Pure (I) (2002)
8/10
On Target View of Drug Addiction --- Set in London
19 January 2007
The most important aspect of this film is how it focuses on a 10 year old boy and his problem with his heroin addicted mother; not on a mother dealing with a boy using drugs.

Keira Knightley is the star power, but she's neither the sexiest nor the most slender; that goes to Molly Parker (Deadwood)and it's easy to see how she could attract men to enable her ongoing drug use. Her acting is as good as it gets but never falls into the trap of excess usually used to portray drug users. The portrayal of the boy Paul is also very real for being matter of fact rather than excess. The cinematography in a working class London neighborhood does not overdue the squalor but shows a pretty nice place to live ---- for those who haven't abandoned religion, patriotism, the work ethic, self-respect and other traditional English values.

Widespread drug use, beginning with heroin, began with MY generation, those who were young adults in the Kennedy Era. Heroin spread like uncontrolled wildfire across America --- from the inner cities of New York, Chicago and LA (the only places where drugs were common in 1960) into every town in America. The #1 carrier of the disease were the college kids --- spoiled brats who embraced heroin with open arms and spread it directly or indirectly to their children. Hippies, with their aversion to soap, spread their false credo of Peace and Love --- if only the world was stoned we'd all love each other. Hippies are just so Yesterday, but their poison legacy lives on.

Children dealing with stoner parents; that's the reality. Young people today have little idea how rotten things were in America in their parents' generation. Drugs and crime everywhere. When kids like Paul in this movie began to rebel against their corrupt and useless stoner parents; that's when things changed. How nice that this film gets it right.
5 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed