Film Schools?

Jimmy Moss said:
I would say forget school, its a ripoff. Its really expensive and you learn more if you just read the books cover to cover anyway.

If you want to get a degree, than get something other than a film degree. It will serve you better, even in the film industry (and cost less).

Just get some self discipline and have fun. Film making is a journey not a career.
Click to expand...

What he said^

If you go to film school be prepared to be disappointed, many kids lack passion. Although the networking may make it worth it, you will learn more by spending time reading books, searching through knowledge filled forums:grin:, and shooting your own stuff and practicing. It will make you either realize you have passion or you dont, and If you do have the passion, dont doubt yourself!
 
I'm actually just curious. These threads pop up from time to time, and the whole film school v no film school (or worst, college v wing it) always comes into play.

I am an advocate of school because of the network, many people say it's a waste of time. Can I then ask - how many people here actually work in the system that is Hollywood?

Anywhere in Hollywood, a prod office, an agency, a management company, PR, distribution, physical production?

I know of maybe ten people on this board that work in Hollywood proper. Or the film industry for that matter? I see so many people blast college and say "just do it" - but what is "it"? And how many have succeeded in "it"? ((I am discounting no-budget films, student films, etc. in the definition of "the industry" because that isn't "the industry"))

At the same time, I know a bunch of kids who graduated film school and aren't really in the industry. But most are somewhere. They are on a desk at a company answering phones, running scripts, and making bridges that will help down the road. I know non-filmschool kids in the same place.

Though, how can increasing your chances to work in hollywood be a waste of time if that's what you want to do? And why are so many so quick to judge film school?
 
I agree, school is good for connections, but I've been known to just slip into classes and listen to guest speakers ect. For no credit of course. Most people don't mind if you ask. Maybe say your looking to enroll in the school.

If you have the balls to make film school work to its top potential, then you have the balls to do it on your own.

I come from a sound engineering background, and honestly my degree has done little to nothing for me in the industry. It all about who you know (and to some degree your talent). I would have been better off spending 100k on gear and that 4 years doing it, instead of sitting in a classroom. However, my degree has help in other areas just not the areas it was supposed to be for!

I would argue that you can know the same people without paying to go to school. You would be surprised how far you can get with a case of beer, some knowledge, and wit. This is coming from a resident of Nashville Tennessee, I don't know how LA or NYC works but I doubt its very different.
 
This gave a good look on the US schools.

How about other places? I'm searching as well for a decent (not out of the world expensive) film school. Film school, to me, sounds like a good way to practice and learn the practicalities of film. If I want to make film otherwise I will be too dependant on money.. (I will too, in a way, if I apply to a expensive school).

How about France? UK? Belgium? Berlin? - of course I'd have to learn a bit of the language as well which usually isn't a problem for me.

and sure a degree in film-making might not be as helpful as , say, some engineering degree... but film-making degree is the only one I would be able to concentrate on..everything else would just go through one ear and out the other :)

Anyone? Appreciate any suggestions..
 
I've read two books based around directing and am currently reading one on cinematography, the question about who is and isn't in the industry is very interesting question that hopefully some forum members can dive into.
 
Mattykins said:
I'm actually just curious. These threads pop up from time to time, and the whole film school v no film school (or worst, college v wing it) always comes into play.

I am an advocate of school because of the network, many people say it's a waste of time. Can I then ask - how many people here actually work in the system that is Hollywood?
Click to expand...

The question here is, which school, that has the 'best' connections... USC... for most people, the tuition is beyond their ability, even with every loan they can glom onto.

UCLA, need major academics from highschool, high SAT/ACT scores, and even then... for outofstate students, there's tution that's pretty steep by 'cal resident' standards, and for everyone there's just 'living in LA'...

New York schools you can name are probably not much different. Don't know much about Austin, but I would imagine U of T has simlar requirements as the rest.

Hence, at some point the 'connections' aspect vanishes, or become rather small.

If someone can afford these schools, just as with any other Name Brand School, for anyother discipline, the graduates are going to have a higher likelihood of success than those graduated from Elsewhere U.
 
Again, one thing you might consider is this; if you are not in film school perhaps you
should go. In film school you have the equipment and facilities made available to you as
long as you are a matriculated student. My school had a $900,000 per year budget for
equipment for students to use. We had sound mixing booths and editing suites available​
to us 24/7.-Film introduction book
 
In this industry, the slightest advantage can help you immensely. Which I think is an aspect that never vanishes (if you want to work in Hollywood). Because almost everyone you talk to out here wound up where they are because of a referral from someone, wether that can from an entry level position or from an alumni from their graduating school. Though many entry level positions appeared from Alumni helping current undergrads from a variety of different colleges.

Film Schools in general offer 100,000's of dollars worth of equipment for you to use.

But I think the biggest question here from all of the film school (and college) detractors is, who is in the industry? Or who has been to film school? How can one comment on the usefulness of something without experiencing it, or knowing first hand what "people" are looking for in the industry.

I think that is my biggest complaint. I believe in film schools, I'm at one, I've experienced it, I can comment on it. Other people don't believe in film school. That's cool too. However, if people say it's useless and they don't work in the industry (end game), and they haven't experienced film school - then how can you say it is useless aside from commenting on the idea of it, and the preexisting assumptions caused by the cost of a specialized college.
 
I've been working since I got out of school almost 3 years ago. I have managed to meet some good people in San Francisco and work pretty steadily as an electric or gaffer. I'm not rolling in the dough or anything, but I think I've made some good progress. If anything, I've definitely passed up my time as just another PA.

So far, 90% of what I've learned so far, I learned outside of film school. Film school is great because you get to work on all of these projects and do it constantly, but Jimmy Moss is so right. So so right.

I would argue that you can know the same people without paying to go to school. You would be surprised how far you can get with a case of beer, some knowledge, and wit. This is coming from a resident of Nashville Tennessee, I don't know how LA or NYC works but I doubt its very different.
Click to expand...

This girl I know came up from Venezuela wanting to learn film. She didn't have much money and school was sort of out of the question. She found some academy of art students online who she thought made good movies and got in touch with them...she said she'd do anything, she just wanted to learn. They brought her on one shoot and now she works on everything they do. She learns what they learn, but she just learns for free.

If you just start working as a PA, and then do these little student films on the side...it's only a matter of time before people start paying you to learn, instead of the other way around.

Also, while I'm not currently enrolled in a film school, I could probably swing just as much equipment for free, if not more than most of the people I know who are in school. A few good friends and big favors will go a long way.
 
Last edited:
I'm on the side of film school. I think that it would have been a lot more difficult for me personally to learn what I know now without having someone who is a seasoned industry professional teach it to me. And it goes beyond the little things - for instance, I had always referred to the lamp of a light as a "globe" which is by and large the term used by the industry. But film school taught me on day one that there are a bunch of nicknames for everything on set, including globes. They can be called lamps, bulbs, globes, bottles, bubbles, eggs - and I can't remember the last one. But sure enough, a couple months later I was working on an AFI thesis film and the gaffer asked me if I'd get him an extra bubble and I just laughed to myself, because I probably would have had to ask him what he meant by bubble had I not learned it in film school.

Of course, that's a super small example. It would have wasted much time at all if I had to ask him what a bubble was. But again, it's my opinion that it goes further than that. For instance, it's a requirement in my film school that we learn to edit as well on AVID systems in addition to Final Cut Pro. Now, I don't want to be an editor - but if I did, that would be INVALUABLE experience. AVID systems are expensive, complicated pieces of technology that are, whether we like to admit it or not, the Hollywood industry standard. FCP has come leaps and bounds but mainly in the independent world (which in and of itself has come leaps and bounds). But 80-90% of Hollywood features are AVID system workflows.

The other big thing that suits the direction of this thread better is the ability to shoot film whilst in film school. Most low/no budget productions in the independent world shoot HD, since it's more cost effective - and I admit, I haven't ever shot a project on film that wasn't directly for film school. But going to film school allowed me to work with film cameras, and get valuable experience using a medium that is still the industry standard without incurring much of the cost. As most people know, it isn't the film stock that is expensive in and of itself, it's the processing and telecine that you do AFTER principal photography. At my school, that's all taken care of so students can really focus on the art and not the cost that is associated with that art. If I had not gone to film school I might have EVENTUALLY learned how to load film cameras, how film stocks worked and why, and the physical means that drive the medium on set or by reading - but for me, practical application is much more important because I'm the kind of person who learns by doing. I couldn't have read about grain structure, dynamic range, and the camera mechanics without seeing it with my own eyes and touching it with my hands.

Lastly, connections. Most of the paid jobs I've gotten are from people who I know through school. For instance, Brandon Trost went to my film school. I spoke to him at a screening that he attended, he gave me his number and I called him up one day, took him out to lunch, and now he's sort of like my mentor and I load for him. But others have said it - there are bad apples as there always are in school. You have to seek out the people who are driven, skilled, and passionate because it does no good to know people who aren't going to work hard to make it.

Ultimately, film school is for some people and not others. It is BY NO MEANS necessary to make it in the industry. Some people feel it helps them, like me. Others feel like it doesn't. What it comes down to is you as a person. Are you the type of person who can walk onto a set as a PA (which if you don't have loads of experience beforehand is where you will start) stand by the camera, listen, and learn? Then skip film school. I can't do that - I had to go to film school and ultimately I think it was better for me.

I'd say do your research on film schools, learn what they each have to offer individually and at what cost. Hell, I got into AFI's cinematography which in my opinion is the program best suited for cinematographers in the world, but there was absolutely no possible way I could afford the $70,000/year cost of tuition and living. In this situation, the school has so much to offer but the cost just makes it completely unreasonable for me. So I chose a more affordable school, with maybe a little bit less of a reputable faculty when it comes to cinematography. But I'm a firm believer that education is what you make of it - it doesn't matter where you go, if you study hard and work hard and make use of all the resources available to you, and are passionate, you're going to go far.
 
USC was my only choice when I was applying to college. I didnt want to go anywhere else.
As for cinematography, there are some amazing instructors here. Your first few undergrad courses are pretty rudimentary, but once you have finished those you are able to petition to take the advanced courses which are shooting on Panavision cameras.
Good luck with your applications.
 
Well my goal now is to get on a movie or two. I have made some previous stuff but nothing worth noting.

Finnegan, I appreciate you taking your time out to write out your opinions on film school.
I aswell could not afford something such as 70,000 a year but working with like minded peers would be nice. Food for thought.
 
Last edited:
I have been a strong proponent of going to school to study something that will make you a better story teller. You can learn all the technical stuff working on film sets. Study one of the humanities, learn what it is to suffer from the human condition. Literature, Philosophy, History
 
KKeller said:
I have been a strong proponent of going to school to study something that will make you a better story teller. You can learn all the technical stuff working on film sets. Study one of the humanities, learn what it is to suffer from the human condition. Literature, Philosophy, History
Click to expand...

This is a good point that somehow I forgot to mention. A good portion of film school deals with story structure, storytelling, and all things story. Granted there are books on these subjects since the art of storytelling has been around long before the cinema, it seems to help to write a lot and have your stories critiqued by your faculty, who have written screenplays or directed for a living.
 
As for story telling I've always had that gift. The material is what comes up(sometimes) in short supply. As for the technical side, it seems like something you watch and learn from what I've seen.
 
Last edited:
DadinWestchester said:
Sounds like a plan. I have a 15 YO actor that has decided to major in film and these are the schools that he will apply to.
Click to expand...

Well also tell him to continue acting and doing other extracurriculars besides film. A lot of the very top schools like USC don't like it when you have previous film experience, they'd rather start with scratch and mold you to their liking haha.
 
SK3055 said:
Well also tell him to continue acting and doing other extracurriculars besides film. A lot of the very top schools like USC don't like it when you have previous film experience, they'd rather start with scratch and mold you to their liking haha.
Click to expand...

I really hope that's not true...:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top