Is producing a good pathway for directing?
- Thread starter rc444
- Start date
Martay
Veteran
Excellent question. And one that probably should be asked before devoting your life to it.
The truth is, you better be able to, otherwise there will be a lot of dead motherf*#kers in this world, because the odds are very long against it. In fact, name 50 Directors of note fast? Yeah, even those making a living at it may be far from the hope of most apirants when they first begin to pursue it.
I personally can. I will make films, regardless. Just like music, I make it for my own enjoyment. If others appreciate it...good.
But, I think my perspective is not shared by aspiring filmmakers who believe they're going to be the next Scorsese, etc.
Examining the reasons you want to do it is very important as well.
-M
filmman
Veteran
Martay:
Do 15 minutes of fame count? An article in LA Times? A few movies that played theatrical and on TV (even though one doesn't see a dime from them)? LOL
Well, seeking notice, critical acclaim, even better > financial independence, that would be better.
But if someone wants "to direct!" there are consequences
I personally don't think it's a good idea to do other things (to gain experience, make contacts or whatever), because in the end it's all a waste of time if one's goal is to become a film director.
I've made my living as a filmmaker for 40 years. If I had to do it over again, I would focus on directing more films myself.
I admire people who only know directing. I wanted to do it all and that gets me into collaborative situations. I enjoy working on movies in whatever capacity, but that's my problem, because at the same time I don't get to do what I enjoy the most: directing...
But of course "a director of note" covers a lot of ground
Do 15 minutes of fame count? An article in LA Times? A few movies that played theatrical and on TV (even though one doesn't see a dime from them)? LOL
Well, seeking notice, critical acclaim, even better > financial independence, that would be better.
But if someone wants "to direct!" there are consequences
I personally don't think it's a good idea to do other things (to gain experience, make contacts or whatever), because in the end it's all a waste of time if one's goal is to become a film director.
I've made my living as a filmmaker for 40 years. If I had to do it over again, I would focus on directing more films myself.
I admire people who only know directing. I wanted to do it all and that gets me into collaborative situations. I enjoy working on movies in whatever capacity, but that's my problem, because at the same time I don't get to do what I enjoy the most: directing...
emotepix
Well-known member
Me too. Started in 1975. Filmmaking ever since.
Now.
Here's the thing.
Most people join a football team, they want to be the top, captain, quarterback, whatever.
Most people think of filmmakers, they think directors - order givers, star makers, glam merchants. The top of the trade.
Well in Hollywood they aren't the top of the trade. Not financially, at least.
When I first got here I finished over 50 indie feature films (edited, mixed, printed to 35mm release prints). Most of them were for distro companies. In all 50, I actually sat with two, maybe three directors. No joking. The rest were a combination of no-shows, too-busy's, and some I actually kicked out of the facility because they had no clue how to direct me or anybody else, they just wanted to be the top dog, the boss.
The top dog in Hollywood is the producer. Director-maker. Star-maker. Deal-maker.
It got that way because directors didn't want to make deals. Contracts. Budgets. Schedules. Accounts. They just wanted to get paid a salary and a percentage, and make movies, which, as anybody can tell you, is just spending money.
The trick is to make a movie that people will pay money for. That's making money. And that's the golden egg that everybody's after.
If you check your Hollywood history, you'll see that the first directors as we know them today were imported from the East Coast by the demands of the (largely) East Coast theatre actors who were imported here to deal with the talkies.
The silent actors couldn't remember their lines - they never had any. Their voices sucked. Their directors by and large also worked the cameras and were largely physical directors - pantomime and circus styles prevailed then.
So the new Actors came in with the advent of sound and soon discovered that the film directors of the time were more cinematographers than the theatrical directors they were used to. Hence "the director is the head of the acting department" and the locals became the Director of Photography, and part of the production crew.
Only a very few, like Hitchcock, were able to make the transition successfully. Most fell by the wayside or were "specialized" into lesser roles.
Same kind of thing today. Directors over here go from film to film, or episode to episode these days, some without ever "visualizing" or even participating in post. They can only charge half rate for rehearsals and post, so they move on to the next prep, the next production, and hand the entire show over to the producer and the post crew to finish. Hence the "coverage" way of shooting - shoot anything that moves, cover it all so they can't come back at you after you've moved on to another show.
They're more like in the trenches, digging with the troops. Certainly not admirals.
Of course, that's not to say t\it's a bad job, or indeed that all directors do things this way. But mostly, if a director isn't at least a little bit of a producer as well, then mostly he'll get bought up, taken over, or passed over as time goes by.
Let's say that film making is about spending money, and that a movie is about making money. There's a lot more that makes a film into a movie than just the prep, production and post of it.
That's usually the strict province of the producer. But indie directors also know about this too, if they are to survive. Career Hollywood directors? Oh, they know, but they're more concentrated in the making of a product that will be successfully received. Their producers take care of the rest.
So do you want to do this kind of directing?
Where do you want to end up?
Now.
Here's the thing.
Most people join a football team, they want to be the top, captain, quarterback, whatever.
Most people think of filmmakers, they think directors - order givers, star makers, glam merchants. The top of the trade.
Well in Hollywood they aren't the top of the trade. Not financially, at least.
When I first got here I finished over 50 indie feature films (edited, mixed, printed to 35mm release prints). Most of them were for distro companies. In all 50, I actually sat with two, maybe three directors. No joking. The rest were a combination of no-shows, too-busy's, and some I actually kicked out of the facility because they had no clue how to direct me or anybody else, they just wanted to be the top dog, the boss.
The top dog in Hollywood is the producer. Director-maker. Star-maker. Deal-maker.
It got that way because directors didn't want to make deals. Contracts. Budgets. Schedules. Accounts. They just wanted to get paid a salary and a percentage, and make movies, which, as anybody can tell you, is just spending money.
The trick is to make a movie that people will pay money for. That's making money. And that's the golden egg that everybody's after.
If you check your Hollywood history, you'll see that the first directors as we know them today were imported from the East Coast by the demands of the (largely) East Coast theatre actors who were imported here to deal with the talkies.
The silent actors couldn't remember their lines - they never had any. Their voices sucked. Their directors by and large also worked the cameras and were largely physical directors - pantomime and circus styles prevailed then.
So the new Actors came in with the advent of sound and soon discovered that the film directors of the time were more cinematographers than the theatrical directors they were used to. Hence "the director is the head of the acting department" and the locals became the Director of Photography, and part of the production crew.
Only a very few, like Hitchcock, were able to make the transition successfully. Most fell by the wayside or were "specialized" into lesser roles.
Same kind of thing today. Directors over here go from film to film, or episode to episode these days, some without ever "visualizing" or even participating in post. They can only charge half rate for rehearsals and post, so they move on to the next prep, the next production, and hand the entire show over to the producer and the post crew to finish. Hence the "coverage" way of shooting - shoot anything that moves, cover it all so they can't come back at you after you've moved on to another show.
They're more like in the trenches, digging with the troops. Certainly not admirals.
Of course, that's not to say t\it's a bad job, or indeed that all directors do things this way. But mostly, if a director isn't at least a little bit of a producer as well, then mostly he'll get bought up, taken over, or passed over as time goes by.
Let's say that film making is about spending money, and that a movie is about making money. There's a lot more that makes a film into a movie than just the prep, production and post of it.
That's usually the strict province of the producer. But indie directors also know about this too, if they are to survive. Career Hollywood directors? Oh, they know, but they're more concentrated in the making of a product that will be successfully received. Their producers take care of the rest.
So do you want to do this kind of directing?
Where do you want to end up?
Last edited:
emotepix
Well-known member
I realize that I really didn't give you any advice.
Well, here it is.
If you're to be a successful director:
1) find someone who's good with numbers and people to be your partner
2) find or develop an excellent story that's both filmable by you and sellable b you
3) have your partner start looking around for the deals - ones to get the film make, ones to get the film sold
4) take acting classes if you haven't already
5) start a production company and audition often. You'll want to get to know your local talent pool
6) shoot shorts with that talent pool - they'll want to get to know you too
7) shoot sizzle reels, trailers, proof-of-concept pieces that you will show people to let them know how great a filmmaker you are
8) refine, redo, refine some more
9) get your packages ready and join your partner in pitching them. Pitch anywhere you can, all around town. Be a pest, but pitch.
10) repeat until you're made a potential sale and a potential financial agreement. Don't give up until you do.
11) find other projects to add to your pile. There's many reasons a script is picked up or rejected that have nothing to do with the actual quality of the script/idea/project itself, so it pays to have a range of product you're developing.
12) again, don't stop until you've gotten one made. Keep making little short pieces, keep your partner out there doing the rounds, keep your finger on what's hot and what isn't.
13) keep going until you get there. Luck is a b!t*h so play the numbers.
Let it not a matter of if, but when. If you have enough gas in the tank (read day jobs) then don't lose heart, don't take no for an answer, don't take your eye off the ball, just keep on going and it will be not if, but when.
Well, here it is.
If you're to be a successful director:
1) find someone who's good with numbers and people to be your partner
2) find or develop an excellent story that's both filmable by you and sellable b you
3) have your partner start looking around for the deals - ones to get the film make, ones to get the film sold
4) take acting classes if you haven't already
5) start a production company and audition often. You'll want to get to know your local talent pool
6) shoot shorts with that talent pool - they'll want to get to know you too
7) shoot sizzle reels, trailers, proof-of-concept pieces that you will show people to let them know how great a filmmaker you are
8) refine, redo, refine some more
9) get your packages ready and join your partner in pitching them. Pitch anywhere you can, all around town. Be a pest, but pitch.
10) repeat until you're made a potential sale and a potential financial agreement. Don't give up until you do.
11) find other projects to add to your pile. There's many reasons a script is picked up or rejected that have nothing to do with the actual quality of the script/idea/project itself, so it pays to have a range of product you're developing.
12) again, don't stop until you've gotten one made. Keep making little short pieces, keep your partner out there doing the rounds, keep your finger on what's hot and what isn't.
13) keep going until you get there. Luck is a b!t*h so play the numbers.
Let it not a matter of if, but when. If you have enough gas in the tank (read day jobs) then don't lose heart, don't take no for an answer, don't take your eye off the ball, just keep on going and it will be not if, but when.
emotepix
Well-known member
Cheer for all your competitors, without exception.
This seems like Hollywood BS but is actually based on good business practice: they're keeping the doors to cinemas open, and the audiences coming, for when your future film blows theirs off the screen.
And then you'll be keeping the industry healthy and the audiences happy - for when some kid's movie comes along and blows yours off the screen...
This seems like Hollywood BS but is actually based on good business practice: they're keeping the doors to cinemas open, and the audiences coming, for when your future film blows theirs off the screen.
And then you'll be keeping the industry healthy and the audiences happy - for when some kid's movie comes along and blows yours off the screen...
taormina
Hates to Rent
To answer the OP's question squarely: Producing is almost never a path to directing. I've produced. It's a thankless job, and the only reasons producers get attached to a project is because they either:
1 - raised the money
2 - found the talent
3 - secured the distribution
That's really it. Can you bring those things to the table? Oh sure, producers do much more than that, but if you don't bring one of those three to the table, you are not worth it. A guy can go hire a great UPM and a Production Coordinator and do most of the jobs a producer can do.
Make no mistake, Producers bring things to the table.
If you want to direct, then go direct. It's one of the few things in filmmaking you can do without much prior experience. You can't DP, gaff, grip, or cast a film as a first timer, but you can direct it. Maybe not well, but hey, we've all got to start somewhere.
1 - raised the money
2 - found the talent
3 - secured the distribution
That's really it. Can you bring those things to the table? Oh sure, producers do much more than that, but if you don't bring one of those three to the table, you are not worth it. A guy can go hire a great UPM and a Production Coordinator and do most of the jobs a producer can do.
Make no mistake, Producers bring things to the table.
If you want to direct, then go direct. It's one of the few things in filmmaking you can do without much prior experience. You can't DP, gaff, grip, or cast a film as a first timer, but you can direct it. Maybe not well, but hey, we've all got to start somewhere.
emotepix
Well-known member
What Taormina said.
Production is a sh1t job. It's the very definition of a sh1t job. On a set, there's always people going "great acting!" or "gorgeous set!" or even "fantastic food!" but does anyone go "incredible generator!"?? Of course not, that's part of production. But let that generator be even five minutes late, and it's "PRODUCTION!!! Where's that )$%^&*( generator???"
When production does its job well, it's expected. When not, then it gets sh1t.
So working in production the best news is no news. Quiet. Because the only thing you'll hear is "PRODUCTION!!! Where's that..."
Sh!t job, as I said.
You better bring the money, talent and distro to the table, otherwise what kind of producer are you?
An Oscar award winning screenwriter friend of mine once got a chance to direct a studio feature and the gist of his experience is that if you can write, and if you can get up at 4:30 in the morning and go (stay awake) until nightfall, then you can direct.
He also said that it's incredibly easy to make a so-so movie. Because if you hire any kind of professionals at all, those people will not let you make a bad movie - because it makes them look bad, and they won't let that happen.
What's the worst you can do? Point the camera away from the action? You can try, but your DP will gently say that once you've done your avant garde take, could he please have a cover shot with the actors in it, just to be safe? And he'll darn well make sure the actors are in the can, at least, even without your permission. "Oh, I rolled the camera. Just exercising it. Wasn't that a rehearsal? It was so good it looked like a take to me..."
So now you have a so-so movie.
But a good one? Ah, that's something very different to make, my friend...
Production is a sh1t job. It's the very definition of a sh1t job. On a set, there's always people going "great acting!" or "gorgeous set!" or even "fantastic food!" but does anyone go "incredible generator!"?? Of course not, that's part of production. But let that generator be even five minutes late, and it's "PRODUCTION!!! Where's that )$%^&*( generator???"
When production does its job well, it's expected. When not, then it gets sh1t.
So working in production the best news is no news. Quiet. Because the only thing you'll hear is "PRODUCTION!!! Where's that..."
Sh!t job, as I said.
You better bring the money, talent and distro to the table, otherwise what kind of producer are you?
An Oscar award winning screenwriter friend of mine once got a chance to direct a studio feature and the gist of his experience is that if you can write, and if you can get up at 4:30 in the morning and go (stay awake) until nightfall, then you can direct.
He also said that it's incredibly easy to make a so-so movie. Because if you hire any kind of professionals at all, those people will not let you make a bad movie - because it makes them look bad, and they won't let that happen.
What's the worst you can do? Point the camera away from the action? You can try, but your DP will gently say that once you've done your avant garde take, could he please have a cover shot with the actors in it, just to be safe? And he'll darn well make sure the actors are in the can, at least, even without your permission. "Oh, I rolled the camera. Just exercising it. Wasn't that a rehearsal? It was so good it looked like a take to me..."
So now you have a so-so movie.
But a good one? Ah, that's something very different to make, my friend...
Interesting post. It confirms my own suspicions.
Daygola814
Well-known member
Directing is a good pathway for directing. But getting your name out there is just as important. You obviously need the skill to get hired but you have to have people SEE you as a director before they'll hire you.
Kevin Greutert (editor of SAW1-5) supposedly just got hired to direct SAW6. David Hackl was the Production Designer on Saw1-4, then they hired him to direct 5.
George Clooney started out as an actor. So did Clint Eastwood. As did Sean Penn.
Doing something in the meantime will help you get the cash flow to possibly move on to directing but nothing will get you there better than just going out there and directing.
Obviously, you probably won't make money right away, but do something else in the meantime while you build your name as a director.
It's difficult, but if you work your ass off, you can do it.
Kevin Greutert (editor of SAW1-5) supposedly just got hired to direct SAW6. David Hackl was the Production Designer on Saw1-4, then they hired him to direct 5.
George Clooney started out as an actor. So did Clint Eastwood. As did Sean Penn.
Doing something in the meantime will help you get the cash flow to possibly move on to directing but nothing will get you there better than just going out there and directing.
Obviously, you probably won't make money right away, but do something else in the meantime while you build your name as a director.
It's difficult, but if you work your ass off, you can do it.
Zblock
Well-known member
It would be smart to PA a few projects so you know how things are run before you hire a crew and start doing things differently than they are used to. I'd put your time in as an intern working on a film or two. (Get paid as a PA or Art or whatever) and then start Directing your films. Don't got equipment?... Sucks for you, you're gonna have to figure it out. Don't got a crew?.... Sucks for you, you're gonna have to figure it out.
But all things are possible so get to it. Like everyone else said. Why waste ten years doing something you don't want to be doing?
But all things are possible so get to it. Like everyone else said. Why waste ten years doing something you don't want to be doing?
RyanT
Veteran
Be a PA for a while and start talking to other PA's. See what their interests are. Talk to the lower grips and the 2nd AC...someones gotta be an aspiring DP. Just become friends with one of these guys and tell them you've got a script and you're looking for someone to shoot it. Find the right person and if he really thinks your script is good enough he'll probably let you use his equipment and bring out some of his friends for free.
I know as a DP, I'm always looking for new directors...and I really don't care if the director is just some PA...if their script is good, I'll do what I can to shoot it.
That's why it's good to PA though. You get to learn by watching how they do it on bigger shows, and you get to meet people who may be in lower positions now, but will be perfect for your productions later on. Not to mention the producers you get to meet...
JonathanLB
Carbonite Member
Exactly, emotepix, that's why I love directing, because I can't do anything else 
lol, j/k. But I'm not a very technical guy, I really don't enjoy trying to learn everything I can about how to edit and use the tools, or how to light a scene, or any of that stuff. I like to know a little bit about everything, about my equipment, about what is available to me in editing, what I like from cinematography, etc. I am much better at working with a large group of talented people and helping them work together to achieve a common vision, hopefully mostly my vision (my idea, my script, but as with anything it's so collaborative it becomes all of ours).
lol, j/k. But I'm not a very technical guy, I really don't enjoy trying to learn everything I can about how to edit and use the tools, or how to light a scene, or any of that stuff. I like to know a little bit about everything, about my equipment, about what is available to me in editing, what I like from cinematography, etc. I am much better at working with a large group of talented people and helping them work together to achieve a common vision, hopefully mostly my vision (my idea, my script, but as with anything it's so collaborative it becomes all of ours).
Ted Spencer
Veteran
I've learned a great deal about filmmaking in general by being an actor. There I am, on set, almost always with plenty of time to kill before I shoot, surrounded by gear and crew doing a zillion things. Watch the lighting setup/results, boom op/gear, use/non-use of shot lists/storyboard, handheld/lockdown camera (etc.), directorial style/ability/lack thereof, story/script/dialog quality, production preparedness/organizational skills/lack thereof, etc., etc., etc. Mental notes-city, my friends...
And you can learn all the same stuff while being on set as an extra, a PA, catering, whatever. Just pay close attention to *everything*, and ask questions whenever appropriate (which is not most of the time).
Plus read everything you can get your hands on.
And *do*.
Rinse, repeat.
And you can learn all the same stuff while being on set as an extra, a PA, catering, whatever. Just pay close attention to *everything*, and ask questions whenever appropriate (which is not most of the time).
Plus read everything you can get your hands on.
And *do*.
Rinse, repeat.
Last edited: