question for actors about 2 directors.

A

astigmatic

Well-known member
Hi,

I'm wondering if anyone has had experience working with a 2 director team.
I'm about to co-direct a film and was looking get some actors perspective on this.

Like, how was it compared to working with one director? For example, was it difficult taking direction from 2 seperate people? Did the directors split the scenes up, or did both give direction during takes? Any major things to avoid doing as a co-director team when dealing with the talent ?

thanks!
 
One director has to have final say. You cannot have directors doing different scenes, it lacks continuity, is confusing to the actors and will be a disaster. Well, maybe not a disaster, but it is strange and leaves the prodution a bit uneasy.
 
Last edited:
It seems many if not most successful co-director situations involve siblings (Coens, Wachowskis). Genetically like-minded might be the key there, along with the family bond and lifelong history. Otherwise it's quite possibly just not a good idea...
 
yeah, I"m wondering how they do it, like does one direct the vocal acting while the other directs the blocking and staging..etc..
 
yes...with a husband and wife directing. with a brother duo co-A.D.'ing. and a cinematographer who gave direction too. you need 1 chief with the actors.

i got fussed at for not following what one director said and had to point out that all 5 gave me different direction and i no longer knew who the heck to listen to. needless to say 1 took charge, told me to do what he said...i did...BUT..i paid the price for pointing it out because i was supposed to work longer and did not get brought back.

keeping title of movie out of it...it TANKED. so...does that tell ya anything?

if one directs talent and the other crew...i can see that working. if one is willing to defer...i can see that working but dang it is a dangerous thing or tons would do it. as mentioned above...siblings seem to do it but maybe because the grew up sharing...dunno!
 
Once a friend talked me into act in a indimove with two directors and a lousy script. I truly hope nobody have seen it... :)
 
I've done it before on a couple of shorts that were directed by two best friends. They worked well together. One of them would give direction, and then look to the other guy to see what they thought. If they agreed, then great. If they disagreed, they quickly compromised or went with the original idea.

Worked pretty well.

It seems like the key is that either one has to take charge, while the other follows. OR they have to have really good chemistry, and preferably have worked together before.
 
Glad to see NIU represented on the forums. I was Director of Engineering for the television facilities back when and built the Northern Television Center. Also, got a lot of directing experience in the educational field.
 
Last edited:
I don't think there should be hard rules on anything. Everyone has different personalities, strengths and weaknesses.
 
I've worked on a few two director projects. One worked as the creative mind and the other worked as the technical mind. The creative one was all about getting the performance out of the actors and making sure the dialogue and blocking was done how he wanted it. The other was used to direct the crew in setting up shots, lighting and sound. It turned out pretty well although it was confusing when one would try and do the other's job.
 
Ted Spencer said:
It seems many if not most successful co-director situations involve siblings (Coens, Wachowskis). Genetically like-minded might be the key there, along with the family bond and lifelong history. Otherwise it's quite possibly just not a good idea...
Click to expand...

Yes I agree, I'm working with two directors who are twins they offer different perspectives but are on the same page and are very consistent.
 
If i were to co-direct I would draw the line between one working exclusively with the cast and the other working exclusively with crew. so with one executing performance, one executing mise en scene and conferring in private to make sure the two work cohesively.
 
Reading these posts made me think about and experimental project where each director was dedicated to working with a different lead actor and supporting actors. Like in football where two teams have two coaches, except you are not competing. The momentum and vision of the script is the uniting and driving force.

It might work, it might not, it might never happen. Emphasis was on the word 'experimental' :)
 
I believe one of the jobs of the first AD is to direct smaller script parts and the managing of extras during a scenes. There are many other duties he must perform but I think thats his main role.
 
J Davis said:
Reading these posts made me think about and experimental project where each director was dedicated to working with a different lead actor and supporting actors. Like in football where two teams have two coaches, except you are not competing. The momentum and vision of the script is the uniting and driving force.

It might work, it might not, it might never happen. Emphasis was on the word 'experimental' :)
Click to expand...

Maybe, if they were in complete agreement and understanding with each other about the nature and intent of every scene and character, which might well not be the case. Failing that, I think there'd be a risk of the story being pulled in two directions.

I acted in a film that I co-wrote last year, and it would have been comical, had it not been so infuriating, to see how the AD tried to 'direct' us in a rehearsal for an upcoming scene. She clearly had no idea what the scene was about in the larger context of the film, and was evidently directing it as though it was a world unto itself. Oops...

This has occurred numerous other times in other projects with acting coaches and the like - maybe they haven't read the entire script, maybe they just didn't 'get it', but scenes got pretty misdirected, and I as an actor had the rather embarrassing job of informing them that the place they were trying to take it was completely at odds with the larger story/character arc(s) etc.

This is Not A Good Thing...
 
we co-wrote the screenplay, but I think i have a clearer idea of the story as a whole. I'm thinking maybe he can direct the parts he really focused on when we divided up the scenes during the writing process. He seems to have a better grasp of those scenes.. Either that or give him an A.D. role.
 
I'd approach it this way:
1 director deals with camera.
1 director deals with actors.
When the actor director has notes for the DP and the DP director has notes for the actors, they go through the other director so that one person is always telling them what to do. You could switch it on different days, or scene to scene but that's how I'd do it.

Cut. You and the other director whisper to each other if necessary. One of you walks off to talk to the actors, the other the DP.

Edit: what Zak said basically.
 
D'oh!

And I thought I was covering my basis with bi-partisanship.

EDIT: my custom user status used to say "Canonsonic Fanboy" and that's what Zak was referring to.
 
I know when a friend and I co-directed a script that we both had written, my concentration was on the actors and the blocking since I had been raised in the theater my entire life, and my friend was basically the DP. In the end though we both agreed on all aspects - from camera angels to blocking.

I think you actually accomplish more this way because granted I could have just hired a DP, but it did feel nice to have someone there to reassure the decisions I had made - granted though we were both working towards a similar vision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top