Not enough of everything

No School. No Work. No Responsibilities. Just three film a Week.

A Dad, his teenage son and the Education he Could not refuse

These are memoirs, therefore no novel. David Gilmour is a Canadian media man who lives of free and fee-work and has written several novels. He is married and has a son with his ex-wife. When his ex-wife found that her son was the right age for a father figure, she insists that they replace the flats and he takes over the education. As Gilmour sees his son how much he suffers from the drab school and how they can screw up his life, allowing him to leave the school 'under the condition that he sees at least three films every week with his father and an introductory Presentation by his old man sounds. Because films, as Gilmour, are the only common ground they have; they both love movies. For books it listens for his son but on already. (Apart from the fact that you can read books much worse together and deal with in a day.)

Gilmour describes funny how it can be carried away in moments of weakness to his son to recite a pre-chewed rule of life to which he does not consider himself the next moment. He describes the great doubt that he has, that he destroyed his son life and future by dissuades him to a high school diploma from the path. Everyday stories run like a red thread through the book about the two guys: son of Jesse infatuation in a manipulative evil woman named Rebecca Ng and he never seems to get over them. His dependence on cigarettes. Father Gilmour's checkered career between financial constraints and money for great spontaneous holiday.

What one actually reads and buys the book, are film history and film language, you will notice through the back door. Not all films that have seen the two protagonists are discussed in the book. But with all the movies that are mentioned, there is a list in the appendix still 'a kind of cut from the canon. Gilmour shows how to read films and how they relate to their own lives, even if the connection is not immediately obvious. But he also talks a lot about the production of the films. He relates the biography of the directors in the interpretation with a declared them as models, or they suspect what they wanted to express in their work.

Here come film reading and film hobby too short for my taste. There are brief moments when the father gives a lecture or philosophize son and there are mostly isolated scenes: Both sit on the sofa or on the porch, but this closed scenes of film analysis are separated from the remaining events in Jesse and David's life. Intellectually, you can follow the parallels, the two pull between life and art, but as a writer it is not possible to relate the value of education with film literature to life.

Of all that has the book, I think it contains a bit of everything and doing too little. A bit quirky family history, but not enough to fill you up. A bit of it is a story of wonder an old father about the Lebensschläue that he has his son ahead. But only suggested. A bit is a coming of age novel, but then again only chunks from a. The narrative is chronological to a superfluous narrative framework. But alone they made a year will be skipped, in which there was apparently no remarkable development. That makes it hard to settle down to have a rocking chair and to accompany the two characters. Jesse development slips so by only exemplary scenes and conversations are retold.

I like "The Film Club" and I enjoyed reading it. But I would have wished that it would quantitatively better meets the promise of the cover and would have been better written structured.