NOTE IMDb
3,4/10
3,3 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueTeens encounter people, who, after being used as guinea pigs for the experimental testing of a virus can live forever in a post apocalyptic world.Teens encounter people, who, after being used as guinea pigs for the experimental testing of a virus can live forever in a post apocalyptic world.Teens encounter people, who, after being used as guinea pigs for the experimental testing of a virus can live forever in a post apocalyptic world.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 nomination au total
Crystal Celeste Grant
- Elizabeth
- (as Crystal Grant)
David Monzingo
- Puppeteer
- (as Dave Monzingo)
Larry Clark
- Nathaniel
- (non crédité)
Jeffrey Pritz
- Hunter
- (non crédité)
Avis à la une
This movie was one of the worst B-movies I've ever seen, and that's saying something. The plot, when stuck to, wasn't THAT bad. It could have been made into something halfway decent and successful with the right writers, actors, and director. But as another person said, most of the film's content is some kind of prolonged orgy, drug & alcohol abuse, and mindless cursing. It has one actor you've heard of...barely. Otherwise, this film doesn't even deserve to be viewed, let alone rented or owned. There are pornos out there with better actors and writing!
Wait...this film might just be a porno...
Wait...this film might just be a porno...
Don't listen to the individual who was upset by the profanity and sacrilege in this movie. If those bother you you may also not like the many drunken teenage orgy scenes, the graphic decapitation, the naked chick who explodes, etc.
But I mean, how many people are there out there who don't enjoy that type of picture? Not many, obviously. Let's be real here. So anyway. What makes this picture special is that it's from the sleazy arthouse director Larry Clark (KIDS, ANOTHER DAY IN PARADISE, BULLY) and contains all the usual subject matter and style of his pictures, ye with a postapocalyptic warrior tribe, and Stan Winston effects where after the orgy they turn into lumpy monsters and fight each other.
This is a stupid movie with some really bad acting by the villain and the usual corny dialogue but if you enjoy Larry Clark pictures, as all of us do, obviously, then you will get a kick out of it. It's such an unnatural combination of style and subject matter that it is what you might call "a hoot." Unless you don't like to have a good time, you will probaly like this picture.
But I mean, how many people are there out there who don't enjoy that type of picture? Not many, obviously. Let's be real here. So anyway. What makes this picture special is that it's from the sleazy arthouse director Larry Clark (KIDS, ANOTHER DAY IN PARADISE, BULLY) and contains all the usual subject matter and style of his pictures, ye with a postapocalyptic warrior tribe, and Stan Winston effects where after the orgy they turn into lumpy monsters and fight each other.
This is a stupid movie with some really bad acting by the villain and the usual corny dialogue but if you enjoy Larry Clark pictures, as all of us do, obviously, then you will get a kick out of it. It's such an unnatural combination of style and subject matter that it is what you might call "a hoot." Unless you don't like to have a good time, you will probaly like this picture.
a cast of b-grade, teen-flick actors have congregated to make a film filled with gratuitous sex and violence. if you want to watch the peripheral characters from mainstream teen flicks ('bring it on,' '10 things i hate about you') get naked with one another and die gruesome deaths, this movie is very satisfying. it combines the simultaneous lascivious and homicidal urges that arise from watching these actors in other films.
it is a stroke flick, definitely, with poor acting, bad script and mediocre direction. however, it offers good laughs in addition to amusing deaths and naked, hot bodies. i doubt it's easily found in a local blockbuster, but if you find this on hbo/showtime/cinemax at 3 a.m., you may wish to have another cocktail and observe.
it is a stroke flick, definitely, with poor acting, bad script and mediocre direction. however, it offers good laughs in addition to amusing deaths and naked, hot bodies. i doubt it's easily found in a local blockbuster, but if you find this on hbo/showtime/cinemax at 3 a.m., you may wish to have another cocktail and observe.
Where to begin? This headliner at the Fecal Film Festival is without a doubt the worst thing I have ever seen. Entirely without any redeeming value whatsoever, not even camp value mind you... this film lacks any substantive plot or story line that is discernable, nor comprehendable dialogue, nor even interest as a soft core porno.
Larry Clark's disturbing debut 'Kids' was controversial for it's depiction of homeless children doing drugs and having sex on the streets of New York. Well, after seeing Teenage Caveman you begin to realize that that subject matter is a favorite of Clark's and he is less gritty filmmaker than closet pedophile.
The film even looks bad... not even visually interesting, this film was an hour and a half of my life STOLEN from me. I don't know what the budget of this cinematic excrement was, but if it was more than $500, the production designer should be arrested for theft. The film appears to be shot entirely inside a closet, with the exception of two or three minutes of exteriors with the appearance that they were filmed in vacant lots and the homeless people who live there were displaced until filming was complete.
I LIKE BAD MOVIES... Ed Wood films are very entertaining to me, because I can take enjoyment in what was going on behind the scenes and the real "camp" laughs. This film can't even boast that. It is BORING. Entirely forgettable... I had to write this review quickly before this 'piece de merde' slipped from my mind.
I think Clark was trying to make some kind of statement about the nature of organized religion, maybe about drug use, something about sexual discovery... but if anyone can figure out what the hell the message was... post it because it was way too subtle for me to pick up on.
About the sex... like everything in else in this Ishtar-wanna-be, it was bad. Clark picked "actors" who were not only unable to deliver any dialogue, but who were just plain unattractive. People who I can't imagine anyone wanting to see naked, even after twenty beers. Particularly of note as being an exceptionally bad actress is the Asian girl who set new records for a lack of screen presence. Even the sexually explicit dialogue she delivers is done so poorly that it would make the most sexually repressed pre-teenage boy yawn. (The only dialogue that I can remember now involves a young boy learning to read from Penthouse forum, and stumbling over "reaming out my wife's bunghole.") I hope whoever wrote the script is proud. I'm embarrassed for repeating it.
In fact... everyone involved with this drek should be ashamed. A film school excercise should be to take the footage from this steaming peanut loaf and put together anything that makes sense. Anyone who succeeds should get a masters.
Perhaps the sci-fi geeks who "must" see anything with a special effect in it may want to sit through this Clockwork-Orange-torture-film, but even the effects are bad. If viewed for it's technical merits, the Computer Generated effects appear to have been done on someone's laptop while riding aboard a shaky bus. The makeup on the bad-guy creature is laughably bad, but not enough so to be entertaining.
Take my advice and steer clear of 'Teenage Caveman.' As a parent, I would rather have my son or daughter watch a snuff film... at least they might learn something from it. THIS IS THE FIRST FILM I HAVE EVER SEEN TO HAVE NO REDEEMING VALUE WHATSOEVER.
Larry Clark's disturbing debut 'Kids' was controversial for it's depiction of homeless children doing drugs and having sex on the streets of New York. Well, after seeing Teenage Caveman you begin to realize that that subject matter is a favorite of Clark's and he is less gritty filmmaker than closet pedophile.
The film even looks bad... not even visually interesting, this film was an hour and a half of my life STOLEN from me. I don't know what the budget of this cinematic excrement was, but if it was more than $500, the production designer should be arrested for theft. The film appears to be shot entirely inside a closet, with the exception of two or three minutes of exteriors with the appearance that they were filmed in vacant lots and the homeless people who live there were displaced until filming was complete.
I LIKE BAD MOVIES... Ed Wood films are very entertaining to me, because I can take enjoyment in what was going on behind the scenes and the real "camp" laughs. This film can't even boast that. It is BORING. Entirely forgettable... I had to write this review quickly before this 'piece de merde' slipped from my mind.
I think Clark was trying to make some kind of statement about the nature of organized religion, maybe about drug use, something about sexual discovery... but if anyone can figure out what the hell the message was... post it because it was way too subtle for me to pick up on.
About the sex... like everything in else in this Ishtar-wanna-be, it was bad. Clark picked "actors" who were not only unable to deliver any dialogue, but who were just plain unattractive. People who I can't imagine anyone wanting to see naked, even after twenty beers. Particularly of note as being an exceptionally bad actress is the Asian girl who set new records for a lack of screen presence. Even the sexually explicit dialogue she delivers is done so poorly that it would make the most sexually repressed pre-teenage boy yawn. (The only dialogue that I can remember now involves a young boy learning to read from Penthouse forum, and stumbling over "reaming out my wife's bunghole.") I hope whoever wrote the script is proud. I'm embarrassed for repeating it.
In fact... everyone involved with this drek should be ashamed. A film school excercise should be to take the footage from this steaming peanut loaf and put together anything that makes sense. Anyone who succeeds should get a masters.
Perhaps the sci-fi geeks who "must" see anything with a special effect in it may want to sit through this Clockwork-Orange-torture-film, but even the effects are bad. If viewed for it's technical merits, the Computer Generated effects appear to have been done on someone's laptop while riding aboard a shaky bus. The makeup on the bad-guy creature is laughably bad, but not enough so to be entertaining.
Take my advice and steer clear of 'Teenage Caveman.' As a parent, I would rather have my son or daughter watch a snuff film... at least they might learn something from it. THIS IS THE FIRST FILM I HAVE EVER SEEN TO HAVE NO REDEEMING VALUE WHATSOEVER.
Loaded with sex, violence, profanity, and drug use, and no redeaming value what so ever. This movie is great for all of you who love B movies. The way religion and god are used to control the "cave kids" is a good metaphor for real life. This movie has it all gratuitous sex, violence and the guy from 7th heaven. However, the ending did leave a little to be desired as far as I am concerned.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesLarry Clark said HBO aired the film the way he made it but he had to edit it to get an R rating for the DVD release. The MPAA forced him to take out most of the orgy and one line of dialogue, "I squirted," He argued with them to no avail. He almost tried to have his name taken off it but decided it wasn't worth the effort. He called MPAA head Jack Valenti "a fucking drunk" in interviews.
- GaffesToutes les informations contiennent des spoilers
- ConnexionsRemake of Teenage Caveman (1958)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Durée
- 1h 26min(86 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant