I recently read that Kenneth Anger made his first film, "Fireworks", when he was 22 and in college, not when he was 17 and in high school as he claimed.
I always wondered about that. Seemed strange that a high school kid would make an art movie. When I was in high school, I made kung fu movies.
Anger claimed that he was in high school, his parents were out of town so he and his friends stole a backdrop from a movie studio then coaxed some sailors into coming to his house to make a homoerotic art film.
There are other directors who've lied about their age. Steven Bach, in his book about the making of Heaven's Gate and the undoing of United Artists, noted that Michael Cimino kept trimming years off his age. Even Woody Allen falsely claimed to be in his 30s when he directed Sleeper.
There have been a few young directors. Robert Rodriguez was, what, 24 he made El Mariachi? Harmony Korine was the same age when he directed Gummo.
Years ago, some cable station hired a six-year-old to direct a series of short videos. A thirteen-year-old directed a movie called Lex The Wonderdog in Holland, but that was his only movie.
In India, there's a 12-year-old director named Kishan Shrikanth who directed a movie at age 9.
But look at the old people!
Alfred Hitchcock was in his 70s when he made Frenzy and was pushing 80 when he made Family Plot.
John Huston was 79 when he directed Prizzi's Honor and 81 when he directed The Dead.
Sydney Lumet was 82 when he directed Before the Devil Knows You're Dead.
Movies made by the really old seem to be much more interesting than those made by the very young.
Of course, it may just be that no one wants to trust a 20-year-old with the millions of dollars it takes to make a movie.
Something for film schoolers to think about. Most of them want to be directors. If you ever hit it big, you'll probably be fifty. How are you going to pay your student loans in the meantime?
