I only watched this movie because Adam Horovitz of the Beastie Boys was in this movie. What I found is a very realistic (until the end) movie about suburban teenage angst. Horovitz plays the lead, who ends up getting institutionalized because his parents are too busy. Horovitz surprised me by his acting skills as his anger was shown strongly. He is in need of fitting in, and that's where his step-brother comes in and influences him to get out of the institution and wreak havoc with him. His love interest is institutionalized too, but when she is free, she is stuck at home drugged out, with her mom not caring for her. Donald Sutherland plays the institution's only caring person. He says "Yeah, they care. They care for a couple hours because they're paid to care." That's another conflict in this movie is his caring for his patients, but it strains his relationship with his real family. This movie is very strong, and shows the pain of being a rich teen in suburban L.A. with no support of the family. I just feel the ending was a cheap cop out to a very good movie.
17 Reviews
not great, but good - Horowitz does fine work
jnsgrover16 January 2007
Really a sweet movie - yes, VERY formulaic, but that does not disqualify any film. Plot - OK, crap. But Sutherland and Horowitz (yes, the guy from Beastie Boys and son of the famous playwright) do well by the roles they are given.
It is the gentle attention that the director give to the characters that makes the movie for me. The two main characters are cast in a very typical ("Ordinary People") situation, but they transcend it with their performances. Sutherland could easily have coasted through this movie for the paycheck, but doesn't. Adam Horowitz could have just posed and postured - but doesn't.
Or I'm nuts - could be. There is no harm, however, in a feel-good story that doesn't cheat on the difficulties of the characters' situations or their needs. This plot may speed past them, but the performances give them depth.
Honest sentiment is no crime - and I would claim that Sutherland and Horowitz give nuanced performances (not exactly typical for either).
It is the gentle attention that the director give to the characters that makes the movie for me. The two main characters are cast in a very typical ("Ordinary People") situation, but they transcend it with their performances. Sutherland could easily have coasted through this movie for the paycheck, but doesn't. Adam Horowitz could have just posed and postured - but doesn't.
Or I'm nuts - could be. There is no harm, however, in a feel-good story that doesn't cheat on the difficulties of the characters' situations or their needs. This plot may speed past them, but the performances give them depth.
Honest sentiment is no crime - and I would claim that Sutherland and Horowitz give nuanced performances (not exactly typical for either).
Not too bad. Teen drama...
smatysia11 July 2005
Not too bad. It's about these "mental" institutions for teens that were popular in the '80's. I remember seeing the advertisements for these sorts of places back then. "Spring Shadows Glen" and whatnot. As I recall they collapsed in a wave of scandals around the time this movie came out. It's also about alienated teen-agers who have no clue about how fortunate they are, and revel in misery and violence for no apparent reason. And it's also about how a kid can be influenced by older bad kids. Gotta seem tough, you know. The film explored the intersections of these phenomena pretty well, at least until the ending which seemed to belong to a different movie. Donald Sutherland turned in his usual top-notch work. The main character was somebody named Adam Horovitz, who I understand was a member of one of those boy bands that were so popular back then. He does a pretty creditable job with his "tortured teen" role. So many singers and athletes appear in movies that you've got to wonder how hard dramatic acting really is. Anyway this film is OK. Check it out.
A lost gem...
brendonm14 February 2002
My mom worked in a mental ward for teenagers, and this movie captures that environment very well (the writer either worked in one or did his research). Amy Locaine is so sweet and screwed up at the same time. Mr. Beasty Boy does a good job as the confused protag, and I especially like how the story and filmmarkers don't judge these kids with speeches about morals from the adult characters -- but instead ask hard questions like: "What do you want [in your life]?" Sutherland is great in his role and totally believable. Worth a rent or watching on cable. Too bad this movie didn't get more attention.
This is what too much leasure time does to Earthlings
winopaul15 November 2023
The technologist tribe gave you idiots all this leisure time, from the steam engine to the washing machine to the little glow-box spy-tech phones you glue to your heads. And this is what the privileged upper-class white boys to with that leisure time. Not to learn and explore and care and improve, but to just become wastrels. This is not an entertainment movie but more a documentary about the collapse of American greatness. That old saw, "From rags to riches to rags, in three generations" is evident here. I don't know who is worse, the phony grinding strivers, or their juvenile delinquents.
Yeah, the production values are dated, but this is still a well-made flick. When I lived in Silicon Valley I commented how San Jose did not really have a ghetto, like Cleveland and Detroit, cities I had also lived in. A guy I met at traffic school (the second one run like a therapy session) told me the real wastrels were in Mountain View, the rich suburb. He explained the parents did not raise their kids. They just gave 'em 300-dollar shoes and a car, and told them to not bother them. So the kids ran wild. But since mommy and daddy were middle-class, they could buy their kids out of trouble, unlike in the inner city.
I also saw the middle-class kids trying to be bad, whether it was with Mafia wanna-bees in Cleveland or outlaw motorcycle gangs in Cali. One nice thing is that it is not hard to cast this movie in LA. These nepo-baby wastrels are everywhere. Perhaps the whole acting profession is a form of delinquency.
So a whole lot of this movie rang true, though it is a bit '80s dated. If you can apply the principles to today, the story still holds up. After all, going to a party-school college and taking a party major is just a more socially acceptable form of juvenile delinquency. A solid 7, good to kill time until Astrid comes on PBS at 10:00.
Yeah, the production values are dated, but this is still a well-made flick. When I lived in Silicon Valley I commented how San Jose did not really have a ghetto, like Cleveland and Detroit, cities I had also lived in. A guy I met at traffic school (the second one run like a therapy session) told me the real wastrels were in Mountain View, the rich suburb. He explained the parents did not raise their kids. They just gave 'em 300-dollar shoes and a car, and told them to not bother them. So the kids ran wild. But since mommy and daddy were middle-class, they could buy their kids out of trouble, unlike in the inner city.
I also saw the middle-class kids trying to be bad, whether it was with Mafia wanna-bees in Cleveland or outlaw motorcycle gangs in Cali. One nice thing is that it is not hard to cast this movie in LA. These nepo-baby wastrels are everywhere. Perhaps the whole acting profession is a form of delinquency.
So a whole lot of this movie rang true, though it is a bit '80s dated. If you can apply the principles to today, the story still holds up. After all, going to a party-school college and taking a party major is just a more socially acceptable form of juvenile delinquency. A solid 7, good to kill time until Astrid comes on PBS at 10:00.
Solid Film
TedMichaelMor18 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
"Lost Angels" may well be director David Hudson's best film. Perhaps, the first-rate script by Michael Weller is the strongest aspect to this work. Well composed cinematography by Juan Anchia and editing by David Gladwell cover some deficiencies in acting by Adam Horvitz, who seems a bit overwhelmed by his role as one of two protagonists. Amy Locaine is a fine young actress on this work. As always, Donald Sutherland provides an excellent foundation for the film. He provides a strong sense of reality, as he does in "Ordinary People." Still, this is not the quality film that "Less Than Zero" or "Say Anything", excellent movies that it resembles, are. Most certainly, this is not "Ordinary People", another related film.
Location shooting in San Antonio hurts because that city does not resemble Los Angeles, the setting for the film. I worked for a psychiatric hospital that treated adolescents. This film depicts that ambiance well. It is accurate. This is an excellent choice for viewing.
Location shooting in San Antonio hurts because that city does not resemble Los Angeles, the setting for the film. I worked for a psychiatric hospital that treated adolescents. This film depicts that ambiance well. It is accurate. This is an excellent choice for viewing.
A Good Drama Attempt But Doesn't Quite Succeed
tabuno18 January 2019
4 August 2010. The focus on juvenile rehabilitation gets a fresh look in this sometimes edgy, raw inside and outside look at juvenile delinquency. The movie hasn't aged particularly well, especially the beginning portion of the movie which seems more like a WEST SIDE STORY (1961)rumble without the love conflict. While the detention center or youth rehabilitation centers has some good moments and in places has an excellent authentic feel without the exaggerated, stereotyping, it nevertheless doesn't follow-through on the actual substance of rehabilitation and the audience gets a tourist version of a visit to your local center inside. Another problem is the title of the movie LOST ANGELS that seem to imply an ensemble movie with a focus a various angels who are lost in Lost Angeles where the movie is taking place, much like THE BREAKFAST CLUB (1985). Donald Sutherland's character seems to have a lot of problems of his own, so much so that the focus on the main theme of the movies gets sideswiped unlike the more focused relational themes between client and therapist and observing how the interaction evolves in a more authentic and meaningful manner as in GOOD WILL HUNTING (1997) between Robin William's therapist identification with Matt Damon's rebellious genius from the poor neighborhood or even PRIME (2000), a comic treatment of a therapeutic relationship starring Oscar award winning Meryl Streep. Cuba Gooding Jr., also had a strong performance as a therapist, but in this case in a prison setting with Anthony Hopkins as an inmate in INSTINCT (1999). Ultimately this movie seems to transform itself into a coming of movie with juvenile rehabilitation more of a setting than an integral part of the movie, as the resolution of this movie seems to come more from outside of the center than within unlike what occurred with 28 DAYS (2000) where Sandra Bullock's character seems to take a lot from her alcohol rehabilitation. GIRL, INTERRUPTED (1999) where Angelina Jolie's character gets a heavy does of theatrical drama in her rehabilitation center is both traditional, yet stylistically more effective than this more low-key version.
Overall, this therapeutic drama as less about rehabilitation from where most movies of this genre derive its strength but from the mean streets of personal experience and the resulting consequences. There is a gritty relationship scenario that occurs in this movie that is particularly effective. But the editing seems unbalanced and somewhat erratic, the voice-over while fascinating but doesn't seem to be used consistently and with as much power of effect as possible such as with THE INFORMANT! (2009) where Matt Damons gets a delicious, running, self-talk through out the movie.
Overall, this therapeutic drama as less about rehabilitation from where most movies of this genre derive its strength but from the mean streets of personal experience and the resulting consequences. There is a gritty relationship scenario that occurs in this movie that is particularly effective. But the editing seems unbalanced and somewhat erratic, the voice-over while fascinating but doesn't seem to be used consistently and with as much power of effect as possible such as with THE INFORMANT! (2009) where Matt Damons gets a delicious, running, self-talk through out the movie.
Adrock gives a good performance, but the film is a dud
reverendtom30 November 2006
Adam Horowitz a.k.a. King AdRock of the Beastie Boys puts in a surprisingly good performance as a troubled teen here, but overall the film is pretty unremarkable. King AdRock and Donald Sutherland? That lineup has cult classic written all over it, but unfortunately, there really ain't a whole lot going on here. There are some great scenes where Adrock gets mad, gets in fights or complains about things, but they are the only high points. Worth watching if you're a Beasties fan, if only to see that Adrock is actually a good actor, but that's it. The film is slow moving and very serious and not even Adrock and Donald Sutherland can save it. Adrock should get back into acting, he's funny as hell, too.
A story about growing up in the city with uncaring parents
massic14 January 1999
I was really moved by this movie. I grew up in similar circumstances and was really able to relate to what was happening to the character. Growing up in the city around drugs crime can really wear a kid thin. If you don't make the right choices you'll end up either dead or in jail. This movie portrayed exactly that, but it's happy ending was unnecessary.
Dull and contrived...
The_Core3 March 2002
This movie didn't "work" for me... the situations didn't feel right, the movie didn't feel realistic, and I didn't care a bit for any of the characters. I did sit through the end of the tape to see how it ended (rather a waste of time). The film itself felt lost... with no direction, no particular meaning and no real plot. Contrived, unrealistic situations and a poor screenplay didn't help a bit.
4/10
4/10
Awesome 80s Cult Classic starring Adrock!
blandiovision-432-27194211 March 2018
Being a teenager in the 80s and growing up in the Los Angeles area myself, this movie appealed to me because of the obvious relate-ability to it. Adrock sure did a stupendous job, especially being that it was his debut in a film. We always think of him as the crazy, funny and party-animal beastie boy, but here he was a dramatic, lost and frustrated protagonist looking to find his way amongst a myriad of issues. This film depicts the consequences of Reaganomics and how the 80s culture-especially amongst white Americans-worshiped greed and money. In this quest to have all the better things in life-which often was because of both the father and mother having careers-the kids become lost and bored and turned to things like drugs, sex, booze, partying non-stop, recklessness, gangs etc. It is interesting how a motif is the Latino gang lifestyle (his nickname was "chino") and how many young white males succumbed to that, especially in Southern California, in their quest to want to feel apart of something and seem important. Little did they know, but the filmmakers foreshadowed a major theme of the 1990s by doing this. The plot was mediocre, but it was the superb acting by Sutherland and Horovitz, and their chemistry along with how the film captured the end result of what happens when greed is god (this film was made in 89) and a seque into the the problems that these lost kids continued on with in the 90s. By that token, it is now a cult classic. I hear many people complain about the ending; I do not think the ending was too bad. Sure, it seems sugarcoated, but the protagonist found himself through the feeling he was able to care for someone else--the Donald Sutherland character. Because of this, he found his way back home.
Not really all that
Eddie_weinbauer10 March 2019
I dunno how the original script looked,but I suspect it was far from what got produced.
What we have her is a choppy movie, about bored rich kids who get into all kind of violent trouble, just cause they are bored.
The main guy is a kid who seem to be more of a background character,kind of guy. He is in a rich kid gang called DAB(you don't ever get told what the acronyms mean). But the problem is he really seem more like a mascot,than a real gang member. He si not all that edgy. nor all that provoking. More the silent nerdy type. Than you have the female lead. The always lovely Amy Locane. But she don't have much to work with here. She is hired cause she is pretty,. She is the gang leaders girlfriend. But he don't really seem to care all that much about her. Kind more like something that is nice to have around.,
After a gang fight gone bad,and a car driven into a swimming pool .They end up in some sort of juvenile mental institution,for troubled kids.
Which is were most of the film take place.
The problem is you don't really feel for these kids. When I watched Where the Day Takes You I had sympathy with them. But watching this movie you don't really feel anything,near sympathy for them.
I think the biggest problem is the movie can't decide if it gonna be a gang movie, a Troubled teen movie,or a poor rich kid with their absent parents drama. I feel the main protagonist would have been played better by someone else.
What we have her is a choppy movie, about bored rich kids who get into all kind of violent trouble, just cause they are bored.
The main guy is a kid who seem to be more of a background character,kind of guy. He is in a rich kid gang called DAB(you don't ever get told what the acronyms mean). But the problem is he really seem more like a mascot,than a real gang member. He si not all that edgy. nor all that provoking. More the silent nerdy type. Than you have the female lead. The always lovely Amy Locane. But she don't have much to work with here. She is hired cause she is pretty,. She is the gang leaders girlfriend. But he don't really seem to care all that much about her. Kind more like something that is nice to have around.,
After a gang fight gone bad,and a car driven into a swimming pool .They end up in some sort of juvenile mental institution,for troubled kids.
Which is were most of the film take place.
The problem is you don't really feel for these kids. When I watched Where the Day Takes You I had sympathy with them. But watching this movie you don't really feel anything,near sympathy for them.
I think the biggest problem is the movie can't decide if it gonna be a gang movie, a Troubled teen movie,or a poor rich kid with their absent parents drama. I feel the main protagonist would have been played better by someone else.
Michael Bolton!
bustercolon22 December 2003
All you really need to know about this movie is that its the first time I ever saw Michael Bolton in a movie. No, not the singer, but the character from Office Space. He plays a minor role as a wise ass in rehab named Carlo. He has some really funny lines and is a good example of the different kind of rebellious teens the 80's produced. You can see how we all became underachievers and slackers by watching this movie. It has a pretty good message about joint income families producing lazy, drug addicted, sex crazed, hyper active, non attentive kids. The movie isnt that great, but the insite into what was going on in the wake of Reaganomics is really important. Its a good capstone for movies like repo man, rad, thrashin, less than zero, and so on. Not that theres much in common here, but the genre is the same. This movie is pretty much an expanded after school special. But the gang and club scenes are great. Theres some decent dialogue and some 80's music. Its worth renting if your from this era, most younger wont get it, most older wont understand. 7 of 10*'s
A very poor film
nichols_donald18 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This has to rate as a Hugh Hudson "turkey". As one of the electricians who worked on the San Antonio location shooting, this film lacked the same "Chariots of Fire" quality one would expect from Hudson. The script (directed by Tom Baer of Ninth Street Pictures) lacked in continuity and concept. The cast was for the most part seasoned veterans from film and television. Donald Sutherland played the Psych part (filmed at the San Antonio State Hospital) with the same characteristic deadpan wit shown most evident in M.A.S.H. Kevin Tighe's character was an extreme departure from his days on "Emergency". Amy Locane showed definite promise as a film newcomer, where Adam Horovitz should have stuck to music. Don't waste your money.
Lost Angels
doctorkersey12 March 2006
I found the movie to be very interesting.
It is about the complexities involved with living in the 80's in southern California.
The southern California area, this movie deals with, has those societal dynamics because of the different cultures involved.
Someone that is not a citizen of southern California might find the movie hard to relate to but it is still worth seeing.
If you want a window into what sometimes happens here in southern California you must see the movie.
How do I know? I lived a similar life.
It is about the complexities involved with living in the 80's in southern California.
The southern California area, this movie deals with, has those societal dynamics because of the different cultures involved.
Someone that is not a citizen of southern California might find the movie hard to relate to but it is still worth seeing.
If you want a window into what sometimes happens here in southern California you must see the movie.
How do I know? I lived a similar life.
Long Neglected Movie About A Long Neglected Scandal
mikestone194825 February 2022
Warning: Spoilers
This film has been little heard from since its release over thirty years ago, but deserves better, as it touches on one of the long-running scandals of US medicine.
The title is perhaps not wholly appropriate. The central character, troubled teen Tim Doolan (Adam Horowitz), may well have been lost in various ways, but he is far from angelic. He and his girl friend have a run-in with the Police after driving her parents' car into a swimming-pool. His Mom and stepdad have left him home alone while they go off for a foreign holiday. His divorced (and violent) natural father refuses to take him in, disowning him because he "chose his Mom" at the time of the divorce. From what we see of his half-brother, who chose Dad, this may not have been entirely a bad thing.
On their return, Mom and stepdad extricate him from Juvie Hall at the price of enrolling him in a psychiatric hospital. One can perhaps have some sympathy for their action, but surely none at all for the way it is carried out. They leave him in the dining room while they go to "sort something out" then drive away without so much as a goodbye. When he realises this, his understandable panic attack leads to his being held down and anaesthetised. He wakes to find himself strapped to a bed
Nor do things improve later, When the parents, Mom and both Dads, are gathered together for family therapy, the meeting quickly degenerates into a brawl, with both sides screaming abuse at each other, completely ignoring Tim's presence. And when he co-operates with the programme to some extent, and is allowed a day out with his mother, inevitably something "comes up" and she doesn't keep the appointment. .If he's not exactly more sinned against than sinning, at least both are clearly present in ample amounts.
Aided by the brother, who has turned up like the proverbial bad penny, he gets out anyway. But when, after various stupidities, he gets to visit his home, he is in for a shock. The parents are so busy entertaining guests that it's several minutes before they even notice his arrival. Moreover, his things have been cleared out of his old room. It is precisely as though he has never existed.
At this point one might see benefits in his committal. With parents like these, some time away from them might even help. Well, at least it could have, had the staff at the institute been conscientious and caring. But they are nothing of the sort. With one important exception, they see the kids purely as a meal ticket. Even the Janitor despises them, dismissing them as "rich garbage" whom nobody wants. They are detained as long as their folks' medical insurance lasts, then discharged whether they are ready for release or not. Thus the girlfriend, whose parents have a cheaper policy, is freed long before Tim. She blesses her luck, but it turns out not to be.
Tim has one support there, Dr Charles Loftus (Donald Sutherland), the one decent doctor in the place. However, he has problems of his own, as his work puts too much strain upon his marriage. Indeed, as he storms against the evils of the system to his more complacent colleagues, at times his behaviour and his language are hardly better than those of his protégé. However, when Tim, once again AWOL, learns that his former girlfriend has a drug problem, Loftus steps in to trace her, possibly saving her life. However he cannot stop Tim being penalised for going out w/o permission. There is more of the same, mostly involving the brother who has "graduated" to gun crime.
The ending perhaps lacks conviction. Loftus drops Tim off at home, promising to sort things out with the Institute, hence the alternative title "The Road Home". . One wonders if it could really be that simple, and what the parents would have to say. But all in all it isn't bad.
I have seen this film decried as "sensationalist", but, though action-packed, it isn't really. Indeed, at times it seems more like a documentary than a drama. By one of those crazy coincidences, in the same year this film was made, I was reading a horrific newspaper story about how perfectly normal children were being confined to mental institutions on spurious "diagnoses", which enabled the nuthouses to run up extravagant bills for their "therapy". One particularly nasty case involved a then 13-year-old boy in Florida who was doing his second stretch in such a place (the first had been when he was eleven!!) and whose only illness was that since his parents' divorce he had kept insisting that he wanted to live with the non-custodial parent. While confined, he was drugged against his will despite being perfectly healthy. Eventually, he won his fight over custody, but not until he was *fifteen*. A straight-A student when his ordeal began, by the end he was having to repeat a year in some subjects. If there is one thing worse than a neglectful parent, it would seem to be an over-possessive one.
Clearly, you didn't have to be a delinquent to encounter the kind of abuse described in "Lost Angels". I should like to believe that this sort of thing couldn't happen today, but quick googles for "child psychiatric fraud" or similar are far from reassuring. This line of business seems to be much the same "Snake Pit" that it was when this movie was made.
In short, well worth a view and I wish it was more widely known.
The title is perhaps not wholly appropriate. The central character, troubled teen Tim Doolan (Adam Horowitz), may well have been lost in various ways, but he is far from angelic. He and his girl friend have a run-in with the Police after driving her parents' car into a swimming-pool. His Mom and stepdad have left him home alone while they go off for a foreign holiday. His divorced (and violent) natural father refuses to take him in, disowning him because he "chose his Mom" at the time of the divorce. From what we see of his half-brother, who chose Dad, this may not have been entirely a bad thing.
On their return, Mom and stepdad extricate him from Juvie Hall at the price of enrolling him in a psychiatric hospital. One can perhaps have some sympathy for their action, but surely none at all for the way it is carried out. They leave him in the dining room while they go to "sort something out" then drive away without so much as a goodbye. When he realises this, his understandable panic attack leads to his being held down and anaesthetised. He wakes to find himself strapped to a bed
Nor do things improve later, When the parents, Mom and both Dads, are gathered together for family therapy, the meeting quickly degenerates into a brawl, with both sides screaming abuse at each other, completely ignoring Tim's presence. And when he co-operates with the programme to some extent, and is allowed a day out with his mother, inevitably something "comes up" and she doesn't keep the appointment. .If he's not exactly more sinned against than sinning, at least both are clearly present in ample amounts.
Aided by the brother, who has turned up like the proverbial bad penny, he gets out anyway. But when, after various stupidities, he gets to visit his home, he is in for a shock. The parents are so busy entertaining guests that it's several minutes before they even notice his arrival. Moreover, his things have been cleared out of his old room. It is precisely as though he has never existed.
At this point one might see benefits in his committal. With parents like these, some time away from them might even help. Well, at least it could have, had the staff at the institute been conscientious and caring. But they are nothing of the sort. With one important exception, they see the kids purely as a meal ticket. Even the Janitor despises them, dismissing them as "rich garbage" whom nobody wants. They are detained as long as their folks' medical insurance lasts, then discharged whether they are ready for release or not. Thus the girlfriend, whose parents have a cheaper policy, is freed long before Tim. She blesses her luck, but it turns out not to be.
Tim has one support there, Dr Charles Loftus (Donald Sutherland), the one decent doctor in the place. However, he has problems of his own, as his work puts too much strain upon his marriage. Indeed, as he storms against the evils of the system to his more complacent colleagues, at times his behaviour and his language are hardly better than those of his protégé. However, when Tim, once again AWOL, learns that his former girlfriend has a drug problem, Loftus steps in to trace her, possibly saving her life. However he cannot stop Tim being penalised for going out w/o permission. There is more of the same, mostly involving the brother who has "graduated" to gun crime.
The ending perhaps lacks conviction. Loftus drops Tim off at home, promising to sort things out with the Institute, hence the alternative title "The Road Home". . One wonders if it could really be that simple, and what the parents would have to say. But all in all it isn't bad.
I have seen this film decried as "sensationalist", but, though action-packed, it isn't really. Indeed, at times it seems more like a documentary than a drama. By one of those crazy coincidences, in the same year this film was made, I was reading a horrific newspaper story about how perfectly normal children were being confined to mental institutions on spurious "diagnoses", which enabled the nuthouses to run up extravagant bills for their "therapy". One particularly nasty case involved a then 13-year-old boy in Florida who was doing his second stretch in such a place (the first had been when he was eleven!!) and whose only illness was that since his parents' divorce he had kept insisting that he wanted to live with the non-custodial parent. While confined, he was drugged against his will despite being perfectly healthy. Eventually, he won his fight over custody, but not until he was *fifteen*. A straight-A student when his ordeal began, by the end he was having to repeat a year in some subjects. If there is one thing worse than a neglectful parent, it would seem to be an over-possessive one.
Clearly, you didn't have to be a delinquent to encounter the kind of abuse described in "Lost Angels". I should like to believe that this sort of thing couldn't happen today, but quick googles for "child psychiatric fraud" or similar are far from reassuring. This line of business seems to be much the same "Snake Pit" that it was when this movie was made.
In short, well worth a view and I wish it was more widely known.
Lost kids, Lost Angels, minor gang members with no direction in life.
TxMike27 October 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Funny how I got to see this movie. I saw in the news currently that Amy Locane is in court regarding a DUI death in 2010, so I looked up her movies and found this one on Netflix streaming movies. It is of teenage angst in Southern California, kids wanting to be tough and members of two-bit gangs.
Adam Horovitz (who went on to an extensive musical career since this movie) was 17-ish Tim 'Chino' Doolan. He gets in trouble, along with a teen girl, and this particular episode ends with the girl's family's car in the pool. They both end up in a juvenile facility. The girl is Amy Locane, really still in her teens, as Cheryl Anderson. This was her first movie role.
Donald Sutherland is one of the 'shrinks', Dr. Charles Loftis, and the only one who really cares about the kids and their potential rehabilitation. He and Chino end up in a love-hate relationship, where he keeps giving Chino chances and Chino fails to keep his word.
Don Bloomfield is the bad half-brother, Andy 'Natas' Doolan, who keeps getting Chino into trouble. Their rivals are the Latino population, they call themselves D.A.B. (dead at birth) Kids, and Loftis notes that it is 'B-A-D' spelled backwards.
It is a movie of teen angst and possible redemption. It kept my interest, and it was nice to see Amy Locane in her first movie role.
Adam Horovitz (who went on to an extensive musical career since this movie) was 17-ish Tim 'Chino' Doolan. He gets in trouble, along with a teen girl, and this particular episode ends with the girl's family's car in the pool. They both end up in a juvenile facility. The girl is Amy Locane, really still in her teens, as Cheryl Anderson. This was her first movie role.
Donald Sutherland is one of the 'shrinks', Dr. Charles Loftis, and the only one who really cares about the kids and their potential rehabilitation. He and Chino end up in a love-hate relationship, where he keeps giving Chino chances and Chino fails to keep his word.
Don Bloomfield is the bad half-brother, Andy 'Natas' Doolan, who keeps getting Chino into trouble. Their rivals are the Latino population, they call themselves D.A.B. (dead at birth) Kids, and Loftis notes that it is 'B-A-D' spelled backwards.
It is a movie of teen angst and possible redemption. It kept my interest, and it was nice to see Amy Locane in her first movie role.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
