then this film would have made more enemies then just movie critics and ratings boards. Also any person who could find any type of arousal from the sexual situations portrayed in this film, has much deeper-seeded issues, that were there before viewing it. That being said. The first thing I'll say is that if the viewer is not familiar with Larry Clark's 7 (to my knowledge) other films and his style, then Ken Park is absolutely not the first one they should see. To truly understand Clark's message (yes, nay Sayers, there is a message!) you have to be able to disassociate yourself with what your are watching. Many other reviewers, both on this site and others, claim that Clark's views of American youth are so extreme, and so vile that there's no way it can be realistic. If today's parent's and middle agers really think that this culture of violent, drug and alcohol using, extreme sexuality experimenting, inarticulately swearing, teenage angst monsters don't exist? Then, smile that blissfully innocent, ignorant smile, and run like hell from anything Larry Clark has ever made. I can confirm with no sense of pride other then to be alive, that such a culture does VERY MUCH exist, I grew up in it. From far to tender an age, drinking, drugs, excessive smoking, swearing, false maturity, and experimentation that I have yet to equal as an adult. Clark's incite into mine and to many other's coming-of-age stories is the most rawly executed, real, portrayal of this excuse-less, counter culture of semi-suburban hell there is and could only be told by someone who had lived it too. Maybe not the specific stories, but the characters are disturbingly to familiar. But, like I said, if you can separate yourself from Clark's semi-psychotic vision of today's youth, then you may see what the minority sees in Ken Park. Ken Park is the collaboration of Larry Clark, director of KIDS, Wussup Rockers, BuLLy, and few others with a screenplay by Harmony Korine, who wrote on KIDS. The first thing you will notice is Clark's signature gloomy vibe oozing through the over tuned punk rock, and visuals that lack specificity and is bled out through the flat colors and signature-less other the places passing by.***SPOILERS FROM HERE ON*** The first noticeable character in their short lived, but plot line based, appearance is Ken Park, maybe 16, who skateboards (a favorite activity of most Clark's characters) down the street to a skate park, rolls around the hips and bumps of white cement a few times, sits down, pulls out a hand gun, and blows his brains out. This was the most disturbing part of the film in my opinion and almost gave the warning (quoting Clark's sig. dialogue) "Dude, you better get ready for some really f*cked-up sh*t...". The simple, yet intricate plot begins to shape as we meet a few of the other kids who knew Ken Park to one extreme or another, who will become the base for the rest of the story. Shawn, our "real" main character by all accounts, is (portrayed as), about 16, and is having an affair with a much older woman. His first act of age-defiance in the film, is performing oral sex on his adult mistress while her young daughter sits alone down stairs and watches some semi pornographic day-time cable, unattended. The casualness of the situation is enough to make your skin crawl.Next we have Claude, 15 or 16, a semi-charismatic teen, with a helping hand for his mother, who appears to be in her first trimester. His stepfather, however, isn't so loving for Claude. In fact his action's toward Claude would be described as dominant, demeaning, emasculating, and as the story progresses, disturbingly sexual in nature. Our female lead, Peaches,15 or 16, is a at first seemingly innocent, wholesome girl. Who's first scene is at the table, with her seeming boyfriend, and over loving, religious father. Her mother has passed away, and is heaavvvillyyy mourned by her father. Only Clark could make missing someone's loved one creepy. Moments after this introduction, Peaches and Boyfriend are caught mid sex act, and the father ruthlessly beats the boy, and has something far more dark in store for Peaches.The third character is Tate, 15-16, (played by the surprisingly well known actor James Ransone) take the "f*cked up" cake for Ken Park. He is a right off the bat disturbed, abusive, angry boy who is constantly screaming obscenities and threats at his Grandparents, who most disturbingly, show the most realistic and absolute love for Tate, while showing ignorance for what he is at heart. Which is, a asphyxiation fetishist (which is not 'portrayed', but acted out fully *shiver*...), and in the end homicidal as he hacks up his Grandparents with a kitchen knife. The story line based upon these charters after the death of Ken Park, whom they all knew. From my simple description, you can see, Ken Park is not just for everyone, it is for a select few with an interest in peering into the minds of some "really messed up kids" (Another Clark Signature If your worried you may come across Ken park on accident, don't worry, it has been banned in almost all major countries, and banned from print or sale in the USA (which made my copy all the harder to find.)

This director has done what Bernardo Bertolucci would like to have done when he directed Last Tango In Paris. It is a brutally honest look at humanity, warts and all. If you are a fan of reality films that do not flinch at showing the human form without adornment and in action as God intended it to be, this is the film for you. You will not like most if not all of the people in this film but then how many people do you like in the life you are currently living? Yes the film could have been better in many ways but it succeeds so well in an area that has not been touched by any other director I have seen. I applaud it and I hope there will be many more like it.