Directing tips for begginer

[Tom Marshall]

I have seen "American Graffiti" and think it's great. I think, for some reason, Lucas really started to focus on the technical stuff as opposed to performances or dialog once Star Wars came around.

 

[Jim Brennan]

the more control you exert the closer your product will be to your vision in the end.

True, but is that what makes the best movie?

Second, it's the head creative guy on set. You might think that means you're the boss of an ad agency- but really its much more like you solve everyone's problems. Actors dont feel comfortable- you come up with a solution. You ran out of food and half the crew hasnt eaten yet- you find the right person's credit card and the fastest PA on the planet. You run out of a particular film stock- you have the right adjustments made so the tone of the film doesn't change arbitrarily

Also true. You become the person everyone looks to. But at the same there is a very rapid point of diminishing returns when you are the person solving ALL of these problems. I think that one of the best things a director can do is find someone who is pro-active, organized and has good people skills to work with him for just those purposes. It could be First AD, a line producer, or even a PA that you can hand this stuff off to. It is unrealistic to think that you won't have to deal with any of it, but the less the better.

 

[Chuklz]

True, but is that what makes the best movie?

Yes. Absolutely. If it doesnt then you shouldnt be in the chair.

Also true. You become the person everyone looks to. But at the same there is a very rapid point of diminishing returns when you are the person solving ALL of these problems. I think that one of the best things a director can do is find someone who is pro-active, organized and has good people skills to work with him for just those purposes. It could be First AD, a line producer, or even a PA that you can hand this stuff off to. It is unrealistic to think that you won't have to deal with any of it, but the less the better.

This is a matter of personal style. Specifically if it is a creative decision it is your purview alone. That being said Jim is right- one cannot do this alone in absentia. I honestly would rather have the very very best script supervisor and the rest of the aforementioned positions be damned. Except the PA's god I love you all. Where's my coffee anyway?

 

[Jim Brennan]

Yes. Absolutely. If it doesn't then you shouldn't be in the chair.

I am unsure about what your original statement means. I agree with everything about being prepared. I've never felt, or heard anyone say, they were too prepared. Pre-production is taken too lightly by too many indie filmmakers.


But when you say

the more control you exert the closer your product will be to your vision in the end.

That can mean different things to different people. If you mean, having a clear vision and working within the parameters of that; being equally clear in your communication to cast and crew, and balancing that with their contributions, then I would agree. In fact, being able to balance your vision with other people's input is probably the single most difficult thing I have ever had to do on a set (aside from firing people who weren't even getting paid...but that's another story). Some ideas seem GREAT at that moment, or they seem ridiculous, but really are great. Knowing if and and how they fit within your original vision and how they can improve on it is really hard when the clock is ticking and the sun is setting.

But if you mean that "we must stick to this because it is the way I saw it and how we planned it", then I disagree.

Even Hitchcock, a man known for being consummately prepared as well as controlling, especially with actors, allowed for his vision to be swayed. Bernard Herrman was the one who wanted music in the shower scene for Psycho. Hitch thought it would be more effective with no music and wouldn't budge until Herrmann played it for him. Hitch not only agreed, but thought the music was so effective, he gave a Herrmann a raise after the fact.

In production it can happen too. The complex relationship (and how it was revealed) in The Conversation between Mark and Ann and what they were facing was difficult to get a handle on. One of Frederic Forrest's readings on the line "He'd KILL us" was done as "He'd kill US". Different emphasis, different meaning, and contrary to the original vision. The line was barely remembered by Walter Murch as he was editing the scene and finding it impossible to make work. Inserting the alternate line reading not only made the scene work, but essentially changed the dynamic of the film, because it changes the viewer's sympathies. Not the original vision, but it made a better movie than trying to stick with something. Ironically, both Coppola and Hackman have cited the film as their personal favorite.

Films are creative and organic. You absolutely must be prepared, disciplined and know what you are trying to accomplish. But in the end you have to ask yourself whether you are going to make the best movie you can, or the movie you set out to make. They are not always the same. As the adage goes, you write one movie, shoot another and edit a third.

But, I could be totally misunderstanding you :smile:

 

[Chuklz]

I am unsure about what your original statement means. I agree with everything about being prepared. I've never felt, or heard anyone say, they were too prepared. Pre-production is taken too lightly by too many indie filmmakers.


But when you say



That can mean different things to different people. If you mean, having a clear vision and working within the parameters of that; being equally clear in your communication to cast and crew, and balancing that with their contributions, then I would agree. In fact, being able to balance your vision with other people's input is probably the single most difficult thing I have ever had to do on a set (aside from firing people who weren't even getting paid...but that's another story). Some ideas seem GREAT at that moment, or they seem ridiculous, but really are great. Knowing if and and how they fit within your original vision and how they can improve on it is really hard when the clock is ticking and the sun is setting.

But if you mean that "we must stick to this because it is the way I saw it and how we planned it", then I disagree.

Even Hitchcock, a man known for being consummately prepared as well as controlling, especially with actors, allowed for his vision to be swayed. Bernard Herrman was the one who wanted music in the shower scene for Psycho. Hitch thought it would be more effective with no music and wouldn't budge until Herrmann played it for him. Hitch not only agreed, but thought the music was so effective, he gave a Herrmann a raise after the fact.

In production it can happen too. The complex relationship (and how it was revealed) in The Conversation between Mark and Ann and what they were facing was difficult to get a handle on. One of Frederic Forrest's readings on the line "He'd KILL us" was done as "He'd kill US". Different emphasis, different meaning, and contrary to the original vision. The line was barely remembered by Walter Murch as he was editing the scene and finding it impossible to make work. Inserting the alternate line reading not only made the scene work, but essentially changed the dynamic of the film, because it changes the viewer's sympathies. Not the original vision, but it made a better movie than trying to stick with something. Ironically, both Coppola and Hackman have cited the film as their personal favorite.

Films are creative and organic. You absolutely must be prepared, disciplined and know what you are trying to accomplish. But in the end you have to ask yourself whether you are going to make the best movie you can, or the movie you set out to make. They are not always the same. As the adage goes, you write one movie, shoot another and edit a third.

But, I could be totally misunderstanding you :smile:

I'm speaking more in the sense of doing your pre-production rather than winging it on set. If you're shooting outdoors, you and the cinematographer better not only have the weather report on the television for the week in advance, but the farmer's almanac so you know know when the sun rises and sets. I tend to rest in the Spielberg camp personally where I shoot the movie and then the edit is easy rather than say the Lucas camp where you shoot around the movie and piece together the best coverage. (The far end of my camp being Hitchcock who said the only creative part of making a movie is done at the storyboard table). Both are valid but the real point is- winging it is bad. You might get lucky but then again you probably wont come close to what you saw when you did your first pre-visualization. Light it properly and get it done right in camera rather than saying... oh we'll fix it in post. You wont fix it in post. It will be too expensive to fix it in post and look half as good as if you did it right to begin with. Rehearse, take the time to plan and review shots. Check your shorts. Get good location sound. These sorts of things are what I'm referring to.



Ignoring the input of your collaborators is foolish. I think the last man to do it and get away with it was Orson Welles. If you're that good, you arent reading this board.

 

[Jim Brennan]

Can't argue with any of that :thumbsup: