SHORT: What do you think of this mock commercial we did?

[JimS2]

Ryan -- look, I don't think you know what directing is. To be fair, a lot of people don't know what directing is, and they think they're a director when they're not. But think about it for a second, what do you think of when you think of a "director"? It's not someone who asks everyone else for their opinion and then is blown in a million different directions by various answers! A director is a "director", as in, the director is THE ONE PERSON ON THE SET who knows the whole story, start to finish. The one person who knows exactly what they're trying to accomplish. The one person with the ANSWERS, not the QUESTIONS.

The director has a story to tell. That director knows the story they want to tell. The director lives and breathes the story that they want to tell.

The job of a director is not to set a camera angle, or to tell somebody to stand in a certain position. The job of a director is to know the emotions they want to convey, and to know how the camera positions affect the way the audience will perceive the image. The job of a director is to know what emotions they want the audience to experience, and to choose the actors who demonstrate the ability to convey those emotions, not on how they look, not on whether they're free that day, but based on their ability to be a willing and effective contributor to the project in seeing the director's vision to life. A director doesn't pick what shirt the actor is going to wear because it looks good on camera; a director picks that shirt based on an innate understanding of who that character is, what clothes mean to a person, and what message that particular article of clothing sends to the audience. A director doesn't pick a camera angle because it looks "neat" or "edgy", they pick the camera angle based on how they want the audience to perceive the action and the actors, whether that's to enlarge them, diminish them, shield information from the audience, or reveal something to the audience.

The director has to already know all this stuff.

Your constant questioning is the exact opposite of what a director should be. Good directors can take ideas from their crew or others, but a good director will only do so when that suggestion helps enhance what the director is already trying to accomplish.

If you don't understand that, you cannot ever expect to be a good director. Which is okay, because frankly 99% of all the people calling themselves directors, actually suck. Which is why 99% of the films that get made, suck.

Whether you can be a director or not, that's only a question you can answer. But with decades of experience under my belt I do feel confident in saying this: you're almost certainly wasting your time pursuing directing. How do I know that? Because of your track record. You talk about it, you ask about it, but you never actually do it. That would not happen with a true director, because it is impossible to stop a good director from making films. A good director is driven by a passion to tell stories, to craft stories, to explore all the visual syntax and language of film to enhance their ability to tell stories. A true director doesn't ask questions on the internet, they're too busy drawing storyboards and filming shots. You've been talking about this for a decade. A real, honest-to-goodness director would already have 20 films under their belt by now. There would be no way to stop them, they live and breathe and die for telling stories. And any questions they had would be answered by making a film and trying out different techniques, and seeing what happens, and whether it was effective or not.

Don't misunderstand me. I'm not telling you to just "go out and do it" (i.e., spend your money and hire actors and crew). That would be a terrible thing to do, and it would be criminally irresponsible of you to spend a bunch of money trying to make a "feature" film, when you don't even show a clear grasp of knowing what motivates people or what the whole point of filmmaking is. You're asking fundamental questions about what would motivate a character or not. You can't be at that level, and also spending money; that would be insane. If you don't innately understand motivation, emotion, arc, anticipation, reward, the Hero's Journey, and how Every Single Decision factors into expressing and conveying that to the audience, then you're not ready and you may never be ready.

Let me be brutally blunt. I have financed films for DVXUsers over the years. I would estimate that I've given various DVXUser directors somewhere over $100,000 to make their movies. I have been in a position to evaluate whether or not I think someone's ready for the next level, and I have actually put my money where my mouth is, helping guys like Jack Daniel Stanley, Mark Harris, Kholi Hicks, Noel Evans, Stephen Mick, and many others to make their films. It is my firm belief that you are wasting your time pursuing directing, and I think it would be a tragedy if people talked you into spending your money on making a full-length film. It would be wasted.

There is no shame in not being a director. I'm not a director, I don't have that skillset and I'm happy to admit it. I am a producer, and I excel at technical tasks. And maybe that's the kind of thing you should look at doing too.

But if you're serious about trying to make progress in film, then the ONLY thing that will help you is PRACTICE, over and over and over. And you will not get that practice by asking random internet strangers for advice. The one thing you must NOT do is spend your own money. And if you can't figure out how to make a commercial or short film without spending money, then that's further evidence that you don't have the skillset to be a film director.

Sure I can practice more. It's just I've been saving my money a lot for a bigger project, and I do not have the money to keep spending on hiring people for practice projects, if that makes sense. I was told before to get better actors and a better DP, otherwise don't make movies, but I was saving up for that more.

As for a director knowing all that, it's just before in the past, when I told myself I know what I want, and then would get opinions after the movie was made, I was told by others I made incorrect decisions, and I guess that is why I am more cautious now, and not wanting to make a movie without getting opinions on lots things, because I don't want to make decisions without advice first. Unless that type of confidence is a good thing, and I should get ahead of myself, and not care what others think? I can do that then, just make a movie and not care what others think of it, and just try to put myself in that mindset, if that's best?

I feel like I could use advice from people who are experts in their fields when making movies. For example, when a director is working with a DP, do they ask them for advice on if they think something will work, or does the director know what they want and they just tell the DP, make it work?

I am guessing it's the former, but I feel like I would do better, if I could work with experts in different fields, like a DP, that I could get advice on from during the project. But why is getting advice from people their field, so wrong?

 

[David Saraceno]

If you are receiving opinions from a half dozen or more people here, or elsewhere as you repeatedly do, and they all differ, then whose opinion do you elect to follow?

Would Martin Scorsese direct the same script the same way as Kubrick, or Spielberg, or Hitchcock, or Coppola, or Allen, or Wilder?

Stop asking, and start doing. Everyone has an opinion, but you need enough faith in your decision-making to start the process without trying to distill a half dozen or more conflicting opinions into one universally correct single opinion. That doesn't exist.

 

[ahalpert]

Oh okay thanks for the input. Since I am not spending any money on the project, is not going to come up off as for fun, or is it possible to do a project for no money and have it still come off as just as good as feature film material to see if I'm ready?

This is kind of a crazy question. If you're going to direct, you should be the one answering these questions and not asking them.

The basic answer- look at some of the good movies that were made for $6k. They dont look like James bond movies but they look like features

 

[JimS2]

Oh okay, but I can't afford to spend 6K on every project I do though, if that's what mean?

 

[ahalpert]

what it means is that you should know enough about filmmaking to have a basic understanding of why things look and sound the way they do on screen and what it cost to pull that off.

and you should have ideas for how to do things on the cheap

i suppose that asking dvxuser is one way to do research but there are a million other sources as well (youtube videos for example), not to mention getting experience on other people's sets

 

[JimS2]

Oh okay, well I do research in other places too. Well the thing I have noticed from being on other people's sets but I can't really make the movies the way they do though. For example, one director I have helped out a lot gets things shot cheap and fast, but he does all his scenes all in one shot for almost all the time, to save on shoot time, but also to save on the cost of editing as well. And I would to avoid having to do that.

That's one example but I just feel I can't direct how people do it, and feel this need to do it my way to an extent in order to get better, but my way may cost more money. Maybe I should just try to cut corners more? I mean there is the notion that I should try to do a lot more myself, but I feel that filmmaking is a collaborative process, and I need people to collaborate more so, as a result. Unless I am not seeing things right?

 

[ahalpert]

Filmmaking is a collaborative process. But when you can't afford to hire someone to do something, you must do it yourself or have a friend or PA do it. The quality of the result will suffer. But you do the best you can

Your way may cost money. You must find a way to do it for less or no money or find a story that is cheaper to shoot.

I have a sci-fi epic I'm working on and also 2 other stories, including one set at a cabin in the woods with basically just 3 actors and the cabin and adjacent locations. The cabin story ("The Ice Cave") would obviously be the cheapest to shoot. But maybe I can use unreal engine to do something with the sci-fi piece. One must be creative. I would also recommend you look into unreal engine. But I dont know enough about it yet to offer any advice.

But the thing about money is - many filmmakers come from a bourgeois background and had relatives who could fund their first projects. Life isn't fair

 

[JimS2]

Oh yeah for sure, it's just that in the past I made projects where I did a lot more things before, but I feel it's time to move on from that and do something with some much more talented actors, and a much more talented DP. I feel like it's time to move to something new, and spend the money, which I can spend, but I can't do it that way for every project I do though. But is that bad of me to see things that way? But I am directing two projects right now that are both documentary type projects for people. But does that not count as doing something worthy of showing because they are documentary type? I can also post one of them here, and what I have so far too.

When you say look into unreal engine, do you mean using the software to make a 3D animated movie?

 

[ahalpert]

Right I mean use the software to make an animated movie. A lot of people on big productions just use it for backgrounds and film actual actors. One might be able to use it to create the whole movie. Again, I know little. And there will be a new unreal engine 5 coming out late next year

Working in unreal engine would give you the benefit of not needing to spend any money to draft the movie (although you may new to pay for animation assets and later for voice actors etc). But your mistakes dont cost you anything as you can just go change the animation. Explosions and fire trucks are probably no issue at all

Making documentaries are documentaries. They're great and have a huge audience. Directing any project teaches you about directing. Doing docs doesn't teach you about writing dialogue or directing actors, obviously

 

[JimS2]

Oh okay, it's just I was advised to do projects without actors right now as well, so I am wondering if it's worth doing documentary type projects therefore. I can look into that program, thanks.

I can post a rought draft of one of the documentary projects on this thread, or I could start a new one, if that's best.

 

[Alex H.]

Oh okay, it's just I was advised to do projects without actors right now as well, so I am wondering if it's worth doing documentary type projects therefore.

As ahalpert pointed out, directing a documentary is a totally different beast from a narrative film.

Documentaries are worth doing if there are interesting stories to tell, but they aren’t going to give you much more of a grasp on what directing a narrative is all about.

Ryan, you keep circling back to “Well, in that past I’ve been told” or “it’s just that I was told by others” and you just can’t seem to move on from any of that. You need to move on from all of that.

You don’t need to spend money. One, it is possible to make a great short film on little to no budget. Two, until you’re able to do that, it’s a waste thinking you can, or should, invest in something bigger. You’ve already been advised, countless times, to try and show the best you have on your own, and you won’t listen. All the endless questions... what you’re trying to figure out are mostly things that aren’t solved with money. They’re solved with experience and understanding of what a director does.

Go back and read Barry;s last post - ALL of it - and really sit down and think about what he’s saying.