Highschool Students First Film

Yeah I would agree about everyone having a number of horrible shorts. I don't see how you can just hit the ground running to such an extent that your very first short film is even "good," let alone great. And let's face it, how many shorts are made every year? 10,000? 50,000? Honestly it has to be a TON. So if you make a good short, I'm sorry to say it won't really get you anywhere. If you make a very good short, it might get you some recognition on the festival circuit, you'll feel good about yourself, hopefully learn a bit, and all that good stuff. But to make any sort of real impact you need a flawless short, a great short, with no technical shortcomings, excellent acting, superb directing, an engaging story that people remember and love, etc. The competition is just too numerous and too fierce to be satisfied with anything less than greatness, unless you're just practicing.

So if you are just practicing, honestly, don't spend too much money and don't make them too long. I think the greatest filmmaking experience I have had from a learning perspective was this short film I made after going to film school for FOUR WEEKS. I don't think many people at any of the 3-year film schools could have done better than that unless they really knew their stuff before they even started. Yet if you asked me what I think of the short now, I think it's a piece of crap. I mean it has some benefits, but of the three actors, one is awful, one was quite good, and one was meh, pretty good I guess but in Hollywood average at best. Camera work had its moments, some nice shots, somewhat grainy overall, bad lighting (or no lighting besides practical / natural much of the time), uhh, locations were good. But yet it does somehow flow into being a better short film than about 40% of the THESIS films I saw screened for that class. Now I'm not saying beating 40% of films is good, but a lousy short 4 weeks into film school should under no circumstances be even as good as ANY thesis film, no way! Not shot with an XH-A1 when the students were shooting 16mm, Sony F950, etc. We spent $600 on that 12 minute short, filmed in a day and a half, and I learned a ridiculous amount. We did ADR on that project, so I got to see what that type of process was like, learned a lot about dos and don'ts of production sound, understood a bit more about working with actors, writing a fairly tight screenplay, editing, after effects, all this stuff I really knew nothing about but a small team of four of us guys pulled this thing off with each of us knowing just a bit about certain things. Yeah, the short is pretty bad I think (it got a 2.5 out of 5 on some video site, I think that's generous, I'd give it a 2), but man for $600 that I split with one other guy, $300 each, what a lot we learned! How else could you get that much education out of $300 besides going out and doing it?

Yet if I had spent $10,000, and didn't know much, the result probably still would have been pretty bad, only I'd have wasted a ton of money too. Best not to spend the money until you're pretty confident you can pull it off and really know what you're doing.
 
Great advice. the hv20 idea was kinda funny actually. If i wasn't going to rent equipment from a low cost non-profit orginization, i would probably try that out.

Right now I'm a bit tied up with stuff for Getting my Eagle Scout, so ive kinda put the whole production on hold. I am still writing however, and looking for locations and actors in my spare time.

One more question, what do you guys think about showing violence ( the scene involves a kid being attacked at home at night, and i want to have them struggle like what would probably actually happen if someone was attacked. Think using household items as weapons to get the attacker off. i also was hoping to include the attacker having a gun, and the kid attacked getting hold of it, and eventually killing the attacker.)

Its kinda complicated to ask and might sound like I'm just trying to put in violence but its part of the story. I wouldn't be showing the actual killing just inferring it, going off scene with gunshots in the back, something to that effect.

I just don't want to overstep lines or look like im trying to put violence in just to be a cool new filmmaker.

If you want to hear the whole story i guess email me or something, but what do you guys think?
 
Yeah I think that's pretty important. Honestly so many new filmmakers think, "COOL movies let's put in guns and drugs!" They kind of forget that you need a story, and the great films that do have guns and drugs happen to have amazing stories too (like a Casino or a Goodfellas or Reservoir Dogs, with the guns, Pulp Fiction, etc.).

Everyone gets tired of people saying "it's all about the story," but it's definitely the essential foundation. I disagree that it's all about the story. In fact I strongly disagree with that. Sounds like advice from a n00b living outside of Hollywood to me. If you make a short with a great story but your production values are pretty bad, your camera work shoddy, and basically it looks like an amateur film with a cool concept and good acting, you think this is going to advance your career as a director? You have to be really naive to think that. In the real world, i.e. Hollywood, it's all about style. It's equally important that your visuals are amazing and you show a clear visual storytelling style than that you have great acting and a great story. Make no mistake, this isn't 1950 where the director focuses just on his actors and his blocking, and leaves the camera work and style to others. No way. Not since Spielberg and the rest of today's music video directors and technical directors (like Lucas, for instance, also David Fincher with his amazing camera styles and music video background) have pioneered their own visual styles and aesthetics. Now, you better be able to prove you have what it takes visually. I guess if you wrote the screenplay to a bad looking short that had a great story, MAYBE it could still help your career. But it's incredibly naive to think you can get away with a shoddy production just because you have a great story. Your audience may forgive you; Hollywood executives and talent scouts, however, will not. So I would say, as Gil Bettman does in his book for instance, focus 50% on the quality of the acting and what you can get out of the performances (combine story in here too, if you are in charge of that), and 50% on the visual style of the film.
 
You're right it's not ALL about a good story. I think it actually is all about a good story, well told. The telling of the story includes everything from the visuals, the sound and final mix and your acting. If you have effects, it's your responsibility as a director to either hire the right people or simply take them out of the story.

But with that being said, the story is the foundation of your movie. It's like a building. If you take the foundation out, the whole thing falls. The visuals, sound and acting are all the decoration and appliances. You can still live in a house that doesn't have anything in it. But to really make your home inviting you have to decorate it.
 
JamieF said:
I'm currently a senior in high school and as everyone else on this site is, im really passionate about film making. Ive made over 15 shorts (only about 4-7 min each) over the past 3 years, and ive had alot of positive feedback from friends, family, and teachers. But for the most part it has been largely experimental stuff.

Im really looking to dive into short films (20-30min) and id love to make an hour long or more, but im level headed enough to realize diving into a feature film is way over my head, and may be for quite a few more years. But i would love to hear anyones similar stories, possibly who are in my current position, or possibly who were at some point there. Id love to know what to do next. Im a pretty decent writer and ive been coming up with a fairly decent idea for a longer film, i just dont want to waste a decent idea with my inexperience. I want to do it right. Any ideas on how i can get started into more serious work (to help me along to longer movies?)
Click to expand...

Maybe take a look into a film school. Start understanding set eidetic. Know all the positions and what they do. If you ever want to work in the film industry or even direct your first feature debut, then you're going to need to know the basics of film theory, film set, etc. I know that you're young and about to graduate but I think you should really take a look into a film school. Try finding some local productions that might be shooting in your area. Get on set. Work as a Production assistant so you can learn the ropes. So here I am writing this to you and just find out that you're from Buffalo, NY. First of all, that's a shitty place for films. Only a dozen of features been shot there. There are a few being shot in Rochester. I was born and raised there. Get out of there as soon as possible. If you get notice or get work, move to NYC. Also, I just found out a year ago that Syracuse has a good film program. Check them out. I got out of there as fast as possible and in two years, I'm working on Features, Music Videos, and Commercials. Directed a few, Produced a few, and Color Corrected a music video for a big hip-hop artist in Miami.

With todays society, the best thing to have underneath your belt is a website just for you. Went you shoot a short film, you want to have everyone that is working with you to have the same passion about film. So they can learn their own positions or they might already know little. You never want to have your film fail because of your film crew. That's the worst. Start diving into film theory. good luck.

Murray
 
Last edited:
I only went to film school for about 8 weeks, but what I did learn was certainly very valuable to my ability to have the confidence to jump into production on my own. Honestly before I started film school, I had no idea what a C-stand was, and if you said script supervisor I would have thought it was someone assigned to watch the script so that nobody steals it or something. 1st A.D.? I thought it was the guy who brings coffee to the director or something. I had no clue about set positions. I also didn't really even think about what a DP did, I mean from being a film critic I knew a DP was responsible for the lighting, but I am pretty sure I thought the DP operated the camera, too. I mean, heck, I didn't really know how a set worked at all, in any respect. It all seemed very confusing to me. At least film school can get you used to what goes on for a professional film shoot. But I still think there are cheaper ways, namely what Murray just suggested, which is trying to get on shoots no matter what you are doing. PA work is fine, low responsibility but you can still learn a lot of basic stuff and get paid to do it, or even if you don't get paid at least you're not paying a ton of money for a school.

I think my main issue with a lot of schools is what you are promised compared to what you get out of them. I have no doubt that for most people, if you have the money, going to USC or UCLA is going to be a great way to build connections, build confidence, learn the craft, etc. I'm not anti-film school. I'm just against thinking that it's the only way to learn, that's all. And I know a lot of film schools, you'd be better off taking that money and putting it into equipment, books, DVDs, and working on projects yourself.

For instance where I went, Los Angeles Film School, you come away with one thesis film at the end of the year. The rest of what you make will be total crap because of the restrictions placed on it, it'll be really amateurish, you may learn something from those projects hopefully, but at the end of the year you have a certificate that has no meaning in the industry (nobody I know cares about education here, it's about your reel and who you know) and ONE narrative film? That's... really not what I'd build a film school around. If I made my own film school, everyone would graduate with 3 music videos, 3 spec ads, a short film, and some corporate work they'd have to go out in the real world and find themselves. If every director graduated with that reel, at least they'd have a fighting chance in a lot of markets, rather than being stuck with one short that probably won't get them anywhere unless it gets accepted to a bunch of major, A-list film festivals and takes home some awards. That's... not very good odds. Plus, you end up coming out of that film school strapped with debt, for most kids, and with little practical experience to get you hired anywhere even for below-the-line jobs.

I think my biggest concern is if you go to a film school and pay $70,000 for a year, i.e. your cost of living (meekly) plus your tuition, you darn well should have a reasonable expectation to get employment above the level that anyone else would be able to get if they haven't gone to film school. Yet the school even tells you in the first few weeks that isn't the case. You will be starting at the same level as anyone else, even those who didn't attend film school. Your only hope is that what you learned in film school will propel you up the ranks faster. Imagine if they told incoming med school students, "Well, hehe, anyone can be a doctor. You guys are going to bust your butts and spend a LOT of money, and yeah, sure, anyone can just walk in off the streets and get an entry level job at a hospital or clinic, but you guys will probably move up faster because of what you learn here." Uhh, sorry, that's not very good incentive. If that's the only promise you can get out of a school that saps that much money from you, no thanks! It's not unreasonable if you're going to attend a school to expect that right out of that school, if you do well, you will START at a higher level than if you hadn't gone there. If no film school can guarantee that, then no film school is really worth attending, in my mind, unless you're very wealthy, don't mind being patient (I had plenty of money, I have no patience when it comes to learning, I prefer to learn at my pace and progress quickly, not be held back by someone else's idea of what I should be learning and when), or just can't motivate yourself enough to learn on your own so you really need that structured environment to learn. That's fine, if that's you. That wasn't me.

To be fair, I think that the best film schools to some extent can guarantee that if you do a great job there, you will start out doing better than people who didn't attend film school and just jumped in. At least, the people I know who graduated recently from a 3-year MFA program have gotten more opportunities than people I know who didn't attend film school or attended a lousy film school (LAFS, haha).

My main problem is I'm very particular about education, always have been, and I've felt that every educational institute I've attended has been lacking in critical ways. I had a 3.97 in college, got my first B the last term (screenwriting, the guy didn't like my script, can't blame him, I didn't either, but he made me write it that way to be "more commercial" after he rejected my more artistic, indie script that would have been low budget with a niche audience, whatever), so I'm not saying that from the perspective of a slacker, but I just have high standards for what I'd like to see. As of now, there are no film schools that represent what I think a film school should be. Or at least what I was looking for in one. I wanted something that was 1-2 years, not 3, that didn't focus much if any on theory because I come from a background in film criticism / film history, and took about 30 credits of that stuff in college anyway, so I really didn't want to spend a whole year going over stuff I spent my life learning before. That being said, I think theory and criticism is essential to becoming a true filmmaker, I couldn't stress that more, but I believe that you should have more options in graduate education. If I want to take 2 years just focusing on production, I should be able to do so. I also don't want a summer break, a winter break, etc. That's a waste of everyone's time. I wanted something that was more like a job for 1-2 years, which was like Los Angeles Film School except without the crapiness. Ultimately I guess what I want out of a film school would probably not exist, and I realized that because I'm too much of a leader to sit in a classroom and have people tell me what to do, have their opinions forced on me. I don't want to hear my teacher's opinion on how he didn't like the Star Wars prequels. I'm sorry, I'm paying money, I loved the movies, I didn't pay to hear his opinions. Shut up and teach. And I don't want to watch a film about how great Kodak is and how 35mm still blows away digital, a film MADE BY Kodak. That's called propaganda. So ultimately I found film school unfulfilling, full of wannabe filmmakers without the basic knowledge any movie buff should have before embarking on such a journey, people who hadn't even seen Pulp Fiction, or thought "old movies" meant stuff from the '80s.

Also the lies people tell you to extract money started annoying me. The way to the top isn't by gripping, or being a gaffer, or anything else like that. Nobody has ever made it to director by doing ANY of that crap. Ever. You can check the entire history of great directors and you won't find one of them! It's a nice myth to keep below-the-line people chugging away, but it's completely devoid of any basis in fact. The fact is directors are made by directing, and most of them come from backgrounds at least in something more artistic than being a grip or a PA, more like art department or special effects, and a lot of them honestly picked up a camera and started shooting / directing. So that lack of intellectual honesty I found appalling and insincere. At least tell the poor kids before they pour their savings and time into this career path that you're not going to be gripping on a set and have the producer take your reel (bad etiquette anyway for you to pass on a reel on a pro shoot as a grip), then magically say, "My god, this grip is a great director, boy let's hire him to direct the next project!" If you can see that happening, I'm sorry for you, you're kidding yourself. At least you have to be honest and realize that if you sell yourself as a grip, everyone will see you as a grip. It will take monumental effort for you to prove them wrong and change that image. That's just the same reason actors get typecast.
 
JonathanLB said:
Also the lies people tell you to extract money started annoying me. The way to the top isn't by gripping, or being a gaffer, or anything else like that. Nobody has ever made it to director by doing ANY of that crap. Ever. You can check the entire history of great directors and you won't find one of them! It's a nice myth to keep below-the-line people chugging away, but it's completely devoid of any basis in fact. The fact is directors are made by directing, and most of them come from backgrounds at least in something more artistic than being a grip or a PA, more like art department or special effects, and a lot of them honestly picked up a camera and started shooting / directing. So that lack of intellectual honesty I found appalling and insincere. At least tell the poor kids before they pour their savings and time into this career path that you're not going to be gripping on a set and have the producer take your reel (bad etiquette anyway for you to pass on a reel on a pro shoot as a grip), then magically say, "My god, this grip is a great director, boy let's hire him to direct the next project!" If you can see that happening, I'm sorry for you, you're kidding yourself. At least you have to be honest and realize that if you sell yourself as a grip, everyone will see you as a grip. It will take monumental effort for you to prove them wrong and change that image. That's just the same reason actors get typecast.
Click to expand...

That's true too. I forgot something else to say. This is very interesting. Alot of directors today that are successful, believe it or not; they have never went to film school, drop out of film school or could not get it. And here they are directing blockbuster hits. Now thats something you have to sit back and think, "wow, thats pretty cool".

As for the film school, I was just saying, try to get some knowledge in some sort of way. It doesn't have to be film school. If you're hungry for this industry, you'll find the knowledge somewhere.

Cheers.
 
I had posted Previously that I've been looking at film schools. Any way i see it, a degree is a degree. If film making and directing don't work out, if i just finish a 4 year BFA at a school then i at least have a degree to fall back on. Yeah, its pretty specific, but many jobs are just looking to see that you took the time to get an education, they just want the piece of paper.

If i take the later route, and do it myself, I'm really pretty boned if it doesn't work out and I've spent 5 years of my life trying to make something of myself. For sure it can be done, I'm just not the guy to do it.

In regards to price, the film schools I'm looking at are really pretty cheap, 5000 a year. They are all around Universities, not strictly film, and they are not bottom level at all. You don't have to pay top dollar to get a great education. And thats before scholarships I might get and possible financial aid.
 
A state school won't give you any sort of degree that will help you get a well paying job most of the time unless you DO go into something specific, i.e. Oregon State University for Engineering, its one specialty, etc. If you get a run-of-the-mill degree from most universities the money you pay is NOT worth the increase in hourly wage you can expect. Most people with a non-specific, non-technical degree are going to be lucky to find $12/hr jobs out of college, which is so pathetic it's not even worth bothering anymore. It used to be that college would guarantee you a good job and a good career. Now, everyone goes to college, so it guarantees nothing.

I personally think it would be smart to go to a four-year university to get a degree that could be valuable and could make you money, then on the side pursue film. That's just me, I mean, I didn't go that route, but in retrospect it might have been a good use of my time.

I think what makes the film industry THE toughest industry in the world, without exception, is the lack of a clear path to the top. It may be extremely hard to get accepted to a top law school, then to perform well enough to graduate at the top of your class, which will then get you offers at top New York law firms, where you will climb your way up, with hard work and determination, to becoming a partner one day perhaps or launching your own firm. BUT that is a pretty clear path to success. It doesn't matter how hard it is, at least it's clearly laid out. If you do this, and this, and this, YOU WILL MAKE IT! In film there is no such guarantee. There's no, "Well, if you get accepted to USC, and you work really hard, and you make what you think is a really good short film, then you will be taken into the wings at Universal and before long you will be directing major blockbusters." Haha, it just doesn't work that way. You can get to the top by any number of means, some ridiculous, some more practical, some a mix of both. You can get a big break through being a music video director, making a short, being a successful commercial director, writing a winning screenplay, you name it.

That is one reason I love to meet other filmmakers and I love filmmakers in general, because they are never mediocre people -- they are the courageous and the bold, the people who dare to follow their dreams in spite of daunting odds against them. That makes them already winners in my mind.
 
I couldn't Disagree more about state schools. State Schools In New York are really ligit. Yo can do a lot with a most of the bachelors degrees you receive there, and for the money, unless you have an uncle named Donald Trump who will give you a high paying job, you have a huge advantage over others who have no college degree.

But yes, becoming a filmmaker is crazy, and yes I'm ready to be daring, and make no money. I'm not in it to be rich, but that would always be nice.

I'm from Clarence. Not originally, but I've been living here for 7 years.
 
State schools in California and New York are the exceptions, they are often very good, especially in California though. There are some absolute CRAP state schools in New York, too. For instance, SUNY Buffalo, rated the worst college in the nation, most depressed students, worst food, dorms like dungeons, etc. It ranked #1 on almost every bad category the Princeton Review compiles yearly. I know because I went to LMU here in Los Angeles for a semester and it ranked #1 Most Depressed Students the year I was there or maybe it was the year before, I can't remember, but I just laughed. It's always up there in the top ten.

I wasn't saying that a state school in general can't get you a high paying job, either, because that's not true. It's just major-dependent. If you major in English at most state schools, you will not make ANY money. I still don't understand the way some people think, I mean if my choices were 4-year degree and start at $30,000 a year, about average for a psychology / English / philosophy major (liberal arts, basically), or work for the police and make at least $50,000 a year, that's a no brainer. Any job you could get with those other degrees will be boring anyway, at least working for the police would have its moments of excitement. Heck you can make $70,000 to $100,000 a year working for the LAPD, with overtime and benefits included. No use getting a four-year degree that can't make any money.

If you were an English major at Stanford or Harvard, though, you would probably make quite a bit more coming out of there just because you graduated from a prestigious school.

But if you go to a state school and get a degree like engineering, for instance, that will start you out making some nice money.

The other pretty much useless major now days is business. Some of the stupidest people get business majors. I don't think you can learn business from books, though, that's just me. I've run businesses and learned a lot more than most of the business majors I went to school with in college, some of whom were friends. My dad never took a business class in his life and he did pretty well for himself, to say the least.
 
Last edited:
Agreed, most at least. Some people prefer not to take a job with the police. I think sometimes people figure beyond starting salary. I don't think there are many situations where i would recommend someone getting a degree. Being educated is never a bad idea, epically in a growing world of idiots.

I'm going to go the school route, but in the mean time try and learn as much as I can. The school told me almost all students get internships in LA or NYC. They may be only internships but any contact is good. Its also mentored by HBO and VH1 executives. And we build a portfolio through the four years, leaving us with a website and a nice body of works, as long as i can make a nice body that is. Hopefully it works out, it cant hurt, and I don't think my parents would in any way let me leave the house without it being to go live at school. Kind of an issue of standards in my household.

Oh, and my high school employs teachers from Harvard as well as very low stature state schools. Its not that it cant happen, you just have to make it happen.
 
My parents were much like that, too. I had to go to college, or there would be financial consequences that wouldn't make it worth not going to college for me, to put it lightly, haha. I considered dropping out once, when I was running an online business that had gotten up to about $2,500 profit per month, because I was thinking it would grow to $5,000/month and I could do a lot from there. But the market took a horrible downturn and that didn't work out, haha.

I got some out of college. But no more than I would doing anything else for 3-4 years of my life. I mean most of what I learned in that time was still on my own, not as part of college classes. Even when I took film classes, because they weren't challenging enough, I made them so. It was basically like, oh ok we're going to see 2 Soviet formalist films? Ok, I'll go rent 10 and review them all for my Website, then read as many essays as I can on Soviet formalist. Oh we have to watch 2 German expressionist films? Well let me find a list of all of the major German expressionist films and watch them. So it's like, yeah, I could credit college for helping my film studies but let's be honest 80% of my studies took place outside of the scope of these classes, they were just a decent springboard. You should have seen my final exam essays, they were hilarious. Every other kid was struggling to remember what the teacher said about how Strike or The Battleship Potemkin fit into world cinema or something, while I'm writing comparisons of these films to other Soviet formalist works and basically citing sources that weren't even part of the class, haha, it was great. Needless to say those were pretty easy A's for me.
 
Every year The Princeton Review publishes a list, compiled entirely by student voting, on a number of categories, and some of them are really funny. Obviously some are very practical and normal, like teacher availability, quality of classes, etc. Others are hilarious like "Dorms like Dungeons" and "Dorms like Palaces," "Is this food?" is another category, and if a school ranks #1 for "Is this food?" that's, umm, bad. Then the most depressed students one is always funny.

Actually the summer before I attended LMU for the first and last semester, I read the final newspaper out of curiosity to get a flavor for the campus life and school and whatnot. There were 3 editorials in the paper, 2 of them focused on how crappy and miserable the school was. One was from a freshman girl who was the more diplomatic of the two. It was like one of those, "It's not you, it's me" kind of articles, where she was trying to say it's not that the school completely sucks in every respect, it's just that I don't really want to be here and so I'm moving back to Washington to go to school closer to friends and family, because it's not that there's no support whatsoever and that almost everyone at LMU is a total tool / spoiled brat / rude, arrogant moron, it's just that I have more friends in that area. Everything she said was basically diplomatic, but you could read that stuff between the lines so easily, like she had carefully worded this piece not to offend anyone too badly. Girls are good at that kind of thing.

The other one was from a senior guy, and guys are not so good at that kind of thing. I definitely am not. I don't sugar coat anything, it's not one of my finer points, if I think something sucks I just come out and say so, haha. He wrote about how LMU was a miserable environment, he couldn't believe he had endured three years there, and couldn't believe it was finally almost over, and how every year he swore it would be his last, but somehow there he was, almost out of the miserable hellhole. It was hilarious, he just went off on what a horrible place to be LMU was. So I read those two articles before I even started my freshman year, way too late though to switch schools, and I had also read that LMU ranked 1st for most depressed students, or maybe it was like 3rd that year, 1st the next, but it was right up there. So for me, it created a little bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy because I figured the school would completely suck and just looked for more reasons why it sucked. So, I could have had a better attitude, but I was also only 18 and not really that mature yet. I did end up feeling it sucked, though, and so did almost everyone else I talked to, but it depended. Some people loved the school and stayed, some people I talked to hated it and thought it was a very cold environment, despite the warm, inviting Southern California sun, haha.

LMU somehow reminds me of that creepy goddess from a season of Angel, can't remember if that was season 3 or 4, but she's supposed to be all beautiful on the outside and everything seems great about her, but beneath the surface she's a hideous, horrible monster. Well, when you look at the facts about LMU, you don't understand how it could be a bad school. I mean, it's in beautiful sunny Southern California, it has like 58% girls, and the girls are often gorgeous, and the campus is beautiful, so what gives? But you start to realize beneath the porcelain veneer is a very cold environment, with a lot of pretentious people. It bothered me that when I walked the dorm parking lots, I saw nothing but Mercedes, Lexus, BMW, over and over again, oh and a few Jags, etc. I thought the first week, "Hmm, must be faculty parking... I guess?" I started to realize, no, that's not the faculty parking, they can't afford those cars, only rich spoiled private college children can. Now don't get me wrong I probably came from more money than any of those people, haha, but my parents weren't about to buy me some ridiculously expensive car as a birthday present because they knew better than to spoil a kid like that. If you start off life with a really nice Mercedes, where do you go from there? You didn't even earn it, and now you're driving around a nicer car than most people work hard to afford. It's kind of cheesy, really. But I wouldn't have cared if their attitudes weren't so bad. I've never met such a bunch of cold people, despite being a religious school I felt the people were mostly fake and the girls especially were the most self-absorbed, ahem, witchy chicks around, despite their looks. I was not used to that coming from Oregon.

As for what's wrong with SUNY Buffalo, sounds like just about everything to me. It was the only school that seemed to beat LMU out on a few of the bad lists, haha. One year it was seriously, I'm not joking, like #1 most depressed students, #3 is this food?, #1 dorms like dungeons, #5 professors get low marks, etc. It was basically in the top 5 for every single awful category and I just thought good god what kind of a retard would go to this school with THIS bad of rankings? It's one thing to have a few negatives but there was absolutely nothing good about that school, and that's from the students, not just 3-4 random people bad-mouthing it. Those studies are done from numerous students at each school, it's pretty comprehensive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top