Film School

Started by finlayr, April 16, 2003, 08:09:50 PM

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Jon

Quote from: finlayrBrainSushi, it's a good thing you don't have sushi for brains.  I'm only 3 years older than you and I might consider doing a Film Production course some time down the road--I suppose for the same reasons you or anyone else would.  I know someone who knows someone who is going to study Film at DCU, it's costs thousands and is for four years.  She doesn't even know who Tarantino is.  It's disgusting.  At least these people don't want to be filmmakers--because they wouldn't know how to make a film..  Learn on your own and get close to the system.

Actually, I'd love to see the film she made.

polkablues

Alessandro's right.  Technical experience and making connections are the biggest positives of film school.  It's nice knowing that when I finally make the big move to LA, I'll have a few couches to crash on, and a few doors to get my foot in.

Ultimately, the only way to become a good filmmaker is to make films, whether in school or not, and keep making them.
My house, my rules, my coffee

Ordet

Ok here's a good one. Hope it hasn't been discussed yet.

Film School.

How important is it?
Is it really important?
If you've had any, what's you're personal experience?
From the accomplished filmmakers who attended film school and the ones who didn't. What differences do you notice between them?
were spinning

Recce

Well, I don't really attend 'film school'. I'm in Communication studies, which is everything media related, including film and video, etc. I know some people say that school is a waste of time in our field. If you're really passionate about it, you can get a shit job as a PA and work your way up. And its true. But I've seen my confidence in my abilities grow considerably since I started University. Whenever someone asked me to shoot something int he past, I would panic for days, terrified that I would fuck it up. Now, you hand me a camera and I feel right at home. I guess it depends on what kind of person you are. You could learn everything you would in school off the internet. But I rather do it this way. Plus, I've learned more during screenings and critiques of our projects in class then in any shoot I've ever been on. It can be rough, but there's nothing like constructive criticism. But, once again, you can jsut show it to random people and get that there, I guess.
"The idea had been growing in my brain for some time: TRUE force. All the king's men
                        cannot put it back together again." (Travis Bickle, "Taxi Driver")

Pastor Parsley

Quote from: RecceI guess it depends on what kind of person you are.

I would agree.  Some need what school has to offer, some don't.  It's impossible to make blanket statements like "film school is a waste of time" or "film school is a necessity".  It just depends on you.  How do you learn, how motivated are you.  One definite plus with school is that it frees up your time somewhat, to spend on your studies.  Otherwise you have to work more to support yourself and then pursue your hobby with what's left, which isn't much.  But if you really want it, you'll make it work either way.  Good luck  :-D .

phil marlowe

in denmark it's so hard to get in you couldn't imagine....

SoNowThen

In Canada, all you need is to cover the entry fee.

We had such useful classes as Cable Wrapping, and Watching Bad Short Films From Last Year. And then there's the wonderful Class Shoot, where the students basically stand around on a pretend set and watch the teachers argue as they do their respective jobs badly, to a pre-written "script" that you wouldn't wipe your ass with, being performed by a bunch of acting school near-dropouts that were told that a director is not allowed to give them line readings.

Little did we know that was an exact preparation for our first jobs on tv/commercial non-union sets after graduation...


**

Come to the Vancouver Grip School!
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

cowboykurtis

i need to be taught how to watch a movie -- youre supposed to hold you head a certian way -- something about visual perception vs. mental reception. i think i need to attend.
...your excuses are your own...

cowboykurtis

i need to be taught how to watch a movie -- youre supposed to hold you head a certian way -- something about visual perception vs. mental reception. i think i need to attend.
...your excuses are your own...

phil marlowe

Quote from: SoNowThenIn Canada, all you need is to cover the entry fee.
and what is the entry fee?

here it's free but you have to send in shorts to impress them and if your REALLY AWESOME you might have a chance of an interview. i can't remember the exact number but i tell you it's sick...they take so few every year

SoNowThen

$20 000

for the one year "intensive" course


It's really like a trade school. They need to keep pumping peons out to fill the PA gaps for all the city's US tv show run-offs...
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

phil marlowe

that's alot of money dude, you talk like it wasn't worth it

was it?

SoNowThen

It's that saying, six to one, and half a dozen to the other. It was stupid, and expensive, and 95% of the teachers were assholes or incompetents or both, and a lot of the processes got drove into me and took years to unlearn, and we never really got down to a love of film, and no younger member of the class really got a chance, and no good movies came out of it.

However

It prepared us for the absolute worst of the business, fighting for every little thing, climatizing us to doing every job and having high stress and dealing with idiots. And I met some of my best friends there, that I will work with and hang out with for the rest of my life, and I have a lot of funny memories. So how can you say you'd rather not have, y'know, and saved the money and made your own movie instead. I dunno...


btw, Phil, seems like your film school has a pretty good set-up, like they care. Exclusive and all that.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Ordet

Yeah I've heard how hard it is to get into film school in Denmark.

Is it the National Film School?

I think that when you can brag about Lars Von Trier being one of your graduates you set the standards pretty high.

Do you notice any difference between directors who attended film school and the self taught ones?
were spinning

SoNowThen

I dunno why I say this, and maybe it's just because I knew before the fact, but the NYU directors seem to share something -- not sure exactly what, but it's this undefinable thing...

anybody else find that?
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.