Kids at 30: Larry Clark’s Unflinching Legacy

When Kids premiered in 1995, it sent an immediate shockwave through cinema, culture, and the media establishment. Thirty years later, the film remains one of the most provocative and polarising portrayals of American youth ever captured on screen. Directed by Larry Clark and written by a then 19-year-old Harmony Korine, Kids follows a day in the life of a group of teenagers navigating the heat and chaos of New York City. Unfolding across a gritty backdrop of skateparks, streets and cramped apartments, the film presents adolescence as restless, reckless and largely unsupervised. It was raw, unfiltered and unapologetic. To some, it was a brutal work of vérité filmmaking. To others, it was a step too far.

The story centres around Telly, a teenage boy drifting through Manhattan with a singular focus. As he and his best friend Casper skate, talk, party and scavenge for thrills, another story runs parallel. Jennie, a girl from their social circle, learns she is HIV positive and embarks on a desperate quest to find Telly before anyone else is harmed. The film takes place over the course of one day but presents a reality that feels far more permanent—a bleak, chaotic loop that many young people lived daily. What made Kids so gripping was not just its subject matter but how it was made. Larry Clark didn’t cast actors. Instead, he recruited real teenagers from the streets and skate scene of Manhattan. Justin Pierce and Harold Hunter, both key characters in the film, were respected figures in New York’s underground skateboarding world. Neither had acted before. Rosario Dawson was discovered sitting on the steps of a brownstone and cast on the spot. Chloe Sevigny, already a downtown icon in the making, joined the cast through her connection to Korine. There was no polish or rehearsal—just raw presence, lived-in authenticity and the sense that the camera had been dropped into the middle of something real.

Clark had made his name as a photographer with the books Tulsa and Teenage Lust, which documented young people living on the edge. His fascination with youth culture, particularly its darker, self-destructive currents, informed every frame of Kids. Harmony Korine’s script added a layer of surreal banter and emotional aimlessness that gave the film a restless energy. Together, Clark and Korine created a piece of cinema that didn’t feel scripted or staged—it felt observed. The city was a character too, presented not as a postcard skyline but as a gritty, indifferent landscape that both mirrored and enabled the aimlessness of its inhabitants.

Controversy followed immediately. Critics, journalists and cultural commentators were quick to voice their concerns. The film was accused of being exploitative, irresponsible and harmful in its depiction of youth culture. Political figures in the UK and Australia sought to have it banned or heavily restricted. Many cinemas refused to screen it. What troubled people most wasn’t the violence or drug use—it was the stark lack of adult supervision, the sense that these teenagers were alone, navigating a world without consequences or guidance. Clark defended the film as a necessary window into a world people preferred to ignore. He insisted that what he captured wasn’t fiction—it was reality, and refusing to look at it wouldn’t make it go away.

Despite the uproar, Kids was a commercial success. Made on a modest budget of $1.5 million, it went on to gross over $20 million worldwide. It premiered at the Cannes Film Festival and earned nominations at the Independent Spirit Awards. Over time, it developed a cult following, particularly among artists, skaters, musicians and those drawn to its punk disregard for convention. For many, Kids was the first film that felt like their world had been put on screen without filters or judgement.

The film’s influence extended beyond cinema. Supreme, the streetwear brand that had opened its first store in SoHo just a year earlier, was closely tied to the cast and scene that Kids depicted. Harold Hunter and Justin Pierce were part of Supreme’s original skate team, and the brand’s aesthetic—scrappy, urban, confrontational—reflected the energy of the film. In 2015, to mark the twentieth anniversary of Kids, Supreme released a capsule collection featuring stills and motifs from the film. The drop sold out immediately and helped cement Kids’ status as a cultural touchstone not just in film but in fashion and street culture.

The legacy of Kids is complicated. Some of the cast went on to build successful careers. Rosario Dawson became a Hollywood regular and outspoken activist. Chloe Sevigny evolved into one of indie cinema’s most respected figures, celebrated for her fearless roles and fashion-forward persona. Harmony Korine would go on to direct his own cult classics, including Gummo, Julien Donkey-Boy, and Spring Breakers, always dancing along the edge of provocation. Larry Clark continued to explore youth culture through similarly contentious films like Bully, Ken Park and Wassup Rockers.

But not everyone emerged unscathed. Justin Pierce took his own life in 2000 at the age of 25. Harold Hunter died in 2006 from heart failure associated with drug use. Their deaths cast a long shadow over the film’s mythology. What once felt exhilarating and transgressive now felt tragic and all too real. The line between representation and reality became harder to parse. In 2021, a documentary titled We Were Once Kids revisited the production and its long-term consequences. Directed by Eddie Martin, the film featured candid interviews with surviving cast members and explored how many of them were left unsupported after the film’s release. At the time, most had signed contracts without fully understanding their rights or what their participation would mean in the long term. We Were Once Kids won Best Editing at the Tribeca Film Festival and prompted a renewed conversation about ethics in filmmaking, particularly when working with vulnerable or inexperienced individuals.

Rewatching Kids today is not an easy experience. The lack of adult presence, the bleakness of its worldview, and the open-ended pain of its characters feel even more pronounced. The film doesn’t offer closure or catharsis. It ends in a place of darkness and uncertainty, reflecting the very world it set out to document. Critics continue to debate its legacy. Some view it as a masterpiece of realist filmmaking, others as a cautionary tale of what happens when art gets too close to the edge. The film’s gender dynamics, in particular, have drawn scrutiny over the years. Female characters often bear the emotional weight of the narrative, while male characters are depicted with a sense of impunity. This imbalance has led many to revisit the film through a more critical lens, questioning how certain stories are told and whose voices are foregrounded.

Yet even with these criticisms, Kids endures. It remains one of the most powerful depictions of adolescence ever put to screen—not as we wish it to be, but as it sometimes is. It captured a specific moment in New York history, before the internet changed how young people connected, before smartphones mediated every interaction, and before youth culture became so heavily commodified. It was, in many ways, the last of its kind: a film made by and about people who lived the life it portrayed, with nothing to lose and no one to please.

Thirty years on, Kids still matters. Not because it offers answers or comfort, but because it asks hard questions and refuses

Its lasting power lies in its unwillingness to sanitise or explain. The film doesn’t moralise. It doesn’t tell the viewer what to think. It simply observes, often unflinchingly, and in doing so forces the audience to reckon with what they’re seeing. This has always been Larry Clark’s approach—show what others won’t, let the rawness speak for itself, and leave the viewer to sit with the discomfort. In an era where so many stories are filtered through algorithms, test screenings, and moral gatekeeping, the bluntness of Kids feels both archaic and oddly fresh.

The film’s aesthetic, its cultural imprint, and the debate it sparked helped usher in a wave of similarly styled independent films in the late 1990s and early 2000s—works that sought to depict youth not as fantasy or metaphor, but as lived experience. Its influence can be seen in everything from television dramas to fashion editorials, music videos, and even the tone of social media storytelling today. That seemingly offhand way of capturing life—gritty, spontaneous, stripped of gloss—has become its own visual language, and Kids helped write the grammar.

It also changed how the industry thought about casting, performance, and authenticity. Larry Clark’s decision to cast non-professional actors living the lives they were portraying set a precedent for other filmmakers interested in realness over artifice. But with that shift came necessary questions about responsibility and care. Who protects these young people? What are the long-term impacts of capturing such intimate, sometimes traumatic moments on film? We Were Once Kids forced many to confront those issues, and the industry continues to grapple with how to balance truth-telling with ethical practice.

For those who were teenagers when Kids was released, it was either a revelation or a rupture. Some saw their lives reflected for the first time—chaotic, unsupervised, and emotionally volatile. Others saw a grim exaggeration that felt alien. But either way, it provoked conversation, and that’s what great art often does. For today’s audiences, the film serves as both a historical snapshot and a disturbing reminder of how little has changed in some areas. The tools of youth culture have evolved, but the isolation, the risk-taking, the longing for connection—all remain.

Even now, Kids is hard to categorise. It’s not a traditional narrative. It doesn’t follow a clear arc. It doesn’t offer heroes or villains. Instead, it immerses you in a world and asks you to stay there, to watch and listen and maybe see something you didn’t want to. It’s not a comfortable watch. It was never meant to be. But it’s an important one.

As the cultural conversation continues to shift, as we reflect more critically on who gets to tell stories and how, Kids stands as a reminder of the power and danger of putting real life on screen. It changed the lives of its cast. It changed the expectations of independent cinema. It changed what was considered acceptable to explore. And it continues to challenge every viewer who presses play.

Thirty years on, Kids hasn’t faded. It hasn’t softened. It remains as jagged and uncompromising as ever. And in a world increasingly shaped by curated personas and controlled narratives, there’s something essential—if unsettling—about a film that refuses to look away.

Topics