Is directing an acquired skill or a gift you're born with?
- Thread starter iamWZA
- Start date
But that's just your opinion. Doesn't mean it's actually correct.
Like what exactly?
jghenderson
Well-known member
And that's just your opinion...
A lot of things. Very high level math, physics, chemistry, neuro-biology, software programming, etc. Intelligence is not all based on education, there is definitely a genetic element, as there is with everything. It's like someone who's 5' but really wants to be in the NBA. Well sorry, it's really really unlikely that it's going to happen. They can practice all they want, but they simply don't have what it takes (always exceptions to the rule, Mugsy Bogues was pretty short).
It's not at all like that, unless there are also physical requirements (height, arm length, ect.) to be a director.
gonzo_entertainment
Veteran
Examples of people who worked very hard and became competent at something, but whose work was pedestrian and uninspired no matter how much they tried...
If you don't see that every day of your life then you must not be paying attention.
jghenderson
Well-known member
It's a metaphor. Obviously there are no physical requirements to being a director, but there certainly are mental requirements. To say that everyone has the same mental abilities is simply false.
gonzo_entertainment
Veteran
Look. It comes down to:
A million different times over the course of a film a director has to make a decision. Yes/no, right/wrong, Red/blue, whatever.
Experience and the time tested rules you can absord can lead to make a "good" decision most of the time. However, some people have a special ability. Their answers to those million little decisions just seem to always work out in an amazing way. They can do what experience and every rule in the book tells them not to do and it's amazing. Their instinct, their whatever, just always seems to be spot on. That's talent.
A million different times over the course of a film a director has to make a decision. Yes/no, right/wrong, Red/blue, whatever.
Experience and the time tested rules you can absord can lead to make a "good" decision most of the time. However, some people have a special ability. Their answers to those million little decisions just seem to always work out in an amazing way. They can do what experience and every rule in the book tells them not to do and it's amazing. Their instinct, their whatever, just always seems to be spot on. That's talent.
And yet some of the directors responsible for classics of American cinema haven't done anything worthwhile in decades. How do you explain that? Did their "talent" disappear?
gonzo_entertainment
Veteran
On some level maybe.
Why did virtually all the great scientists and mathematicians do all their best work in their mid twenties and then produce almost nothing for the rest of their lives... Sometimes it just works that way. Maybe they lost the drive, that whatever it is that makes you stay up all night working on something. Maybe they got fat and sassy after their success and didn't care as much anymore. Maybe they slept on the wrong side of the bed, I don't know. The whole "Why is Monet in the Louvre and another guy just as technically competent is selling his stuff for $25 at the flea market" question is more philosophical than purely logical.
maranfilms
Veteran
Here's an example of talent vs non talent. I been playing guitar for 28yrs. When I was around 18 I had been playing for approx. 6yrs. A friend decided he wanted to learn guitar, For what it's worth his dad was a jazz keyboardist. Anyways, within 6 monthes, this kid surpassed my ability without even trying. He naturally had a gift for the instrument. I used to practice scales all day, and would work my butt off. He on the other hand would watch and listen to what I was doing, then do it perfectly his second or third try. If there's such a thing as being a "natural" this was it. Hard work can only get you so far. Natural talent can get you further, and in less time with less effort. It's just the way it is.
jghenderson
Well-known member
First of all, I think the word "talentless" is harsh. Everyone has at least some level of talent, even if it's not much. And I think most directors that are successful would have to have at least some level of talent.
Secondly, it's difficult to know whether someone is all skill or has talent unless you actually see how they work. I would be inclined to say Michael Bay has no talent, but it's possible he just doesn't care about telling a compelling story.
It's complicated. All i'm saying is that not everyone is born with equal talent. I had friends in highschool that would do nothing but go home and play video games every day, and yet they were making all A's and ended up going to Ivy League schools whereas others in my class would probably study 4-5 hours a day and even then couldn't compete. It's not fair, I know. But it's the reality of the situation.
In the end though, I don't think it really matters on a practical level. If you want to be a filmmaker, just go out there and make films. You'll either end up getting paid to do it or you won't. Someone shouldn't necessarily give up just because they feel they aren't talented enough, just as someone shouldn't just assume they will coast with their talent.
Then it would seem to make the whole discussion moot, would it not? We ascribe "talent" to people that may not actually have talent, they may have just worked harder or been luckier than their peers. There are people you may think are "talented", but aren't really, it's just your perception. You may think someone just gets by without having to work hard at it, but are you even really sure that is the case?
gonzo_entertainment
Veteran
An interesting philosophical circle jerk. However, I still don't really see what difference it makes. You have a ceiling (of how good you can be), in everything you do in life and everybody's ceiling is different.
No amount of work will make you as good a basketball player as Michael Jordan. Nothing you do will make you as good a physicist as Einstein. It's also likely nothing you do will make you as good a film maker as Kurosawa. Though I don't know that because nobody will know until you either do or don't achieve it.
No amount of work will make you as good a basketball player as Michael Jordan. Nothing you do will make you as good a physicist as Einstein. It's also likely nothing you do will make you as good a film maker as Kurosawa. Though I don't know that because nobody will know until you either do or don't achieve it.
john threat
Carbonite Member
Some people only have one or two stories to tell.
Ps: the whole world thinks they can direct. You be hard pressed to find the rare set of people who dont think they could direct.
Chris Adler
Veteran
It's hard to credit a director with too much glory when you take into account he's almost always surrounded and handled by people with specialized skills greater than his. The questions the director often has to answer are very pre-processed and the director is merely picking from options that will all work out equally well. A great crew will make a mediocre director look much better than he is. I know this from personal experience. On my first big budget short directing debut I dropped the ball several times, but I had the support around me to keep everything on track and deliver a really good finished product.
jghenderson
Well-known member
That is definitely true, you cannot make a good film without a good crew. However if you look throughout the history of the business, the number one factor that best predicts the quality of a film is the director.
Melvin Harris
Black Flag Member
Kevin Smith is a good example of this. You can see his skill increase over the years. You can see his technique get better, but he isn't a naturally talented director. Clerks to Red State is a journey in improved execution but only Zack and Miri shows a glimmer of genius in an otherwise honestly mediocre but enjoyable catalogue (I personally love Kevin Smith- even Jay and Silent Bob Strikes Back, and that's saying something there...).
Jersey Forever!
Bong!!!!