A) A thororough understanding of photography and the technical aspects of photography and filmmaking.

B) Free use of equipment to make films both within and outside the program. I made at least ten short films while I was there and edited on both a flatbed moviola (a novelty, but a good learning experience) and Final Cut Pro (an invaluable skill these days).

C) A dedicated teaching staff, which may have lacked great credentials, but made up for it in knowledge, enthusiasm for filmmaking, and willingness to go outside the bounds of their jobs (sometimes not even sleeping) to help us achieve our goals.

D) Student discounts on everything from computer programs to equipment rental. This was invaluable and I still miss the amazing deals I got, solely from being a student.

The only thing I regret is that, based in Santa Barbara (Ventura after I graduated), it was so easy to focus solely on school and not make the trip down to LA and network.

I moved to LA six months after I graduated. Five and a half years on, I’m still writing and, occasionally, I direct another short film. I keep watching movies. I keep learning. I do wonder if I’m ever going to make a decent salary as a filmmaker. In fact, I think something like wedding video or getting a teaching degree might be a better way to support my passion because doing “commercial” films interest me about as much as eating mud for dinner. I’d rather be able to determine the perspective of my work than have it dictated by a false standard that seems as common in Los Angeles as the smog above the skyline.

It’s difficult for Americans to grasp, but countries like France, Britain, Germany, and Switzerland have a much different perspective on cinema and its uses. Experimental and essay films are as common as anything else. It’s only America, with its crass commercialism, that the personal gets relegated to some outre category and ignored. There is a broad pallete for artistic expression and, unfortunately, the powers that be seem to feel a very limited category is what should be promulgated in all media.

And I’m still writing.

Sold a few low, low budget scripts; one optioned, a lot of close, close calls. And I’m still writing, and loving it.

No matter the bankruptcy that came and went; and a car accident I shoulda died in, and month and months and years since leaving UCLA in 1998… of carpentry, working construction.

I put writing, creativity ahead of all else.

It is all about being in love with hearing and seeing and reading stories above all else…and then writing, creating that same feeling those original writers gave me.

I recently acted for the first time in a play version of CLOCKWORK ORANGE.

It was great.

Never thought I had it in in me. It was wierd, and scary and great.

Here’s what i did not do while 4 years at UCLA. I didn’t network…even after being told I needed to. I just wrote.

I didn’t intern at a studio…on the actual lot…where so many chances happen. I just wrote more and more.

I was always ready for those chances; many different scripts in hand; a real good work ethic…but there was something wierd to me about doing the networking.

Don’t make my mistakes folks. DO NOT.

I learned metworking, making contacts outside the Hollywood Beltway; but inside…down there in L.A. — it’s so much easier.

You really can write and write and network just as well.

Keep at it.

MARK11

No. Please, be mediocre and refuse to work hard. Just focus on that MFA and you’ll be fine.

On the other hand, I don’t have the resources (cameras, film/video, editing equipment, lights, mics, editors, sound mixers, orchestrators, actors) to bring my idea from the page to a screen of any size. Not with any level of quality, not even that resembling short film. Especially because I’m from Missouri. These are all resources that film school offers which are very hard to get otherwise.

I feel like you need the resources (and connections, granted) more than you need the information. I’m an undergrad student, and I probably understand both conceptually and historically as much about film as many grad film students do. I’ve been studying hundreds of films for years. But it won’t do me an ounce of good if I don’t even have a camera.

I honestly think I could’ve gained the bulk of the info by…

a) joining a writing circle worth its salt (honest criticism, encouraging) b) listening to lots of DVD commentaries (Soderbergh’s are especially good) c) finding out when USC was hosting guest speakers and crashing the show d) writing, writing, writing, writing, writing e) interning and not being afraid to share my scripts f) doing coverage for a production company g) reading this blog (I’m learning good business stuff through this)

You could save yourself a ton of dough.

I worked with 16mm as well (nice) and edited it on a flatbed (bad). wtf is a visceral feel of a film? You gotta be kidding me. Visceral is how you feel by how the film plays, not how you fondle it.

The editing on the flatbed was a horrible and traumatic experience :). I will never do it again. What you do learn with flatbeds: “Final Cut Pro” is a god send.

When in the edit room: edit. If you have a fetish for feeling up film, do it in the privacy of your own bedroom ;) (Don’t do that by using the flatbed).

I must stop arguing both sides…head-is-spinnng.

I totally disagree. It’s like saying any jet pilot should fly a bi-plane at least once. Technology evolves. Learn it, use it, evolve with it.–

I was on a film festival panel this past weekend with Oscar winner Irving Saraf. Irving brought up this “old school-new school” argument. His take was that films today can sometimes become diluted by the current editing technology. When he used to cut a film, the film was cut. There really wasn’t any going back.

With current technology, through ease of access, there can be so much “tinkering” from so many points of view – the finished product can sometimes suffer.

I’m sure you can argue this from both sides until you’re a nice shade of blue…