Kegan
Spam Assassin Mod
A degree in film is no more a waste of money than going to school for an english degree..
Film School
- Thread starter parabola10
- Start date
A degree in film is no more a waste of money than going to school for an english degree..
thematthewbone
Well-known member
...i cannot disagree with that anymore.
that is like saying a history, philosophy, political science, etc. etc. degree is useless...i think people outside of the arts are much more inclined to hire someone with a degree in english than film.
that is like saying a history, philosophy, political science, etc. etc. degree is useless...i think people outside of the arts are much more inclined to hire someone with a degree in english than film.
Mattykins
Cute Member
You are more likely to get a job with a liberal arts degree outside of the film world. Essentially if you go to a trade school, unaccredited...get a 2 year degree, and realize you can't go anywhere in the industry, what do you do?
You don't have a degree in anything. Essentially you didn't go to college. Good luck getting a job.
Places require degrees, to make any kind of money. Go to an accredited school. Get a liberal arts degree and concentrate in film. but take other classes as well. That piece of paper will save you.
And teachers are always needed, english people teach, write, and so on. They are much more likely to get a job in the real world. Considering the film industry is more competitive than almost anything else in the world.
You don't have a degree in anything. Essentially you didn't go to college. Good luck getting a job.
Places require degrees, to make any kind of money. Go to an accredited school. Get a liberal arts degree and concentrate in film. but take other classes as well. That piece of paper will save you.
And teachers are always needed, english people teach, write, and so on. They are much more likely to get a job in the real world. Considering the film industry is more competitive than almost anything else in the world.
Loki
Veteran
A Degree in Film is not the same as going to Film School. I don't know of many universities that give out degrees in film production.
Well, thats a lie, I know of two here in Ontario, but even they are 3 years of academics and one year of production.
Of all the comments this is the best advise. Regardless of the training and desire, anything associated to an "art" is difficult to say the least. Long hours, small or no pay, lots of hurdles, and then you wait, wait, and wait, for nothing sometimes.
This award winning director and cinematographer never went to film school but studied hundreds of movies for years and years while reading everything I could about the subject of making movies AND I had over 20 years experience as a Supervisor, General Supervisor, General Manager, and Vice President . . which means I had learned people skills and business management . . which is a lot of what the job of being a producer and director is all about . . planning, managing, and implementing with a lot of people interactions.
As one Exec Prod that I worked with said when I asked him why he didn't direct this production instead of hiring me his answer was, "I hate actors." WoW! If that were my case I would find another field. For me I love actors and am not one. I can sell you anything but I can't act myself out of any scene but one thing I have is people skills and can get an actor/actress to do exactly what I am looking for . . AFTER . . I have generated in my head the story images I want.
Just some thoughts to ponder.
cinematical
Well-known member
You can't compare something like Full Sail to USC or NYU. Full Sail is a trade school, an wont give you anything you couldn't easily learn on your own. A proper film school gives you access to the school's (sometimes extensive) network of working alumni, along with school resources for marketing and distributing, along with (sometimes) world class pratical and theory-centric professors. Film school is a more structured environment - that's it's main benifit.
Drew Ott
Wish I were banned.
Yeah usually those classes are required, but you don't need as many credits in those subjects as a normal degree would call for.
thematthewbone
Well-known member
well. you can major in film and tv production which is part of the communications programs at a lot of legitimate universities.
if you go that route you have to take the same amount of gen eds as you would for any other major....but if you go to a trade school like full sail or the LA Film Academy etc etc. then no...you go there just to take film production courses.
one gives you a real life B.A. while the second gives you a certificate but, more experience in the craft.
if you go that route you have to take the same amount of gen eds as you would for any other major....but if you go to a trade school like full sail or the LA Film Academy etc etc. then no...you go there just to take film production courses.
one gives you a real life B.A. while the second gives you a certificate but, more experience in the craft.
nantnee
Well-known member
I would say go to school. You'll come out knowing more then when you went in. However, if you really want to learn, i would suggest reading your own material on top of what is assigned, and doing lots of projects with friends. School is only the foundation, its your job to build it up from there.
I don't know much about Full Sail (I did go to film school but not there), but I did hear that they recently started offering a bachelor's degree.
http://fullsail.com/flash/index.cfm?degree=film
http://fullsail.com/flash/index.cfm?degree=film
Mattykins
Cute Member
Mind you, fullsail is a for-profit organization.
Just go to a regular college, study in TV/Film production and get an actual degree. That piece of paper is so much more important in the long run.
And yes, when you focus in Film at a college, you do take other classes. Thus rounding out your degree.
Just go to a regular college, study in TV/Film production and get an actual degree. That piece of paper is so much more important in the long run.
And yes, when you focus in Film at a college, you do take other classes. Thus rounding out your degree.
JonathanLB
Carbonite Member
I'm probably the only person in this thread (I wonder on this board?) who has dropped out of two film schools. I'm actually kind of proud of that fact, LOL, just because it's funny.
I quit LMU back in 2001, went to college the next year at Oregon State University where I graduated in 2005 with a B.S. in Philosophy summa cum laude (appropriate, right, BS in philosophy? Oh man, that one never gets old to me). Then I went to L.A. Film School last year where I lasted 7.5 weeks until I said screw this, this school completely blows and they can't teach me anything I can't learn myself. I quit with another (older) student and we co-founded a production company, bought our own equipment, got insurance, office space, etc. We weren't really that amused by the equipment the school gave us access to anyway. Their access was limited, buying stuff ourselves we could film whenever.
Plus we wanted to start in the business more as businessmen than as artists, and we realized that early on. I personally want to be a director, I see myself as more of an artist than my business partner, who is strictly a producer. I'm very happy I quit film school.
The rest of my class graduated this past month and only one out of 19 had a job. The class had 35 originally, the rest all quit. It's the worst school in general around, I can't stress that enough, LAFS is a complete scam and I would go on record anywhere saying that. I believe their activities are borderline fraudulent and I would not bat an eye if they have a class action lawsuit filed against them one day for false advertising. It's a shame, it makes me angry seeing so many other students go there, go heavily into debt, come out, and not have any employment prospects. It's just sad. The industry eats people up.
When I see Los Angeles, as my business partner always says, I see it like Vegas. Everyone thinks they're going to be the one to beat the house, but alas there are just people all over with broken dreams or people working so hard for so little. It's tough, it's like a warzone. When you post on craigslist and want to find crew and you get people with 12 years of experience willing to work for $100/day it makes you think, jeez, this really is tough. How could people that qualified work for so little? But the fact is they may sometimes work for more, but it's hard finding steady work and so they reason some money is better than no money.
I think some of the comments in this thread are fantastic, I mean some really good advice and an accurate depiction of film school. It really is about the connections not the knowledge. One of the kids who went to school with us majored in editing and the reason he's going to be doing better than most of those kids is because he met us. We have a bunch of corporate work over the next two months and he's going to make a nice paycheck. I'm paying him to edit a music video I'm shooting for my reel. I have a feature documentary (quite low budget) planned and he's my editor for that, where a large portion of the expense is the editing. The point is knowing someone who can offer you work is a valuable connection.
Frankly all I heard in film school over and over again, at LAFS I mean, is, "You only get out of this what you put into it. Ultimately you're going to learn by going out there and shooting, shooting, shooting! Just go out there and make work, make mistakes, learn!" So after hearing that twice a day for what seemed like 6 months but was in fact only less than 8 weeks, they taught me all of the basics really well, and coming from a background in film criticism and film theory (I have two published books and another published essay, plus I've written more than 700 movie reviews, or several thousand pages worth of reviews on films from 1894 through about 2006) I found myself already more knowledgeable than most of the students. LAFS, being a trade school, places almost no emphasis on film theory or film history, which is sad. I think without a grasp of the past it's hard to know where you want to fit in and what kind of work you want to be doing, what has come before, etc. I felt that since I was in high school and knew I wouldn't be a filmmaker for a long time, so I spent my time studying theory and history so that I understood a lot about cinematography, shot selection, what makes a scene, etc. I felt that was fundamental, like the base of understanding.
But my experience in production was very, very low, probably bottom 50% of the class I'd say, well maybe bottom 30%, I don't know. I had done some short films that sucked hardcore (like... hardcore, sucked) and a really lousy educational DVD project that I edited, shot, did the music for, DVD production, etc. I learned a lot but it's embarrassing beyond belief, I wasn't paid, I did my best with what I had (XL-1s, no lighting except available lighting, etc.).
In film school in 8 weeks I did learn everything I needed to know to figure out what I DIDN'T know. In other words, I understood what a 1st A.C. was, what a 1st A.D. was, what grips do, what a c-stand is, what flags are for, etc. I also knew the areas that I knew nothing about so I was able to go buy books and read that information, and read DVX User and the RED forum and whatnot and pick up a bit of knowledge each day. I still count myself as quite inexperienced, but I know as a director what I want to see, I have a clear vision, I'm a professional writer and think visually so I can communicate on paper what my plans are for a shoot. I wrote our company's structural documents and some basic legal and contractual paperwork (consulting a bit with our lawyer but, sheesh, who can afford much of that), etc. So my skills in other aspects of my life serve me as a director while I gain experience, and I'm open with DPs with whom I work in saying that I am inexperienced and have much to learn, and like to have a very collaborative process where I bounce ideas off them and we enhance the original concept.
Ultimately film is a very tough path to pursue and I think some of my advice for people would be unpopular as it is rooted in some realities I have seen that a lot of people would prefer to ignore. I think film school takes the right type of person, and I was done with school frankly after college, I didn't know that myself, I thought I could do film school because I love film, but I was wrong. I was stuck with a lot of kids who didn't have college degrees and were fresh out of high school. The maturity level was frustrating to me, as well as some of the other older students (most of whom were quite a bit older than myself), but also I just have little patience for film school students who don't take what they're supposed to be pursuing seriously. If you haven't seen Pulp Fiction for god's sake please delay film school until you have. It's stuff like that where I just get annoyed. "Citizen Kane? Is that MTV's new reality TV show?" No dilweed it's one of the greatest movies of all time. I mean honestly these kids hadn't even see a movie before 2000 I swear. I want people around me who take something as seriously as I do and I could see that wasn't the case, either at LMU or at LAFS. I remember at LMU being embarrassed at my film knowledge because in my mind, there were way too many classics I hadn't seen (still are), but when I was talking to most of the other students I felt like Roger Ebert by comparison. Grrr....
I also strongly advise, and this is where my advice would be unpopular, that you have money before you go to film school. I'm sorry but I see this business as being so risky and such a lottery that too many people come down here and don't succeed because of their financial resources, or lackthereof. From my film school, one kid is going home almost immediately after because he has to pay off the loans and can't find high enough paying work or consistent work in the film industry. Others are back to their previous jobs before film school. This isn't an uncommon thing. It happens constantly. One huge reason I am pursuing film is not just because I love it but because I have the financial backing and security to pursue this dream without fear of failure. I can afford to take this risk. Does it mean I'll make it? No. But does it give me a better chance than many other people? Absolutely, yes. Instead of having to take a 40-hour-a-week day job, I can focus just on film and put all of my energy into it. That means I have more opportunities to shoot, more funds to shoot with, more equipment to make professional work, more funds to hire professionals and learn more from them, etc. I understand that comes across as, "So basically you're spoiled and can outspend normal people" (I won't get into my financial situation but part of the reason it's better than it could be is because of something very sad that happened in my past, so it has its costs), but keep in mind there are a lot of USC kids or Chapman kids exactly like that, too. As one poster on another forum I read had said, "Be prepared for the people who have such wealthy parents they can simply outgun you." When people are willing to spend a lot of money on their dreams, I mean large cash sums of money to get into this industry, it makes it that much harder for everyone else (I'm guilty, I want in, I'll spend money to give myself a better chance, even if it's only a 0.2% chance instead of a 0.1% chance, lol). That's why when you see guys on craigslist offering to shoot for you with an HVX200 and P2 cards, batteries, etc. for $150 a day you say, "Jeez, I can't compete with that, how can this guy spend $7,000 on a camera and charge just $150 for his time AND the camera?" Easy. Because he doesn't care about the camera as an investment, he's using it to get in the door on productions and that $7K for him is a sunk cost. That's what you're up against, people like that. Or people like me, spending a lot of money on my reel to give it more polish than other reels out there from people with my limited experience, with no guarantee whatsoever that I'll make (any) of that money back.
I'm sorry for the long post but I came down here very naive about this industry, and I knew it was TOUGH, but the reality has been even tougher than I had imagined so I just wish to caution people as much as possible to be careful. I don't think it's the worst idea to do what my business partner did, which is make large amounts of cash in another industry (he was a business owner before, too) and get into film later when you do have the resources to take some risks. Then again, when you're young, you might be more tolerant of a poor lifestyle and taking chances before you have a family if that's what you're into. I have no interest, just interested in my career, so that kind of concern is not my own. My business partner has been much the same way. It's a personal decision how you want to try to break in, but the question I sometimes pose is, "Would you try to make it big in poker without a sufficient bankroll?" Probably not. Chris Ferguson started with $0 recently in an experiment and played the freeroll with the goal of earning enough money to play in bigger and bigger games and get to $10,000. He did it, but it took a lot longer than if he started out with $200. In fact it took him the most time to get from $0 to $20. Poker is much like life in that respect, you need a sufficient bankroll to give yourself the best chance of success. Sounds cynical, sounds bad, but honestly, it's true.
I quit LMU back in 2001, went to college the next year at Oregon State University where I graduated in 2005 with a B.S. in Philosophy summa cum laude (appropriate, right, BS in philosophy? Oh man, that one never gets old to me). Then I went to L.A. Film School last year where I lasted 7.5 weeks until I said screw this, this school completely blows and they can't teach me anything I can't learn myself. I quit with another (older) student and we co-founded a production company, bought our own equipment, got insurance, office space, etc. We weren't really that amused by the equipment the school gave us access to anyway. Their access was limited, buying stuff ourselves we could film whenever.
Plus we wanted to start in the business more as businessmen than as artists, and we realized that early on. I personally want to be a director, I see myself as more of an artist than my business partner, who is strictly a producer. I'm very happy I quit film school.
The rest of my class graduated this past month and only one out of 19 had a job. The class had 35 originally, the rest all quit. It's the worst school in general around, I can't stress that enough, LAFS is a complete scam and I would go on record anywhere saying that. I believe their activities are borderline fraudulent and I would not bat an eye if they have a class action lawsuit filed against them one day for false advertising. It's a shame, it makes me angry seeing so many other students go there, go heavily into debt, come out, and not have any employment prospects. It's just sad. The industry eats people up.
When I see Los Angeles, as my business partner always says, I see it like Vegas. Everyone thinks they're going to be the one to beat the house, but alas there are just people all over with broken dreams or people working so hard for so little. It's tough, it's like a warzone. When you post on craigslist and want to find crew and you get people with 12 years of experience willing to work for $100/day it makes you think, jeez, this really is tough. How could people that qualified work for so little? But the fact is they may sometimes work for more, but it's hard finding steady work and so they reason some money is better than no money.
I think some of the comments in this thread are fantastic, I mean some really good advice and an accurate depiction of film school. It really is about the connections not the knowledge. One of the kids who went to school with us majored in editing and the reason he's going to be doing better than most of those kids is because he met us. We have a bunch of corporate work over the next two months and he's going to make a nice paycheck. I'm paying him to edit a music video I'm shooting for my reel. I have a feature documentary (quite low budget) planned and he's my editor for that, where a large portion of the expense is the editing. The point is knowing someone who can offer you work is a valuable connection.
Frankly all I heard in film school over and over again, at LAFS I mean, is, "You only get out of this what you put into it. Ultimately you're going to learn by going out there and shooting, shooting, shooting! Just go out there and make work, make mistakes, learn!" So after hearing that twice a day for what seemed like 6 months but was in fact only less than 8 weeks, they taught me all of the basics really well, and coming from a background in film criticism and film theory (I have two published books and another published essay, plus I've written more than 700 movie reviews, or several thousand pages worth of reviews on films from 1894 through about 2006) I found myself already more knowledgeable than most of the students. LAFS, being a trade school, places almost no emphasis on film theory or film history, which is sad. I think without a grasp of the past it's hard to know where you want to fit in and what kind of work you want to be doing, what has come before, etc. I felt that since I was in high school and knew I wouldn't be a filmmaker for a long time, so I spent my time studying theory and history so that I understood a lot about cinematography, shot selection, what makes a scene, etc. I felt that was fundamental, like the base of understanding.
But my experience in production was very, very low, probably bottom 50% of the class I'd say, well maybe bottom 30%, I don't know. I had done some short films that sucked hardcore (like... hardcore, sucked) and a really lousy educational DVD project that I edited, shot, did the music for, DVD production, etc. I learned a lot but it's embarrassing beyond belief, I wasn't paid, I did my best with what I had (XL-1s, no lighting except available lighting, etc.).
In film school in 8 weeks I did learn everything I needed to know to figure out what I DIDN'T know. In other words, I understood what a 1st A.C. was, what a 1st A.D. was, what grips do, what a c-stand is, what flags are for, etc. I also knew the areas that I knew nothing about so I was able to go buy books and read that information, and read DVX User and the RED forum and whatnot and pick up a bit of knowledge each day. I still count myself as quite inexperienced, but I know as a director what I want to see, I have a clear vision, I'm a professional writer and think visually so I can communicate on paper what my plans are for a shoot. I wrote our company's structural documents and some basic legal and contractual paperwork (consulting a bit with our lawyer but, sheesh, who can afford much of that), etc. So my skills in other aspects of my life serve me as a director while I gain experience, and I'm open with DPs with whom I work in saying that I am inexperienced and have much to learn, and like to have a very collaborative process where I bounce ideas off them and we enhance the original concept.
Ultimately film is a very tough path to pursue and I think some of my advice for people would be unpopular as it is rooted in some realities I have seen that a lot of people would prefer to ignore. I think film school takes the right type of person, and I was done with school frankly after college, I didn't know that myself, I thought I could do film school because I love film, but I was wrong. I was stuck with a lot of kids who didn't have college degrees and were fresh out of high school. The maturity level was frustrating to me, as well as some of the other older students (most of whom were quite a bit older than myself), but also I just have little patience for film school students who don't take what they're supposed to be pursuing seriously. If you haven't seen Pulp Fiction for god's sake please delay film school until you have. It's stuff like that where I just get annoyed. "Citizen Kane? Is that MTV's new reality TV show?" No dilweed it's one of the greatest movies of all time. I mean honestly these kids hadn't even see a movie before 2000 I swear. I want people around me who take something as seriously as I do and I could see that wasn't the case, either at LMU or at LAFS. I remember at LMU being embarrassed at my film knowledge because in my mind, there were way too many classics I hadn't seen (still are), but when I was talking to most of the other students I felt like Roger Ebert by comparison. Grrr....
I also strongly advise, and this is where my advice would be unpopular, that you have money before you go to film school. I'm sorry but I see this business as being so risky and such a lottery that too many people come down here and don't succeed because of their financial resources, or lackthereof. From my film school, one kid is going home almost immediately after because he has to pay off the loans and can't find high enough paying work or consistent work in the film industry. Others are back to their previous jobs before film school. This isn't an uncommon thing. It happens constantly. One huge reason I am pursuing film is not just because I love it but because I have the financial backing and security to pursue this dream without fear of failure. I can afford to take this risk. Does it mean I'll make it? No. But does it give me a better chance than many other people? Absolutely, yes. Instead of having to take a 40-hour-a-week day job, I can focus just on film and put all of my energy into it. That means I have more opportunities to shoot, more funds to shoot with, more equipment to make professional work, more funds to hire professionals and learn more from them, etc. I understand that comes across as, "So basically you're spoiled and can outspend normal people" (I won't get into my financial situation but part of the reason it's better than it could be is because of something very sad that happened in my past, so it has its costs), but keep in mind there are a lot of USC kids or Chapman kids exactly like that, too. As one poster on another forum I read had said, "Be prepared for the people who have such wealthy parents they can simply outgun you." When people are willing to spend a lot of money on their dreams, I mean large cash sums of money to get into this industry, it makes it that much harder for everyone else (I'm guilty, I want in, I'll spend money to give myself a better chance, even if it's only a 0.2% chance instead of a 0.1% chance, lol). That's why when you see guys on craigslist offering to shoot for you with an HVX200 and P2 cards, batteries, etc. for $150 a day you say, "Jeez, I can't compete with that, how can this guy spend $7,000 on a camera and charge just $150 for his time AND the camera?" Easy. Because he doesn't care about the camera as an investment, he's using it to get in the door on productions and that $7K for him is a sunk cost. That's what you're up against, people like that. Or people like me, spending a lot of money on my reel to give it more polish than other reels out there from people with my limited experience, with no guarantee whatsoever that I'll make (any) of that money back.
I'm sorry for the long post but I came down here very naive about this industry, and I knew it was TOUGH, but the reality has been even tougher than I had imagined so I just wish to caution people as much as possible to be careful. I don't think it's the worst idea to do what my business partner did, which is make large amounts of cash in another industry (he was a business owner before, too) and get into film later when you do have the resources to take some risks. Then again, when you're young, you might be more tolerant of a poor lifestyle and taking chances before you have a family if that's what you're into. I have no interest, just interested in my career, so that kind of concern is not my own. My business partner has been much the same way. It's a personal decision how you want to try to break in, but the question I sometimes pose is, "Would you try to make it big in poker without a sufficient bankroll?" Probably not. Chris Ferguson started with $0 recently in an experiment and played the freeroll with the goal of earning enough money to play in bigger and bigger games and get to $10,000. He did it, but it took a lot longer than if he started out with $200. In fact it took him the most time to get from $0 to $20. Poker is much like life in that respect, you need a sufficient bankroll to give yourself the best chance of success. Sounds cynical, sounds bad, but honestly, it's true.
Last edited:
Andrew Lee
DVXUser Sponsor
I went to Full Sail.
Everyone wants to know if film school is one of the following:
A) good
B) bad
Because everyone wants to know if there is on magical way into the industry that will always work for everyone ever.
There isn't. There is exactly one way into the industry for each person who wants in.
I was in one of the last small classes at Full Sail. It's a bad school for theory but I managed to get a great amount of directing training and education out of it. I will also vouch that Full Sail can train a crewperson as well as (in many cases better) than UCLA, UT, USC, AFI, or NYU. Then again, of a class of about 40, I know less than 10 of us are still going in the industry.
I also know of guys and girls that randomly volunteered on sets that learned more in one day than most film students will learn in 2-3 years (or at full sail, 3-4 months).
The education does not make the person. The person makes the education. And I guarantee, any school you go to, when you leave, you will not be done learning.
Everyone wants to know if film school is one of the following:
A) good
B) bad
Because everyone wants to know if there is on magical way into the industry that will always work for everyone ever.
There isn't. There is exactly one way into the industry for each person who wants in.
I was in one of the last small classes at Full Sail. It's a bad school for theory but I managed to get a great amount of directing training and education out of it. I will also vouch that Full Sail can train a crewperson as well as (in many cases better) than UCLA, UT, USC, AFI, or NYU. Then again, of a class of about 40, I know less than 10 of us are still going in the industry.
I also know of guys and girls that randomly volunteered on sets that learned more in one day than most film students will learn in 2-3 years (or at full sail, 3-4 months).
The education does not make the person. The person makes the education. And I guarantee, any school you go to, when you leave, you will not be done learning.
JonathanLB
Carbonite Member
Great comments Andrew, I really agree with that. You have to take charge of your learning and education, and that can be done in film school or out of it, I believe, but you can't just go through the motions. You have to take charge and make your own opportunities.