BULLY

[indianasmith]

This movie is a classic example of why I hate IFC!     I watched it quite a while back.  It is the story of a dumb teenager in Florida who is best friends with a MEAN dumb teenager from Florida.  They pick up a pair of girls, have sex, use drugs, then later the MEAN guy (the BULLY of the title) rapes the girl he was already having sex with, and she talks the dumb teen and his girlfriend into helping her kill the bully, which they do.  Then they all get caught and go to jail.

  It wasn't that the movie was cheap or badly acted.  And I'm not so much of a prude that I was turned off by the rather generous amounts of nudity in it.  The reason I hated it so much is that EVERY single character in the film is a stupid and despicable person.  The kids use drugs, swear, have sex, and fight.  They can't complete a sentence without using the F-word four times.  Their parents are selfish, self-absorbed idiots who don't seem to care that their teenagers are out all night, every night, using drugs, having sex, and beating up on each other.  They are all essentially mindless idiots who seem incapable of any kind of rational thought or action . . . just pure creatures of impulse.  I like movies that have heroes and villains, or at least some normal people in them that I can relate to.  I understand that the movie is based on a true story.  If that is what the modern American teen is actually like, I fear for our future . . . . 

[Mr_Vindictive]

I on the other hand absolutely love IFC, well most of the time.

Bully though....it's not a good film.  I second your opinion in that everyone is despicable and it's damn hard to watch a film when you dislike every single character in it.

I have learned to stay far away from any film directed by Larry Clark.  His films always have a huge amount of nudity, and not the good kind.  There's a lecherous sort of feeling to his handling of nudity and drug use.

[indianasmith]

I guess my biggest beef with indie films is they are so darn depressing.  Someone is addcited to drugs, someone is gay, someone has a disease, someone is gay and addicted to drugs and catches a disease, I mean, COME ON!!!! Life is depressing enough, I want my movies to ENTERTAIN me, not make me want to open my wrists!

[voltron]

I'm not a big fan of this movie either. I liked Kids and Gummo a lot more.

[RCMerchant]

One  minute I love  IFC...the next I hate it. When I thought I couldn't stand to watch another piece of worthless garbage like DAHMER (how do you make a movie about a killer cannibal boring!?!?),or watch any more lesbian movies where  no one gets nekkid, they show a cool Shogun movie or a little seen exploitation classic. Ah well...

[Ash]

I have to respectfully disagree with you guys.

I liked Bully and I give it a big  .

And Indiana...I think you missed the point of this movie.
(see Ebert's review below)

Nick Stahl played such a prick in this film...I couldn't wait to see him get what was coming to him.
And when it finally did happen, I actually felt sorry for him.

This film, like most of Larry Clark's films, is about kids who have no supervision of any kind and no goals in life. 
And the fact that this film is based on a true story made it all the more intriguing to watch.
Here's the Wikipedia page of the guy who was murdered in real life:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Kent

------------------------------------------------------------

I wasn't alone in thinking that Bully was a good movie...
Roger Ebert gave it 4 out of 4 stars.
Read his review

Payback For a Bully
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l09sntl9sRM
(not safe for work!)

[Dennis]

I liked this movie inspite of it being depressing, primarily because it made me think about how choices that we make as young people can have consequences that follow us for a life time. It's not a happy movie, but I found it thought provoking.

[Allhallowsday]

I guess my biggest beef with indie films is they are so darn depressing.  Someone is addcited to drugs, someone is gay, someone has a disease, someone is gay and addicted to drugs and catches a disease, I mean, COME ON!!!! Life is depressing enough, I want my movies to ENTERTAIN me, not make me want to open my wrists!

What is this "gay" commentary?  I respectfully tolerate a fair amount of veiled bigotry, but relating "depressing" and "disease" and "drug" addiction to gay is just ignorant.   

[Torgo]

Bully IMO is the only really good film that Larry Clark has made to date.

While his preoccupation with showing 18 and 19 year olds either nude, having sex or in their underwear gets old after a while in his films, the subject matter in Bully is what made the film so good. Along with the performances.  You sometimes felt like you weren't watching a movie and were actually watching real life.

Oh, and on a much more superficial note Bijou Phillips looked incredible in this movie.

[indianasmith]

The subject matter is what made me hate it, so I guess it's just a case of "Differn't strokes for Differn't folks."  I am a fundamental optimist, and that movie severely challenged my optimism.

Oh . . . and AllHallows, as I've commented before, I'm just not comfortable with heavy gay content, especially men, in any film.  While I believe consenting adults are absolutely free to indulge in whatever relationships they choose, I find the sight of two men making out fairly repulsive and always have.  Two women, on the other hand . . . 

Bully IMO is the only really good film that Larry Clark has made to date.

While his preoccupation with showing 18 and 19 year olds either nude, having sex or in their underwear gets old after a while in his films, the subject matter in Bully is what made the film so good. Along with the performances.  You sometimes felt like you weren't watching a movie and were actually watching real life.

Oh, and on a much more superficial note Bijou Phillips looked incredible in this movie.

[Allhallowsday]

Oh . . . and AllHallows, as I've commented before, I'm just not comfortable with heavy gay content, especially men, in any film.  While I believe consenting adults are absolutely free to indulge in whatever relationships they choose, I find the sight of two men making out fairly repulsive and always have.  Two women, on the other hand . . . 

Well, I didn't read what you wrote that way.  You only mention "someone is gay."  Plus, "indulge" still seems an intolerant word, but I'm not interested in taking up the "gay" arguement.  I just don't care for bigotry. 

[indianasmith]

Well, be assured of my respect.  I personally believe homosexual behavior is immoral, according to the tenets of my religion, but so are a lot of other things.  One thing all humanity shares in common is a propensity to sin, and I am as guilty as the next guy.  But disliking a behavior is NOT the same thing as disliking people.  Lots of my friends do things that annoy/offend me, and I generally still try to maintain the friendship.  If that offends you, accept my apologies.   Then we can just agree to disagree and go on with life, liberty, and the pursuit of truly dreadful pieces of cinema . . . . like BULLY.



(Like how I came full circle on that one?) 

[Torgo]

Oh . . . and AllHallows, as I've commented before, I'm just not comfortable with heavy gay content, especially men, in any film.  While I believe consenting adults are absolutely free to indulge in whatever relationships they choose, I find the sight of two men making out fairly repulsive and always have.  Two women, on the other hand . . . 

I think where AllHallowsDay  is coming from is that your post can be insinuated as not showing tolerance towards the gay community.  I'm a heterosexual male and I read your post as thinking that the reason why you didn't like the film was solely for it's sometimes gay-homoerotic content.  I'm completely comfortable in my sexuality in that scenes showing nude men or gay activity in a mainstream film doesn't bother me one bit.

Where Larry Clark rubs me the wrong way is how he chooses to film/frame his usually teenage actors nude and in sexually comprising situations.  Anyone who has seen Ken Park might know what I'm talking about.  I have no problem with explicit or even hardcore sexuality in a mainstream film but there's just something about the way that Larry Clark does it that makes me feel like I need to take a shower afterwards. Maybe that's his point, who knows.    

I work with a guy and let him borrow the movie Quills (which is a great movie about the Marques De Sade).  Upon returning it to me, all he could complain about and/or talk about was all of the male nudity in the movie.  I told him that apparently there was something going on beneath the surface for him to just keep going on and on about the male nudity and not the movie itself.  He then tried to do the typical thing of saying that I must be secretly gay and that the reason I didn't have problem with it is because of that. I told him that, no, I have been straight all my life but I didn't find male nudity problematic in a movie if it happened to occur.       

He also had the same complaints about Bully. All he could go on and on about was the "gay" content in the movie at times. 

I just saw the recent film Shortbus which is a mainstream film featuring hardcore sex scenes of both the gay and straight variety.  It was a pretty good film.  If Bully freaked you out with it's "content", I would love to see your reaction to Shortbus.     

[Allhallowsday]

... But disliking a behavior is NOT the same thing as disliking people.  Lots of my friends do things that annoy/offend me, and I generally still try to maintain the friendship.  If that offends you, accept my apologies.

Huh?  I'm supposed to be offended and am apologized to because you try to maintain friendships with people who do things you find offensive?     Like I wrote, I'm not interested in taking up any part in an argument about the right or wrongness of anyone's sexuality.  However, intolerance I must challenge. 

I personally believe homosexual behavior is immoral, according to the tenets of my religion, but so are a lot of other things.  One thing all humanity shares in common is a propensity to sin, and I am as guilty as the next guy.

One of the things I find intolerable about organized religion is the judging of behaviour and the long-term disagreement of the meaning of scripture.  I believe in what Jesus said: "Judge not lest ye be judged,"  and I do think with regard to that quote there, you're attempting to convey the same. 

Then we can just agree to disagree....

Most certainly; but assume not lest you make an "ass" of "u" and "me..."   

I think where AllHallowsDay  is coming from is that your post can be insinuated as not showing tolerance towards the gay community.  I'm a heterosexual male and I read your post as thinking that the reason why you didn't like the film was solely for it's sometimes gay-homoerotic content.  I'm completely comfortable in my sexuality in that scenes showing nude men or gay activity in a mainstream film doesn't bother me one bit.

Here, here!  I have friends of many races, sexual orientations, and creeds (from diehard atheists to kneeling prayers) and am offended more readily by cruelty, indifference, and bigotry, than by consenting adult behaviour. 

I work with a guy and let him borrow the movie Quills ...Upon returning it to me, all he could complain about ...was the male nudity in the movie.  I told him that apparently there was something going on beneath the surface for him to just keep going on and on about the male nudity...  He then tried to do the typical thing of saying that I must be secretly gay and that the reason I didn't have problem with it is because of that.

I often defend even those I do not like if I feel they've been wronged.  To me, it's not about who I am, but about the facts.  Karma for you, Torgo.  You said it better than I could have. 

[Torgo]

If anyone who hasn't seen it yet wants to see how awful Larry Clark can get as a filmmaker, just check out Teenage Caveman.