I'm losing my crew

Movie_Dude_3 said:
As much as I would absolutely love to work with professionals, I'm still really young and have to have a job myself, as well as finish up college. But, instead of doing nothing, I'm going through the 'film student crap' and learning what I can now.
Click to expand...

Since when did they set a age cap for being a professional film maker. I honestly seen a really good youngster on here which I think he's under the age of 17 and he's producing what you would call " professional work "

Don't let your age put you down, keep at it. Age doesn't make the film maker. If your good then it'll show young or old --- besides their are a lot of older film makers that are horrid.


Keep at it and you'll get better, but work with crappy film makers and sadly you'll never get any better. Work with better film makers you'll excel much faster.
 
Okay, rather than talk in generalities, I'm just going to comment on your specific problems that you mentioned in your first post.

1) The guy that can get called away at a moment's notice? He's gone. Simple as that. Having someone who can completely derail a day's shoot with no warning playing a major role is just insane. If it's too far into the shoot to replace him, take this as a valuable lesson. And yes, having to replace him would be unpleasant, but filmmaking at this scale is never going to be all sunshine and puppies, and you'll have to make the occassional hard decision.

2) Why is the guy freaking out about you shooting in his neighbourhood? What are you doing there? Or is he simply embarrassed that he's doing something his friends/neighbours will think is "not cool"?

If you're doing something you shouldn't be, you might need to reassess how far you can push things as a guerilla filmmaker these days. Smith and Rodriguez got away with all kinds of cr@p when they were starting out, but restrictions have tightened a lot since then, and you have to be careful about how you go about things. If iyou're shotting where you don't have permission to, as someone else has already said, try asking, you'll be surprised at how often you get a yes.

3) You're sending out schedules (or what sounds more like call sheets) two days before each shoot. That's good. But how far in advance have you created your schedule. On my micro-budget feature I spent a couple of weeks nailing down a schedule, sending emails and phone calls back and forth to work out people's availablility. Before we started shooting, we knew what we were shooting and when for the next three months. A few curves were still thrown at us (eg: a location falling through at the last minute), but for the cast and crew there were few excuses.

It sounds very much like there's no real dedication from anyone (except you, of course), which is a bit concerning if the others involved are planning on working in film production in the future. Much has been said here about working with professionals, but professionalism is as much an attitude as anything else. On my films I work with a mix of pro and beginner crew, usually all unpaid. But the one thing they have in common is that they take what they're doing seriously.

As far as professional cast is concerned, did you even try auditioning, or just hand out roles to friends. If the latter, your project was pretty much doomed to failure from the start. There's likely to be some sort of community theatre organisation in your town, get in touch with them for some leads on actors. As with crew, you want people who are dedicated to what they're doing. I've been lucky enough to get actors from the local theatre scene through auditions who have since gone on to paid, professional work. All I had to do was feed 'em :-)

So, with where you are right now, your first order of business is to halt production, call a meeting of all involved and read them the riot act. Make it clear that these issues are endangering the production, and that the purpose of the meeting is to make some hard decisions about where you go from there.

It's possible the whole thing might fall apart, it's also possible people will pull their fingers out and get more serious. It's probable that you'll lose a few people, but that'll be for the best, because those left will be the ones who are serious about knuckling down and getting it done.

Filmmaking isn't a lark, it's really hard work. Anyone who's in it just so they can be cool, isn't going to last long or give you what you need. You have to weed these people out and get rid of them, or at least reduce their responsibilities.

Yes, it's going to be hard to do that with a bunch of friends working on the film. That's one reason why you work with pros rather than friends.

I hope it all works out for you. As several people have said, keep at it and make sure you learn something from each film you make.

Cheers
 
Ozhair said:
Okay, rather than talk in generalities, I'm just going to comment on your specific problems that you mentioned in your first post.

1) The guy that can get called away at a moment's notice? He's gone. Simple as that. Having someone who can completely derail a day's shoot with no warning playing a major role is just insane. If it's too far into the shoot to replace him, take this as a valuable lesson. And yes, having to replace him would be unpleasant, but filmmaking at this scale is never going to be all sunshine and puppies, and you'll have to make the occassional hard decision.

2) Why is the guy freaking out about you shooting in his neighbourhood? What are you doing there? Or is he simply embarrassed that he's doing something his friends/neighbours will think is "not cool"?

If you're doing something you shouldn't be, you might need to reassess how far you can push things as a guerilla filmmaker these days. Smith and Rodriguez got away with all kinds of cr@p when they were starting out, but restrictions have tightened a lot since then, and you have to be careful about how you go about things. If iyou're shotting where you don't have permission to, as someone else has already said, try asking, you'll be surprised at how often you get a yes.

3) You're sending out schedules (or what sounds more like call sheets) two days before each shoot. That's good. But how far in advance have you created your schedule. On my micro-budget feature I spent a couple of weeks nailing down a schedule, sending emails and phone calls back and forth to work out people's availablility. Before we started shooting, we knew what we were shooting and when for the next three months. A few curves were still thrown at us (eg: a location falling through at the last minute), but for the cast and crew there were few excuses.

It sounds very much like there's no real dedication from anyone (except you, of course), which is a bit concerning if the others involved are planning on working in film production in the future. Much has been said here about working with professionals, but professionalism is as much an attitude as anything else. On my films I work with a mix of pro and beginner crew, usually all unpaid. But the one thing they have in common is that they take what they're doing seriously.

As far as professional cast is concerned, did you even try auditioning, or just hand out roles to friends. If the latter, your project was pretty much doomed to failure from the start. There's likely to be some sort of community theatre organisation in your town, get in touch with them for some leads on actors. As with crew, you want people who are dedicated to what they're doing. I've been lucky enough to get actors from the local theatre scene through auditions who have since gone on to paid, professional work. All I had to do was feed 'em :-)

So, with where you are right now, your first order of business is to halt production, call a meeting of all involved and read them the riot act. Make it clear that these issues are endangering the production, and that the purpose of the meeting is to make some hard decisions about where you go from there.

It's possible the whole thing might fall apart, it's also possible people will pull their fingers out and get more serious. It's probable that you'll lose a few people, but that'll be for the best, because those left will be the ones who are serious about knuckling down and getting it done.

Filmmaking isn't a lark, it's really hard work. Anyone who's in it just so they can be cool, isn't going to last long or give you what you need. You have to weed these people out and get rid of them, or at least reduce their responsibilities.

Yes, it's going to be hard to do that with a bunch of friends working on the film. That's one reason why you work with pros rather than friends.

I hope it all works out for you. As several people have said, keep at it and make sure you learn something from each film you make.

Cheers
Click to expand...

Great advice, thanks a lot. I'll be saving this post for a long while, to look back at and follow.

I just wanted to ask - how do you usually get in touch with professionals? And how do you explain to them that it doesn't pay? Are they usually ok with that sort of thing?
 
Unfortunately, my method of getting pros to work on my films won't be much help to you. I've been working in the television industry here for about twenty years, so I know plenty of people I can call up and ask if they'd be interested in helping out. In return, I also help out on other people's films. The benefit of experience and having a track record, which doesn't really help you as you're just starting out.

Even then, I still have to pay occassionally. For example, the guy I know who has a very sweet SI-2K rig that I'm hoping to use in an upcoming film. There's no way in hell I'm getting that as a freebie, but I will get a better than usual rate ;-)

I can't really comment on how to go about finding pro help in your area, since I don't know what resources are available there. That's where you need to start doing some research of your own, find out who's doing films, or even corporate type work in your area. As a bunch of 19-20 year olds just starting out, it might be hard to comnvince these people to give full committment to your project at first, but if the project sounds interesting, and you can present yourself as being serious about what you're doing, they may offer to help out for a day or so.

Once you make the initial contacts, if these guys have a good experience on your set they'll be more willing to help out in future, and word will spread and you'll garner contacts with a wider range of pros. But be warned, if they come away from your set thinking you're a bunch of idiots, then it can have an equally detrimental affect.

Notice that I'm using a lot of "mays" and "mights". None of this is guaranteed to get more experienced people helping you out, but you do need to start trying to find people beyond your immediate circle of friends. It's also not a "quick-fix" solution to your problems on this particular film. Contacts like these are going to take time to nurture and grow.

But you're only 19. There's plenty of time to gain the experience and contacts, no matter how impatient you feel at the moment. The important thing is to keep making films, keep learning, and don't give up. :-)

Cheers
 
Ozhair said:
Unfortunately, my method of getting pros to work on my films won't be much help to you. I've been working in the television industry here for about twenty years, so I know plenty of people I can call up and ask if they'd be interested in helping out. In return, I also help out on other people's films. The benefit of experience and having a track record, which doesn't really help you as you're just starting out.

Even then, I still have to pay occassionally. For example, the guy I know who has a very sweet SI-2K rig that I'm hoping to use in an upcoming film. There's no way in hell I'm getting that as a freebie, but I will get a better than usual rate ;-)

I can't really comment on how to go about finding pro help in your area, since I don't know what resources are available there. That's where you need to start doing some research of your own, find out who's doing films, or even corporate type work in your area. As a bunch of 19-20 year olds just starting out, it might be hard to comnvince these people to give full committment to your project at first, but if the project sounds interesting, and you can present yourself as being serious about what you're doing, they may offer to help out for a day or so.

Once you make the initial contacts, if these guys have a good experience on your set they'll be more willing to help out in future, and word will spread and you'll garner contacts with a wider range of pros. But be warned, if they come away from your set thinking you're a bunch of idiots, then it can have an equally detrimental affect.

Notice that I'm using a lot of "mays" and "mights". None of this is guaranteed to get more experienced people helping you out, but you do need to start trying to find people beyond your immediate circle of friends. It's also not a "quick-fix" solution to your problems on this particular film. Contacts like these are going to take time to nurture and grow.

But you're only 19. There's plenty of time to gain the experience and contacts, no matter how impatient you feel at the moment. The important thing is to keep making films, keep learning, and don't give up. :-)

Cheers
Click to expand...

20 years old*, haha, but not too much of a difference, I don't think. Again, I'm really thankful for your advice, it's been really inspiring!

I live in Florida and I have the film handbook, so I might take a look through there. I think I might volunteer on other sets, get to know people, and make some friends through there. But like you said, I'll do that over time, while finishing up school, working, etc.

Thanks so much!
 
Movie_Dude_3 said:
I just wanted to ask - how do you usually get in touch with professionals? And how do you explain to them that it doesn't pay? Are they usually ok with that sort of thing?
Click to expand...

This is where working on other movies can be really helpful. I've met a lot of crew this way directly, but a lot of times knowing even a few people will give you names and references for a lot of pros other people have met over the years.

For example there was a director I worked with once and I asked him if he knew any ACs he'd recommend since I needed two for a short film. He recommended me his normal 1st and 2nd ACs, who were busy on my dates but they also put me in contact with the ACs that we ended up using and did a fantastic job.
 
It's not terribly important, but I'd like to specify that everyone works different was my point, whether you think that's what I meant or not.

Look at Robert Rodriguez, indeed. The only problem is his content was incredibly shallow. Kevin Smith is another example. He made a film with people who weren't "pros" (but his content was also very shallow). And look at Spielberg- he spent a ton of money, but his movies are also shallow. Money has nothing to do with these directors being good, since none of them really are anyway.

But look at Tarnation, Hannah Takes the Stairs, Shadows, Four-Eyed Monsters, Meshes of an Afternoon, etc. Digital technology, 16mm film, amateur actors.

Look, I won't argue that having an amateur or film-student crew isn't much much tougher. But it can be done. Hell, you can make a film totally by yourself nowadays and it can still be amazing, you just need to realize your limitations.

But you don't need professional actors. In fact I tend to avoid students in my drama department. And Cassavetes and Bresson both used amateurs to great success. Chris Marker made a film out of pictures because he couldn't afford a camera. There are people out there who will make movies in ways you and I could never dream and they will have no budget. And they will be beautiful.

Therefore, I just disagree that professionals are the perfect fit for every situation. It really depends on what you're making and what your resources are. If that's how you work, that's cool. I love Ingmar Bergman and he called himself a "super-professional". I also love Cassavetes and he said directors shouldn't have "too much discipline".

In the original poster's dilemma, he shouldn't be discouraged, he should re-evalute who he's working with and find more passionate people who actually want to make a movie, and not simply get paid to do it.
 
So Kevin Smith, Robert Rodriguez, and Steven Spielberg are not good directors?? lol, I guess you must have a pretty unusual definition of good directing.

Spielberg has made a lot of deep, very engaging films, and is arguably the greatest director of all time. In fact it's fairly hard to argue against that. I would say the only reason I respect him a bit less as a filmmaker than many others is because he doesn't come up with his own material, he isn't a writer, he seems just to use pre-existing material and then perfect it, but there is an art and a skill to that as well. He is a great director! I just have a bias towards other writer-directors because I don't personally understand why you'd want to direct anything you didn't write yourself.
 
jpastuch said:
Look at Robert Rodriguez, indeed. The only problem is his content was incredibly shallow. Kevin Smith is another example. He made a film with people who weren't "pros" (but his content was also very shallow). And look at Spielberg- he spent a ton of money, but his movies are also shallow. Money has nothing to do with these directors being good, since none of them really are anyway.
Click to expand...

The claim that Robert Rodriguez, Kevin Smith, and Steven Spielberg aren't good directors is quite a ridiculous claim unless you're Akira Kurosawa, Stanley Kubrick, or Orson Welles. I can understand how someone might consider Smith and Rodriguez mediocre directors (I personally don't think this at all) but Spielberg? That's beyond me. Did you see Saving Private Ryan? Jurassic Park? Jaws? Not only are these huge box office successes, but they're also great achievements in film. Saving Private Ryan was an incredible achievement in cinematography (and acting, jeez, what a performance from Tom Hanks) and Jurassic Park utilized was one of the first films to really push the envelope for CGI utilization (same with Terminator 2). And Jaws was so scary people had to pick their feet up off the ground in the theater - and he made it look real to the audience with a mechanical shark named Bruce who sank all the time.

I simply can't understand what evidence you can give to backup the claim that Smith, Spielberg, and Rodriguez are bad directors.

JonathanLB said:
Spielberg has made a lot of deep, very engaging films, and is arguably the greatest director of all time. In fact it's fairly hard to argue against that. I would say the only reason I respect him a bit less as a filmmaker than many others is because he doesn't come up with his own material, he isn't a writer, he seems just to use pre-existing material and then perfect it, but there is an art and a skill to that as well. He is a great director! I just have a bias towards other writer-directors because I don't personally understand why you'd want to direct anything you didn't write yourself.
Click to expand...

This crosses the line though. Steven Spielberg is a great director, no doubt. But he is NOT the greatest director of all time - not even close. There is absolutely no way Spielberg can be named in the same breath as Alfred Hitchcock, Orson Welles, Stanley Kubrick or Akira Kurosawa. Now THAT is not arguable.
 
JonathanLB said:
So Kevin Smith, Robert Rodriguez, and Steven Spielberg are not good directors?? lol, I guess you must have a pretty unusual definition of good directing.

Spielberg has made a lot of deep, very engaging films, and is arguably the greatest director of all time. In fact it's fairly hard to argue against that. I would say the only reason I respect him a bit less as a filmmaker than many others is because he doesn't come up with his own material, he isn't a writer, he seems just to use pre-existing material and then perfect it, but there is an art and a skill to that as well. He is a great director! I just have a bias towards other writer-directors because I don't personally understand why you'd want to direct anything you didn't write yourself.
Click to expand...

It's actually astoundingly easy to argue against him even being a good director, much less "greatest of all time". I think even his fans would call that overblown praise. But I won't disrupt another thread with that, if you want to hear my reasons PM me. I don't know how often I'll be on here, it's sort of scattershot, but I'll do my best to get back to you if you so desire to hear my thoughts. If not, no harm done and we'll just disagree.

Let me just point out another point that DOES have to do with how to make films though- something this thread is about.

Popularity does not make something good. I'm not saying you said this, but just because Steven Spielberg makes a lot of money or his films are popular or he wins Oscars does not mean he's the "greatest ever", and trying to make a case for an objective "greatest ever" in any form of art is usually pointless. Just because Kevin Smith or Robert Rodriguez have fans doesn't make them deep artists.

In the same way, just because someone uses a three-act structure doesn't mean you HAVE TO. Just because someone does something in way x y or z doesn't mean you should too...especially in the creative sense, you should avoid copying people. Professionals are good, but there are wrong professionals too. People who don't keep an open mind and can't think of ways to overcome limitations are useless, no matter how well they're taught. That isn't a big rant against learning. But you should learn from other people than go beyond that. That's what learning is about. If a professional does that, all the better. But too often students learn "this is the way it's done" and never go beyond that. They fear making a "mistake". Maybe that's the point I've been trying to make all along? I'm tired so don't hold me to it.


EDIT: @FINNEGAN: I saw Jurassic Park. What exactly was the deep insight Spielberg gave us in that one? LOOK OUT FOR THE RAPTORS! Saving Private Ryan simplified war and turned it into another thrill ride. I don't need to be Kurosawa to criticize Spielberg, especially just because he's rich. What a culture we live in where we feel shame and stupidity for criticizing someone's work just because they won some awards and have a bunch of money. I'm not just calling him a "poo-poo" head on the internet- I have serious disagreements with many of his films and techniques and the giant following he has. If you love him, that's great, I'm sure I won't "convince" you otherwise and don't particularly want to.
 
Last edited:
Finnegan said:
The claim that Robert Rodriguez, Kevin Smith, and Steven Spielberg aren't good directors is quite a ridiculous claim unless you're Akira Kurosawa, Stanley Kubrick, or Orson Welles. I can understand how someone might consider Smith and Rodriguez mediocre directors (I personally don't think this at all) but Spielberg? That's beyond me. Did you see Saving Private Ryan? Jurassic Park? Jaws? Not only are these huge box office successes, but they're also great achievements in film. Saving Private Ryan was an incredible achievement in cinematography (and acting, jeez, what a performance from Tom Hanks) and Jurassic Park utilized was one of the first films to really push the envelope for CGI utilization (same with Terminator 2). And Jaws was so scary people had to pick their feet up off the ground in the theater - and he made it look real to the audience with a mechanical shark named Bruce who sank all the time.

I simply can't understand what evidence you can give to backup the claim that Smith, Spielberg, and Rodriguez are bad directors.



This crosses the line though. Steven Spielberg is a great director, no doubt. But he is NOT the greatest director of all time - not even close. There is absolutely no way Spielberg can be named in the same breath as Alfred Hitchcock, Orson Welles, Stanley Kubrick or Akira Kurosawa. Now THAT is not arguable.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? How many great films did Orson Welles make? I only really care for A Touch of Evil and Citizen Kane, and the guy didn't really have a very successful career. A few great works? Absolutely. Better than Spielberg's career? Not a chance. And since I actually have studied film history extensively, don't even start with that ;) I come from a background in film criticism as a professional writer.

I love Hitchcock, and agree that he should be considered right up there, but he was also a popular director like Spielberg and I think Spielberg is rapidly becoming (like Tiger Woods to Jack Nicklaus) a better argument for greatest director. The guy has made amazing films from the 1970s through present, everything from Jaws, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, E.T., and Raiders to Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, even underrated stuff like Amistad, to A.I. (extremely underrated), Catch Me If You Can, Minority Report, etc. The guy has repeatedly shown himself to be a master not only of entertaining blockbusters, i.e. crowd pleasers, but also gripping, philosophically or dramatically significant work like Schindler's List, Minority Report, and Munich, etc. To say that he doesn't fall into the same category as them is rubbish.

I also like some of Kubrick's work, but again, how much? I love 2001, I love A Clockwork Orange... but not a lot besides that.
 
Back on topic, if your shooting a feature you should be using semi pro actors minimum. Post an add on Mandy.com and see what happens, you will get 20+ replies a day to your ads. People will do a lot of stuff for credit and to help better their future.
 
I'll just add that you really should listen to all the advice in this thread, especially anything that is repeated. So I'll add that you do get what you pay for.

But also if you are on a shoot, don't expect things to go smoothly. It's the nature of filmmaking, things will go wrong, many things in fact. As you move forward you'll get more experience and can make adjustments to avoid the same mistakes from occuring again.

However as you move up, you're just going to be hit with a new set of problems and mishaps. You really have to be strong headed, patient, and forgiving if you want to be a filmmaker. It really is a miracle that anything gets completed at the low/no budget level with all the obstacles that exist.
 
Nodding My Head

Nodding My Head

JonathanLB said:
Are you kidding me? How many great films did Orson Welles make? I only really care for A Touch of Evil and Citizen Kane, and the guy didn't really have a very successful career. A few great works? Absolutely. Better than Spielberg's career? Not a chance. And since I actually have studied film history extensively, don't even start with that ;) I come from a background in film criticism as a professional writer.

I love Hitchcock, and agree that he should be considered right up there, but he was also a popular director like Spielberg and I think Spielberg is rapidly becoming (like Tiger Woods to Jack Nicklaus) a better argument for greatest director. The guy has made amazing films from the 1970s through present, everything from Jaws, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, E.T., and Raiders to Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, even underrated stuff like Amistad, to A.I. (extremely underrated), Catch Me If You Can, Minority Report, etc. The guy has repeatedly shown himself to be a master not only of entertaining blockbusters, i.e. crowd pleasers, but also gripping, philosophically or dramatically significant work like Schindler's List, Minority Report, and Munich, etc. To say that he doesn't fall into the same category as them is rubbish.

I also like some of Kubrick's work, but again, how much? I love 2001, I love A Clockwork Orange... but not a lot besides that.
Click to expand...

I'll have to agree with Jonathan on this one. He has a point here. Cheers Jon.

Murray
 
I made two features all with friends and some pros mixed in. For my third feature, I will be working with all pros. Friends suck when making movies unless they're just as obsessed as you are. Go with the pros. Seriously. And don't hire guys who get called to their other job in the middle of a filming day. Keep pushing forward though. You can do it.
 
Yeah...

I'd never shoot a project with anyone who isn't a pro. Friends who are professionals, sure, but that's about it. I mean I can see giving someone a chance as a PA on a feature maybe, but that's as far as it should go because feature filmmaking should be a very serious endeavor. It shouldn't just be thrown together.

I think that's the difference between my opinion of features and a lot of indie filmmakers, which is one reason their work turns out so crappy to be honest. My work may turn out crappy too, for all we know, but the point is you can't shoot a feature on a $10,000 budget with 3 of your buddies and call that a feature. I don't consider a feature to be merely the run time of your project. A feature is something special, it's more than just run time, a feature has a certain degree of professionalism and aura about it that you just don't screw around with.

I think it's kind of a lack of respect for the art form to make a feature without adequate financing and proper planning. If it turns out bad in spite of that, oh well, but to say, "Well we can shoot 20 minutes a day and make this thing for $3,000." Uhh... that's not a feature any more than me filming myself taking a dump for 1.5 hours is a feature, I'm sorry. It IS more than just run time!
 
JonathanLB said:
Yeah...

I'd never shoot a project with anyone who isn't a pro. Friends who are professionals, sure, but that's about it. I mean I can see giving someone a chance as a PA on a feature maybe, but that's as far as it should go because feature filmmaking should be a very serious endeavor. It shouldn't just be thrown together.

I think that's the difference between my opinion of features and a lot of indie filmmakers, which is one reason their work turns out so crappy to be honest. My work may turn out crappy too, for all we know, but the point is you can't shoot a feature on a $10,000 budget with 3 of your buddies and call that a feature. I don't consider a feature to be merely the run time of your project. A feature is something special, it's more than just run time, a feature has a certain degree of professionalism and aura about it that you just don't screw around with.

I think it's kind of a lack of respect for the art form to make a feature without adequate financing and proper planning. If it turns out bad in spite of that, oh well, but to say, "Well we can shoot 20 minutes a day and make this thing for $3,000." Uhh... that's not a feature any more than me filming myself taking a dump for 1.5 hours is a feature, I'm sorry. It IS more than just run time!
Click to expand...



I agree BUT, that would be a hell of a learning experience. Every project is a huge learning experience for me. I am VERY perfectionistic but I know that when I shoot my first feature, I am going to learn so many invaluable lessons. Now for people who plan less, they might learn less (or more actually haha), but anyways, it is still a learning project. Let people go out and experiment. But hopefully they will learn before they produce too much crap (not talking to you OP, just saying in general).
 
Sure

Sure

Sure, if you just want a learning experience, there's no harm really as long as you keep the costs very low. I wouldn't have high expectations for it, though.

I dropped out of an idea with my friend because I just thought he was wasting his time, and this was... below him. He wanted to do weekly projects, like just little skits every week, and put them on YouTube, and I said I'm not interested in attaching my name to that crap. He thought it would be "fun" and that we'd learn or keep our craft fresh, but I disagree. He has done AMAZING short films, with a crew of 60 for one, that have been to some pretty major, A-list festivals. He is above that kind of work, and he isn't doing that anyway, but I told him how I felt and that I wouldn't be interested in continuing.

I only learn by doing bigger and better stuff. I learned from my last short because I hadn't yet done a pro short, so I learned quite a lot that I hadn't already learned from shooting music videos. But with music videos, it's the same thing, if I were to do more for my own reel, first I'd have to feel that it was worth the money (doubtful, I'm happy with my reel, spent enough on it, now i want to get paid! lol), but second I'd have to do something new. I've never worked with green screen for instance, I'd love to do that, so it would be pushing the bounds of my knowledge.

But shooting something with a couple buddies, I won't learn anything. I have been doing pro work now for two years, so I don't want to step back, basically. I want to move ahead and break new ground. But I am SURE I will learn a ton on my first feature, hoping to shoot next year, but I have to make sure the financing part is in order. I want to do it smart, and have it at least give me a chance to make most or all of my money back. I'm less concerned with making a profit, but I don't want to blow $150,000 and get $0 back. If I got $85,000 back, I'd be feeling alright about myself, as long as the film turned out good.
 
JonathanLB said:
He wanted to do weekly projects, like just little skits every week, and put them on YouTube, and I said I'm not interested in attaching my name to that crap. He thought it would be "fun" and that we'd learn or keep our craft fresh, but I disagree. He has done AMAZING short films, with a crew of 60 for one, that have been to some pretty major, A-list festivals. He is above that kind of work, and he isn't doing that anyway, but I told him how I felt and that I wouldn't be interested in continuing.
Click to expand...

I think this attitude stifles creativity and makes you hard to work with. The idea that you're "above" a certain type of work, whether it means small crew, low budget or low tech is a big warning flag in my mind. If David Lynch thought he was "above" doing TV or web projects, we would never have had Twin Peaks, Mulholland Drive or Inland Empire. District 9 got made because Blomkamp was attached to a Halo film that collapsed, and Peter Jackson took interest in an old, low-budget short he had done.

I understand the pressure of climbing the ladder and doing this for a living, believe me. All I'm trying to say is that sometimes it's the small, low budget projects with talent and vision that get your career going. Bigger doesn't mean better, it just means bigger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top