Are directors ever 100% satisfied with their films?

H

HeyAndy

Active member
Are film directors ever 100% satisfied with their films? I know that directors have to look through the whole film to check if the final product in its current form is good enough for theatrical release but does that mean they have to be fully satisfied with it and think it's a "great" film with no mistakes or improvements needed?
 
David Wain has stated that he is satisfied with Wet Hot American Summer and wouldn't change it even after 10 years.
I strive to work so that, when all is said and done, I feel like my "plan" (list of shyte that didn't happen and I had to fix) was executed to the best of my ability.
But no, I am never satisfied, ever...

Remember though, I am a nobody- self deprecation with gusto is allowed.
 
Being a perfectionist I feel that nothing I have done has left me 100% satisfied - maybe 90% at most. Will I ever be completely satisfied with a film I've made? Probably not - but that's just my personality. I find it hard to watch anything I've done without identifying the things that could have been better. Even Peter Jackson with his new Tintin film realised that at some point he needed to let a scene go because somethings can never be perfect and sometimes he'll never be satisfied and the ability to revise and adjust 3D motion capture films made him realise that.
 
HeyAndy said:
Are film directors ever 100% satisfied with their films? I know that directors have to look through the whole film to check if the final product in its current form is good enough for theatrical release but does that mean they have to be fully satisfied with it and think it's a "great" film with no mistakes or improvements needed?
Click to expand...

The industry standard is that films are abandoned... especially 'art films'... many directors have noted they would have 'tweaked' this or that, changed something... but due to either interest or time constraints have let the film go...
 
Being 100% satisfied with any work of art (such as a film) is more often a sign of a poor artist than not. The director of "Troll 2", acknowledged by many as one of the worst films ever made (it was even the subject of a recent documentary to that effect), insists it's a masterpiece. And he's completely serious. So there you go...

IMHO, being less than satisfied, almost if not literally *always*, while certainly frustrating to a greater or lesser degree, is one of the telltale signs of a genuine artist. It's arguably the very thing that drove them to achieve their greatness - a relentless, self-critical striving, as a world-class musician friend of mine jokingly puts it, to "not suck".
 
I've never been and never will be, and as with the above I consider that an asset. It teaches me what to do differently next time. I am proud of my work and glad that we put together what we did, but there's always something I would have done differently, even if they're minor details.
 
Ted Spencer said:
Being 100% satisfied with any work of art (such as a film) is more often a sign of a poor artist than not...
Click to expand...
I agree. In other words, "I fullly & completely acknowledge that perfection is unobtainable...Now let's go out there and obtain some motherfuckin' perfection!!"







Edit:
Whoa! I didn't get poopooin' bleeped...
 
I'm never 100% satisfied, no one should be. I do special effects/3d animation and on multiple occasions, my perfectionism has lead me to not finishing projects. While they were very minor projects, I've started to learn to ignore my perfectionist impulses and simply learn from my mistakes for the next time.
 
I think many are probably content with their work, when taking into account the restrictions they had while filming. I'm sure very few are truly satisfied. I've shot things and felt like they were pretty solid for what I was working with, but at the same time knowing full-well exactly what I would change if the budget and resources were there.
 
HeyAndy said:
... and think it's a "great" film with no mistakes or improvements needed?
Click to expand...

The day a director thinks that should be the day he'd end his career. Having no doubts and second thoughts about your own creative work is either a sign a person is autistic or a moron. Or takes the wrong drugs.

On the other hand: The person that displays doubts and second thoughts publicly in the distribution phase of his/her film also is either autistic, moronic or takes the wrong drugs. Best to ask a director what he/she thinks about the film two years or four after it's finished.
 
Last edited:
George Lucas will have the final revisions of the Star Wars trilogy as part of his Will. My guess is it will released in 4D and with Chewbacca having the voice of Michael Jackson.
 
Even if perfection did exist, George Lucas will never be able to achieve it with Star Wars (prequels most notably).
 
Please for the love of god don't composite heyden christianson's face onto the old anikin for the vader unmasking. The young ghost at the end is bad enough....

But I degress. I would agree that I've never been fully satisfied with a film I've directed, but I've never had any resources either, so I'm generally proud of the experience, more than the final product. I have however been fully satisfied with films i've dp'd for other people. I don't claim that they are perfect, and can always still see flaws that I'd fix if given a chance, but the distance from the finishing process gives me a perspective I don't have on my own projects.
 
dop16mm said:
Please for the love of god don't composite heyden christianson's face onto the old anikin for the vader unmasking. The young ghost at the end is bad enough..
Click to expand...

Right! Why? There isn't a young Obi Won Kenobi... no young Yoda... Vader didn't die until he was old, his freaking kids were grown for goodness sake!

...and uh, that has a lot to do with directing...
the, eh, not being satisfied part!
Who could be satisfied with that?
 
To me, the original poster asks a question where it sounds like every director is 100% satisfied, but there's never a consensus on anything really. I've done work where, while I feel there may be improvements possible if I had more money or resources, I can't think of any given what we had and look fondly onto it. There are others where I've had a lot of resources and didn't feel it lived up to my standards. The best we can do is learn all that we can and apply it to our future projects
 
never ever ever.
its only perfect if you never ever ever ever look at it again.
Thats what you kinda have to do - abandon it.
you grow too much even in a day to like what you did the day before usually.
If you still like it later 100% - then you didnt grow at all.
 
daveswan said:
"No work of art is ever completed, only abandoned"
Click to expand...
Even if I'm simply (at best) a pro-hobbyist doing little short films for online contests, I'm simply never satisfied because I'm learning new stuff everyday, that I could have applied when I shot the scenes. And it worth for every department, as I'm basically doing most of the work alone.
Even the bests working with the bests won't ever be satisfied, and that's a good thing because that way you know you're going forward.
 
Personally, I think that being 100% satisfied with anything you have completed is either indicative of a delusional streak or extremely sad. Imagine being totally satisfied with something on every level. There'd be nothing to take from that. No lessons to be learned. There are many ways to learn, but one thing that is true of virtually everyone is that we learn from our mistakes. The goal should not just be to produce good work, but to improve as time passes. Once you stop improving where is the satisfaction? I guess there is something to be said for making work that pleases others, but a big part of the enjoyment of filmmaking would be lost for me if the learning element ceased to be there, even if only for one project.

That alone would cause me to be unsatisfied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top