Film School, UK

[Guest fstop]

.

[Phil Connolly]

Hi

 

I'd be curious to know if anyone has any info, along the same lines about the school as well.

 

I'm in a similar position to Fstop, I applied this year but didn't get anywhere - the reel I submitted was mostly low budget DV and I guess not good enough.

 

I've been working to beef up my reel, as well, ready for a second attempt next year.

 

I don't think I will get chance to shoot on film - so my reel is only going to have a mixture of Digi-Beta and DVCAM on it, anyone think this would put me at a disadvantage? Assuming the digital stuff is of decent quality.

 

I don't know anybody that went to the school, but I have heard good things about it.

 

I did think about the 'London International Film School', but its more expensive and after talking to a few ex-students and I felt that its probably not for me - I'm more interested in a specialist cinematography course rather than a general filmaking MA.

 

The fact that you have to do a weeks workshop, before being offered a place at the NFTS, would give a good insight into the course and teaching quality.

 

Phil

[David Mullen ASC]

If I were judging student reels for a film school, I wouldn't take format into account; one can tell if someone has talent for composition and lighting -- a visual sense -- in any format. I've seen some amazing student work done in Super-8. In fact, my reel to get into CalArts was mostly Super-8 material.

[Phil Connolly]

Fstop,

 

Thanks, its good to hear that you can just have a Digital Reel.

 

Good luck with your films and remember, its not the size of the lights, its how you use them :)

 

Phil

[DanStewart]

The NFTS is highly thought of by most people, and the standard of teaching is high as far as I can judge from its graduates. It is very difficult to get in as there are only 3 or 4 places for brits every year and a LOT of applications, so don't be too down if rejected. They do have an open day to look around and talk to the staff.

 

LFS is as you say a general course - it's main strength is the number of 16 and 35mm shoots you can do in the 2 years (and usually a 3rd 'unofficial year' if you are asked to shoot grad films). A friend of mine spent 360 days of his last two years there on set. That's insanely excessive, but there's not much he doesn't know about gaffing and sparking, and his DP reel is getting nice too. Not bad for a 25 year old guy. LFS is VERY expensive though, and if you can't do diplomacy and don't like to drink in the bar you may not get the films or jobs you want.

 

I wouldn't be negative about either course, or the AFI which is apparently a very high standard. But the most important thing to remember is that you can only teach so much. If you are not watching movies, making movies, taking pictures, experimenting with looks, filters, composition, cutting and camera movement then a few hours of classes a week won't help you. Knowledge comes from within - make your own plan to learn and then see who can best help you execute it. Don't expect anyone to come and pour wisdom into your head.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

I'm just very cautious about anyone who's paying to go to film school in the UK. It won't pay off - you will almost certainly never make the money back, and you'll be in even more debt than everyone else who went through their childhood being told university was going to be free.

 

You can get the best people in the UK, and they'll be maybe a third as good as the best people in the US. They'll also teach you UK filmmaking, which is a fringe artform, as opposed to American filmmaking, which is a business and a career. This doesn't bear directly on UK schools, but it does make it much more attractive to go to one in the US if the finances are workable.

 

Really, all I can say is this: never pay for film education in the UK. It's not worth it.

 

Phil

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

This is based on several people I know who've been to film school in the UK; discretion forbids me to name them, but at least one of them is currently in the process of making it big in the US which I think says it all!

 

But really, most of what I've been trying to say is based on the sure and certain knowledge that the UK film "industry" is most unlikely to repay any investment of time or money you choose to make. Sure, got to NFTS if you can afford to do it for fun, but don't expect to get a job out of it because you won't.

 

Phil

[Morgan Peline]

Hi,

 

As I will be attending NFTS this year and I missed getting in last year by one place, I have a little understanding of what they are about. Basically, I really would not worry about what your reel is shot on. What they are looking for first and foremost is story-telling ability; candidates who have that 'spark of something' creative that can be developed. As long as you are artistic, your level of technical knowledge is not important, in fact almost irrelevant because technique can always be taught. 'Is this the best way to tell the story?' is the motto.

 

This year I think 3 of the cinematographers (including myself) are camera assistants who have worked on features and in television, 2 are film school graduates and one is a high school graduate who has an amazing amount of creative talent - for his showreel he shot one film on 16mm (for the first time) which he lit and directed himself. To be frank, at the workshops he blew us away with his raw talent even though the rest of us had more 'technical' experience.

 

As for getting work afterwards... you probably know that this is still under a lot of debate... I suppose it is very safe to say that there is definitely a lot more work available in America than in the UK. I do know for a fact however that there are many NFTS graduates working in features, television, commercials and music videos in America and the UK though I think most move into music videos and commercials to begin with - not always right away - sometimes a year to 3 years after graduating. Two of the tutors Sue Gibson and Nina Kellgren graduated from NFTS, they shoot for TV and the big screen.

 

Cheers

Morgan

 

p.s. My personal feeling is that regardless of where you get trained it still takes a year or two to get regular work while you build a decent showreel, apart for maybe those who are very talented, very connected or indeed very lucky.

[Morgan Peline]

Shoot as much as possible and meet as many people as possible! :D

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

> some "if you were me" responses

 

If you are over 18, you are already too late to start paying into a decent pension. Even if it's a stupidly small amount - even if it's £50 a month, start doing it, because the accumulation makes it impossible to catch up after a few years.

 

And consider another career. When I was 18, I had the choice of doing either engineering or media. Media seemed more fun, but it was the worst decision I ever made.

 

Phil

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

A tale of unremitting anguish and woe, of course.

 

Why do you ask?

 

Phil

[Adam Frisch FSF]

That's just Phil - that's how he's always been :D

 

But I would disagree that technicians in the industry are better simply because they

do bigger stuff. More experienced with odd gear, perhaps, but not better.

 

The british crews I've worked with so far, have all been absolutely brilliant. I was also at

Pinewood a couple of weeks ago to look at all the sets for Tim Burton's new film, and they

we're brilliant as well. Absolutely huge. So you can't say that crews are automatically better in Hollywood. Just look at Prague - Les Miserables old Paris sets, From Hells London sets and Polanski's upcoming Oliver Twist all done there. Why? There must be some reason all these big movies shoot here - and in the case of Britain, it surely can't be that they save any money!

 

Swedish crews don't have the same experience, but they make up for it by being jack of all

trades and very enthusiastic - they'll solve any problem if they have to. So experience can

to some degree be compensated with enthusiasm and adaptability.

 

That said, I really look forward to the day when I can work with a US crew, since I've heard

so much good stuff about them.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

I think that pretty much confirms everything I've been saying for the last, oh, five years or so. One crew going round and round getting all the work. The UK only needs one feature DP, one crew for him, one sound department.

 

And as to the postproduction thing: again, with no features going around, where's the experience supposed to come from? Soho is full to the brim with snorting little Fauntleroys whose only qualifiecation is being rich enough to run for two years for no money. Of course modern films don't do sound here, of course they don't do effects here - because the work simply wouldn't be of the currently expected standard.

 

Phil