edited by Jonathan Doyle

Cloverfield [BLU-RAY] (Paramount Home Entertainment, 6.3.2008) Disguised under deliberately goofy, yet deliciously edible-sounding, aliases such as Cheese and Slusho, Matt Reeves' Cloverfield was produced and rushed into theaters under an equally appetizing shroud of secrecy. From last year's incredibly elusive Super Bowl ad to the film's viral marketing campaign, Cloverfield had everybody scratching their heads and drooling in anticipation. Aside from the as-yet untitled title and the Blair Witch-ian visual style, the film's biggest appeal was the enigmatic creature who was last (un)seen hurling the decapitated head of the Statue of Liberty onto the crowded streets of New York City. All we knew about the mysterious beast was that it was big and angry. Now that the highy-anticipated project has come and gone, one question has fortunately been answered: Cloverfield was a major success. (continued)

Upcoming

August 27

Traitor

August 29

Babylon AD

College

Disaster Movie

Goal II: Living the Dream

I Served the King of England

My Mexican Shivah

Sukiyaki Western Django

Year of the Fish

Young People F*cking

September 3

The Pool

September 5

A Secret

August Evening

Bangkok Dangerous

Everybody Wants to Be Italian

Mister Foe

Ping Pong Playa

Save Me

Surfer, Dude

Wrong With That

email this story
read comments (24)
post a comment

David Gilmour's "The Film Club" is nominally about his decision to permit his 15-year-old son, Jesse, to drop out of school as long as he agreed to watch three movies a week of Gilmour's choosing. That's it? No requirement to write about them afterwards? No digesting and reprocessing them in some creative way (like shooting a short-film tribute)? Just watching three films a week doesn't seem like enough to engage a 15 year-old. I would insist on at least four or five.

Douglas McGrath's 7.6 N.Y. Times article about the book reminded me, in any case, of that i-Village article I co-authored with my son Jett about three years ago that covered...well, vaguely similar ground. The title was "Kazan for Recess? Kubrick for Snack? How to create a passion for film in your kids."

The underlying point, now that I'm thinking about it, was that unless a movie-fanatic father saturates his kids with first-rate films early on (and I mean starting at the toddler stage), any effort to implant or encourage a sense of taste in movies will be an uphill one, and may well prove fruitless.

Kids are off into the wild blue yonder by the time they hit 15. Friends, school, burgeoning sexual urges, media distractions...forget it. The spiritual divorcement process actually begins sometime in their late tweens. You have to reach them early on, when they're still soft clay, or you're spinning your wheels. Even if you've gotten to them early they still go away in their mid teens. But if you've done your work they'll come back after three or four years.

I love two Gilmour lines that are excerpted in McGrath's article. The first is a statement that Peter Yates' Bullitt "has the authority of stainless steel." The other, as McGrath writes, "captures the reality-altering magic that movies cast." After seeing Bullitt as a kid, Gilmour recalls "emerging from the Nortown theater that summer afternoon and thinking that there was something wrong with the sunlight."

Brooklyn Bus<< previous | next >>No Bunk

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on July 5, 2008 at 12:52 PM

comment #1

Nick Plowman says ...

That is so unfair!!!!

Being a 16 year old myself, I have juggle film criticism and school, barely balancing the two at the best of times. I wish David Gilmour was my daddy…

Posted by Nick Plowman at July 5, 2008 1:30 PM

comment #2

Balthazar says ...

I didn't give a rat's ass about cinema or great films when I was 15. In fact, I hated it when my grandmother made me sit down and watch Gone With The Wind in one sitting. *Almost* turned me off to that film for the long run.

When I was 10 through 15, I just wanted to watch cool films -- Star Wars, Raiders, The Goonies, The Karate Kid, Rocky II and a crapload of (mostly bad) horror films.

Didn't keep me from discovering all the greats in my 20s and 30s.

Posted by Balthazar at July 5, 2008 1:39 PM

comment #3

Rev. Slappy says ...

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why the American educational system is in the shitter: We simply do not think education is important. We do not value it in the least. Allowing a 15 year old to drop out of school is irresponsible parenting and replacing that education with 3 movies a week is stupid to the highest order. Can watching great films be enriching to the intellectual development of a teenager whose mind isn't fully formed yet? Of course it can be. I am a former educator and I believe strongly in arts education in school as being vital. But watching 3 movies a week isn't a substitute for real learning in math, science, literature, or history.

Posted by Rev. Slappy at July 5, 2008 1:49 PM

comment #4

Nick Plowman says ...

Rev,

Math and science is only helpful if you wish to go into a field that requires those subjects, most people never think about them ever again when they leave school, because they know the value of calculators, and no one cares about physics and chemistry like they did back in the day because WE NOW HAVE MOVIES TO PASS THE TIME.

*ahem*

Posted by Nick Plowman at July 5, 2008 2:02 PM

comment #5

TedM says ...

Have to agree with you about starting kids early. My grandmother used to watch the "afternoon movie" at around 4pm every day. She was bedridden and lived with us and I'd go up after school to visit with her and often times would get hooked on the film and watch it with her. It was my introduction to film noir, to actors like Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn and Humphrey Bogart. I didn't understand everything, but it sparked an interest in film that I still now these many, many years later.

Posted by TedM at July 5, 2008 2:29 PM

comment #6

Balthazar says ...

Yeah, it's definitely important to start the kids early and foster an interest and appreciation in film. But for the most part I don't think it's important WHAT those films are when they're between the ages of 10-16.

Let their interests guide them at that point.

Posted by Balthazar at July 5, 2008 2:51 PM

comment #7

btwnproductions says ...

Gilmour's Canadian. Blame Canada.

Posted by btwnproductions at July 5, 2008 3:01 PM

comment #8

nemo says ...

"Math and science is only helpful if you wish to go into a field that requires those subjects, most people never think about them ever again when they leave school, because they know the value of calculators, . . . blah de blah blah blah"

Criminy Jesus, I hope you're kidding. That sad old crap again. You're talking like a guy who just bought a one-way express ticket to Loserville.

Posted by nemo at July 5, 2008 3:28 PM

comment #9

lipranzer says ...

I liked this book a lot. Gilmour's taste in film is quite varied, and the book isn't just about showing his son movies - most of it, in fact, is about their relationship. It reminded me a lot of a column George Plimpton wrote about taking his daughter to the Harvard/Yale football game when she was young.

Posted by lipranzer at July 5, 2008 3:53 PM

comment #10

Discman says ...

I took my two daughter to their first film-with-daddy together today. Our choice? "Horton Hears a Who."

Not bad, really, I don't think we'll be having many long conversations about the movie -- the girls are 5 and 3, respectively -- but we could've started with a much worse film.

Our next one will be much, much better: "Wall-E."

Posted by Discman at July 5, 2008 4:19 PM

comment #11

Edward says ...

Discman, I took my daughter to the movies a lot when she was your youngest's age (she's 20 and her taste in films sucks--and I tried instilling a love for art). Saw a lot that was good, but when she got older and wanted to see something specific -- well, it was often painful to watch some of those "kid friendly" films. Have fun.

Posted by Edward at July 5, 2008 5:13 PM

comment #12

CinemaPhreek says ...

I've met a lot of 30 and 40 year olds who regretted not taking this subject or that when they were younger (Latin is mine), but I have yet to meet a single soul who has said "Man, I really regret learning all that algebra and trig when I was in school."

As to Gilmour's misguided attempt to apparently bond with his son by giving in to his inane desire to drop out, I can only hope that Canadian schools are like American prep schools and by 15 you have learned enough that you could go on to many colleges without much of a problem.

Otherwise, it really is the height of irresponsibility, made very hypercritical by the fact that Gilmour is a novelist.

Posted by CinemaPhreek at July 5, 2008 8:12 PM

comment #13

BurmaShave says ...

Slap the cuffs on him. Absolutely unacceptable. School is about so much more than just "schooling". His kid is going to be a mess unless they snap out of it quickly.

Posted by BurmaShave at July 5, 2008 10:10 PM

comment #14

lipranzer says ...

If you read the book, you'd find out Gilmour's son eventually does go back to school, and though things were rough for a while (for reasons other than dropping out of school), he seems so far to have turned out all right. Look, I'm in favor of education as well, but this is one case.

As far as what they do after they watch the film, according to the book, Gilmour doesn't make him write about it or anything, but he does discuss the films with him in depth, it seems, or as much as time permits.

Posted by lipranzer at July 5, 2008 10:28 PM

comment #15

Rich S. says ...

I think this is a heck of a plan, since film criticism is such a growing career field.

Maybe pops and son can both sign up to be on the dole together.

Posted by Rich S. at July 6, 2008 4:54 AM

comment #16

bluefugue says ...

[quote]Math and science is only helpful if you wish to go into a field that requires those subjects[/quote]

Math and science are among the great immortal legacies of the human mind. We owe it to those we educate to introduce them to these subjects, regardless of whether or not they will require them professionally later on.

Posted by bluefugue at July 6, 2008 7:54 AM

comment #17

Edward says ...

Not everyone needs to take advanced calculus or science, but a well rounded education needs math and science along with the arts, history, literature, etc. I was never a math or science whiz, but it blows my mind to read a book like "Godel, Escher, Bach" or the "Tao of Physics."

Posted by Edward at July 6, 2008 8:25 AM

comment #18

George Prager says ...

The first movie I ever saw in a theater was "Song of the South" (my Mom took me). I was scarred for life.

Posted by George Prager at July 6, 2008 10:11 AM

comment #19

Reedyb says ...

The other posters who read the book are correct in the fact that he didn't ask his son to write anything because it was conversation and an open education to awaken in his son a love of learning he was after, not just a pure cinema 101.

I spent a lot of time on giving my daughters a basic understanding of movies and books (as much as that is possible).

My teenage daughter was proud of the fact that she was the only girl she knew who not only knew that Hairspray was a movie before the musical, but she had actually seen it.

An interesting difference here is that I have girls. The films I love and would have most like to have shown to them (Lawrence of Arabia, the Searchers, etc.) are very masculine in their appeal. Lots of violence and male bonding. Not their cup of tea.

Posted by Reedyb at July 6, 2008 10:13 AM

comment #20

George Prager says ...

There are a lot of movies that women think (or you think women think) they are going to hate but wind up liking/loving. THE RIGHT STUFF, THE ROAD TO PERDITION and FIGHT CLUB are examples of this.

Posted by George Prager at July 6, 2008 10:17 AM

comment #21

corey3rd says ...

what a load of rubbish. "Not only did I find Jesse smart and funny, but more than once I was moved to tears by his battle to find his place. " How do we really know this was what Jesse was really doing and not merely his writer father creating the fiction of a son? Is this guy going to get outed on Oprah?

This merely sounds like the exploits of a trust fund family and a dad trying to score a quick book.

And three movies a week to drop out of high school? A pathetic attempt of a father to sound like Fred McMurray without a clue.

Posted by corey3rd at July 6, 2008 11:49 AM

comment #22

lipranzer says ...

corey, unlike you, I've met David Gilmour (at the Toronto Film Festival about 15 years ago). He may be a lot of things, but he isn't a trust fund family guy. Post-James Frey, I certainly understand the cynicism one may have about memoirs, but at least know the facts before going off like a pompous windbag.

Posted by lipranzer at July 6, 2008 7:18 PM

comment #23

corey3rd says ...

I'm so sorry that I forgot to check the Trustfundkid website to see if they're actually listed. But watching three movies a week to straighten out your life? Then again it is hard to tell your kid to get a job when you're an unemployed movie critic. Dream big, son! I'm watching those guys on Ice Road Truckers busting their hump to put food on the table. They're driving over ice. And this unemployed movie critic isn't getting a real job and teaching his son how a 90 minute entertainment is going to inspire him to sit on his ass and eat buttered popcorn for the rest of his life.

Although living in Canada is pretty much the same as one big trust fund - with all that free health care and other welfare programs.

Any other real father in Canada would tell their kid they have a choice - go to high school or play hockey in the juniors.

When I was in school, there was only one film that my father and I bonded over: John Waters' Polyester. Mom never forgave me for showing him that movie. "Francine!" he'd cry out.

Posted by corey3rd at July 7, 2008 8:05 AM

comment #24