Are some filmmakers gifted and others not?

[James Steven Beverly]

I said: "If somebody gave me the money and script"

What I mean is, I am fully conversant with the thousand-and-one things that are necessary to make a commercial feature film. I have worked with cinematographers, casting people, set builders, scriptwriters, even caterers! I know where you get the talent from, and most of the time, the key people can suggest other people that have worked with successfully before and so on. Just because I am not directly employed by the film industry any more, doesn't mean I don't know anything about it. It's painfully clear that most of the posters on this forum could not truthfully make that claim. (Well, they may well believe they're truthfully making the claim, but they simply have no idea that they have no idea).

 

 

 

Crocodile Dundee is an interesting example. None of the people involved in making the film had ever made a movie before, they were all TV production people. If it's a good enough story, and can be readily understood by Americans, you will be able to get funding (not from Australia, but it is still possible). The trouble is, most of the people capable of delivering have already moved to Hollywood :(

 

Knowing HOW something is done doesn't mean you have the ABILITY to do it. I know how a submarine works, that don't make me Captain Nemo. The key to making movies isn't knowledge or talent or money. The key is exactly what you said you DON'T have, PASSION. EVERYTHING in art STARTS with passion. Without it...well, it truly is impossible.

 

Passion is the thing that keeps you going when the whole thing falls in on top of you and why you have the strength to stand up in the midst of the rubble, brush the dust off your weary shoulders, pull yourself together and carry one till the very end, come Hell, high water, fire or storm to make it happen though sheer strength of will. A will born of passion and tempered in adversity and pain.

 

Passion is the armor that surrounds you when everyone says no, when you've given all you can give and have to give more. Passion keeps you awake when all you want to do is sleep and passion is what lets you sleep when no one believes in you. Passion feeds your soul when your sitting in some dank little apartment scribbling out a few lines of dialog that you know you're gonna have to rewrite a few weeks later. Passion keeps you knocking on doors that you know won't open because there's a slight chance you could be wrong.

 

Passion is you muse, your lover, you companion and sometimes your only friend when there is no one out there, not even yourself who believes in you. It seems such a small thing, but it is in fact, everything and without it, an artist is lost. In fact without passion, an artist is a bystander. B)

[James Steven Beverly]

Sounds incredible! I'm moving to Australia!!

 

That's way better than movies about depressed lesbian cod fish that we make in Canada.

 

R,

 

See THAT'S why you guys can't get distribution in the States. Now if the cod fish had shotguns with freakin' lasers on their heads or even just plain old AK-47s and are hijacking a busload of 17 year old Catholic school girls THEN you got a movie! Depressed lesbian Canadian cod fish really seems more like an art movie to me so at best, you're looking at a limited art house release...MAYBE 7 or 10 screens for the hoity toity snobs if you're lucky and the French don't make something about physically challenged rutabagas fighting for acceptance in an uncaring world, but us REAL Americans can't resist hot 26 year old models playing 17 year old school girls and a gender bending aquatic craniata with a Chinese made, Russian assault weapon which is why an a Chinese RPG-7, 8 or 9 would work for us as well! Just trying to help. B)

Edited July 9, 2012 by James Steven Beverly

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Here it would be a depressed indeterminate-gender Farmed Barramundi from Taiwan that swam here claiming Political Asylum and his/her/its unlikely relationship with an elderly and lonely Vegan Johnson's River Crocodile that was molested by a psychopathic butch platypus as a hatchling, and thus was not able to form a stable relationship with other crocodiles. The croc is however able to heal with the help of the Barramundi.

In a tragic and unexpected twist at the end, the Crocodile regains its carnivore status and eats the Barramundi, which symbolically restores the Barramundi to its right and proper place in civilized society.

 

You know, not for nothing, but I could almost honestly see this as a kind of sick twisted Pixar film.... and I almost even like it.

[Guest]

Now if the cod fish had shotguns with freakin' lasers on their heads or even just plain old AK-47s

 

You are mocking our nations greatest achievement in film.

 

R,

[Keith Walters]

Now if the cod fish had shotguns with freakin' lasers on their heads or even just plain old AK-47s

You are mocking our nations greatest achievement in film.

 

R,

I don’t remember seeing anything like that in Anne of Green Gables.

Was that in a later series that was only shown on Pay TV?

[James Steven Beverly]

You are mocking our nations greatest achievement in film.

 

R,

FAR be it from me to mock the great nation of Canada with it's magnificent mountains and French speaking people (even I, who LOVE the French language, can't speak it.)BUT we AMERICANS, won't buy any sapphic, daunted, Gadus Morhua unless it's packin' heat! This is a BUSINESS consideration, buddy. In America, the ONLY things we're gonna let you foreigners distribute is stuff we made in your countries, with your actors and acting babes that have a lot of gunfire, explosions and one liners OR your version of the things we make in your countries, with your actors and acting babes that have a lot of explosions and one liners. Americans make MOVIES, leave the films to the French! B)

Edited July 10, 2012 by James Steven Beverly

[Justin Hayward]

Dude, I'm truly inspired by your "passion" speech, and it reminded me of the movie you've been wanting to make (and maybe made for all I know:) "Blood Moon Rising".

 

Did you get to make your movie, and if so how's it going? If not, what's the progress to date? Are you still interested in making it or has something else interested you?

 

I know this is the internet and sometimes honest questions can be misinterpreted without the proper "tone" (you hear what I'm scream'n), and in that case, I promise you all my questions are sincere.

 

Thanks man,

Justin

[James Steven Beverly]

Dude, I'm truly inspired by your "passion" speech, and it reminded me of the movie you've been wanting to make (and maybe made for all I know:) "Blood Moon Rising".

 

Did you get to make your movie, and if so how's it going? If not, what's the progress to date? Are you still interested in making it or has something else interested you?

 

I know this is the internet and sometimes honest questions can be misinterpreted without the proper "tone" (you hear what I'm scream'n), and in that case, I promise you all my questions are sincere.

 

Thanks man,

Justin

Thank you for the kind words, sir. I's about at the same point Richie was talking about(and boy are THOSE some words to take to heart), finding the money. As Richie says, it is the hardest part of the business. I've written,directed and produced LOTS of small projects from several theatrical plays to industrial and instructional videos to 3 camera live action events and music videos many of which were feature length. I've turned some one else's utter mess of poorly shot video footage for an abandoned feature film into a watchable movie that got the guy funding for a sequel. I figured I could shoot BMR with as little as 3 mil and still make it look decent and have enough star power for a tiered release.

 

I shopped it around last year at AFM and got some incredible response and interest. I got the long treatment (which for an action project with so little dialog like BMR, actually IS pretty much the script although I will paste it into proper script form when I get a chance.)to a point where I'm VERY confident in it's appeal. I have a producer from Houston who I also met a AFM has the short form synopsis in hand that I'm working with on my TV project "Driveline" . I'll see what happens with that collaboration.

 

I took time out to write another script from an idea suggested by a Canadian producer friend of mine I met at AFM which is a slapstick comedy that I had a BLAST writing. He has some investors in NYC and Vegas that like the idea so I'll see what comes of that. Throughout this whole thing, I've had another director/producer who wants to do a co-production on BMR with me directing and him producing. I'm planning on meeting my Canadian producer friend at AFM this year and we have booked our hotel right on the beach, a half block from the Loew's. It should be great!

 

One thing I'm gonna try is I'm preparing to shoot an animatic of BMR in it's entirety using miniatures and ADR with sound and FX layered in as a moving storyboard. I did this last year just for myself to test the concept and it worked amazingly well. The surprising part was how quickly I could shoot it. I kept it in a scale that was very common so I had to fabricate as little as possible while also also being readily available and cheap as Hell, SO I came up with 1:6 scale which is Barbie/ full-sized GI Joe. I found TONS of stuff everywhere I looked, especially my old theater prop and costume resource, Goodwill. Dolls are like 50cents, a buck. Cars, 2 to 4 bucks.

 

One problem in the first tests were the Barbie doll's expressions, little too gleeful for a horror movie....THEN I did some research and found this:

so not ONLY could I have dolls with the right kind of expressions BUT I could essentially test cast the actors I wanted for the movie in the moving storyboard. Some of these diaramas are incredible:

 

 

Really, just miniature film sets.

 

I WAS going to go the route of preparing a graphic novel , (I'm a decent artist) which everyone is kinda doing now but I like this MUCH better. I can show my planned shoot in advance and fix any potential problems before we ever shoot. It should give potential investors a very close idea of what the finished product will look like, kinda like a salesman's sample. There's some sets and props and practical FX to build but I have a little over 3 and a half months. Maybe it'll help, maybe it won't BUT it'll help me so I loose nothing. We'll see. Anything that gets 'em off center, Right? B)

[Rick Cook]

I feel like like attitudes towards success, such as this do damage to the idea of aspiring to be a filmmaker.

I have always looked at filmmaking as a means in which to entertain, and inform. More then anything you are a storyteller. In my eyes, if you have a viewer, and you have altered or informed this viewers perception, you are succesfull. Making a film that sells is essential to survival when it comes to funding and will always be the goal, but it does not determine if somebody is a successful filmmaker in my eyes.

I know may not be the best to touch this, I recently shot my first feature. It is being passed around to distributers now. If it is sold (even as part of a 10 film for $5 box set) I will be honored. If it doesnt, I will still jump at every oppurtunity to be involved with telling a worthwhile story.

[Jason Outenreath]

I completely agree. If you comb these forums, you'll find a lot of destructive cynicism that passes for "being realistic", and "informed", and "in the know". It's one of the reasons I stopped frequenting these kinds of discussions a ways back when I was still a student. It isn't constructive in the least, and is actually destructive, particularly to young aspiring filmmakers. It's like what Chris Doyle said once: "I was at NYU and I was telling the kids to JUST DO IT, and all the teachers were reinterpreting what I was saying, telling them--'what Chris really means, is if you work hard WITHIN the system then you'll get somewhere'."

 

The bottom line in life is: If you're really good at something, no matter what field, then people will take notice. Now, will that make you a millionaire and get you the highest grossing film of all time? Maybe not. But who cares? What more can someone ask from life than to be at the highest level possible in whatever field they love and to do it on a daily basis. And if you are really good, there are rewards that come with that. Maybe not fame or tons of money (which has sadly become equated with "success" in the eyes of many, especially in this forum), but the knowledge that you are really good and making film at the highest level.

[James Steven Beverly]

Film making is a business, first and foremost. It has to be because it costs a fortune to make a movie and if it doesn't make money it's that much harder to get the next one made. Financial success gives film makers far more freedom to do what they want to do, like the old Hollywood adage, "2 for them, 1 for me." Money's more or less just a way of keeping score. If you're making money, you're reaching somebody. Spielberg made great movies that appealed to a large percentage of people, that's why he's rich and owns his own studio. Art, even more so than beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. Talent is subjective to those who view the finished product which makes the term "gifted" something that can only be bestowed by your audience.

[Keith Walters]

It's like what Chris Doyle said once: "I was at NYU and I was telling the kids to JUST DO IT, "

 

 

The problem is, that 99% of so-called aspiring film makers seem to be more interested in TALKING about DOING IT, than actually working out a way of actually DOING IT.

20 years ago, OK, getting access to decent quality film or video cameras and editing equipment might have been a challenge, but these days there simply is no excuse. You can get first-class results with very cheap equipment these days.

 

People keep going on like they will only ever be allowed to make one film in their entire lives, so it has to be perfect. In reality, the more simple no-budget projects you shoot the better your first "real" project is going to be, but that appears to be somehow "beneath" them.

[Marcus Joseph]

The problem is, that 99% of so-called aspiring film makers seem to be more interested in TALKING about DOING IT, than actually working out a way of actually DOING IT.

20 years ago, OK, getting access to decent quality film or video cameras and editing equipment might have been a challenge, but these days there simply is no excuse. You can get first-class results with very cheap equipment these days.

 

People keep going on like they will only ever be allowed to make one film in their entire lives, so it has to be perfect. In reality, the more simple no-budget projects you shoot the better your first "real" project is going to be, but that appears to be somehow "beneath" them.

Absolutely, you learn more from the no budget productions than you do with film school.

 

A lot of people do just procrastinate, it's a bad habit but maybe it's cause in the film industry everyone tells each other what they're doing and then possibly don't work as hard towards it.

 

There's this interesting study on the effect

 

http://sivers.org/zipit/

[Keith Walters]

http://sivers.org/zipit/

Interesting, but it's just a rather long-winded way of saying that there are far more people who are more interested in "Being a Film Maker" than "Making Films"

Just as there are far more people who "want to be a musician" than "want to make music", "want to be a writer", than "want to write". "want to be an actor", than "want to act". You know, "Starving in a Garret" and all that....

 

I've written two Science Fiction novels, and I'm working on the third in the series. This project has been on-going since 1989.

I used to write it bit by bit on the train going to and from work, but now I drive, so the project has gone on hold again.

I realized well over ten years ago that the chances of a new writer getting published these days are essentially zero, because the publishers' in-trays are jammed to bursting point with thousands of manuscripts, 99.99% of which are unreadable drivel. None of them accept unsolicited manuscripts any more, and most reputable agents won't either.

However I have faith that when I have all three ready for release, on-line publishing will have matured to the point where I have a chance of making some money from my writing.

But if that never happens, I will have the satisfaction of knowing that I did actually write something, unlike the millions of wannabes who inhabit Creative Writing classes and the like, who do little more than talk about it. :P

[Nicolas Gomez]

Making films is like any other work in life, its all about hard work, resillience and practicity. Think about the product, how to sell it, where it will be sold, become a business administrator for your film. Young directors don´t see that in order to make a big movie, you need to have done many others before and you have a lot to learn. Talent is one part, hard work and learning is the major part.

 

 

 

 

http://www.elsotano.com.co

[Guest Christopher Sheneman]

The problem is, that 99% of so-called aspiring film makers seem to be more interested in TALKING about DOING IT, than actually working out a way of actually DOING IT.

20 years ago, OK, getting access to decent quality film or video cameras and editing equipment might have been a challenge, but these days there simply is no excuse. You can get first-class results with very cheap equipment these days.

 

People keep going on like they will only ever be allowed to make one film in their entire lives, so it has to be perfect. In reality, the more simple no-budget projects you shoot the better your first "real" project is going to be, but that appears to be somehow "beneath" them.

 

I don't think there's anything wrong with "talking" about doing it, especially with young filmmakers who have loads of time and limited resources. That's the first step..it's hard to make a film without talking about doing it. What do think all of Hollywood does everyday? TALKING about DOING IT and then they do nothing. Nothing happens all the time- books have been written about all this talk and nothing doing .

[Marcus Joseph]

I don't think there's anything wrong with "talking" about doing it, especially with young filmmakers who have loads of time and limited resources. That's the first step..it's hard to make a film without talking about doing it. What do think all of Hollywood does everyday? TALKING about DOING IT and then they do nothing. Nothing happens all the time- books have been written about all this talk and nothing doing .

Filmmakers do not learn anything from talking, they only learn by doing.

[Guest Christopher Sheneman]

Filmmakers do not learn anything from talking, they only learn by doing.

 

I'm just the opposite. I learn by talking and then I'll tell you what you'll be doing. Got any more wisdom gleaned from Gatorade commercials?

[Marcus Joseph]

I'm just the opposite. I learn by talking and then I'll tell you what you'll be doing. Got any more wisdom gleaned from Gatorade commercials?

You make no sense at all, what will you tell me you'll be doing? Talking about making films?

 

Robert Rodriguez shot over 200 short films before El Mariachi, Peter Jackson shot weekend short films before he took on Bad Taste spending what money and time time he had to slowly craft what is the biggest filmmaking career to come out of New Zealand. Tarantino thought very little of his first film, but he always says that it taught him how to make a movie. Nolan and Spielberg were shooting since they were 8 years old. Sam Mendes did TV movies before American Beauty. Ridley Scott shot a super amount of commercials, David Fincher shot music videos.

 

What director got where they are by sitting around and talking? Get your facts straight.

[Guest Christopher Sheneman]

You make no sense at all, what will you tell me you'll be doing? Talking about making films?

What director got where they are by sitting around and talking? Get your facts straight.

 

All of them got where they are by sitting around and talking. They must have talked to casting directors or actors, otherwise how would they know to be in their films? They must have pitched their stories to investors or studios- this involves sitting and talking. They probably were sitting rather than standing.

 

Why should I tell you this - young Grasshopper- if you have the script, talent , money , locations, distribution___then___

The film is already done, there is no need to shoot it!

 

Do you see without seeing- Grasshopper?

[Marcus Joseph]

All of them got where they are by sitting around and talking. They must have talked to casting directors or actors, otherwise how would they know to be in their films? They must have pitched their stories to investors or studios- this involves sitting and talking. They probably were sitting rather than standing.

 

Why should I tell you this - young Grasshopper- if you have the script, talent , money , locations, distribution___then___

The film is already done, there is no need to shoot it!

 

Do you see without seeing- Grasshopper?

What are you on about? I think you should lay off the crazy pills.

 

There is no filmmaker that got behind a major motion picture by simply 'talking' about making films... they at some point have to actually make something. I'm sure investors and studios will listen to someone who has never made anything in their lives... yes, that makes so much sense.

 

Why don't you go ahead and try talking your way into making films and we'll see where it gets you? I'll be sure to remember your name too, best of luck with everything.

[Brian Rose]

My fear is that soon being gifted or a skilled craftsman will soon no longer matter, as equipment gets cheaper and in the hands of more and more aspirants. HD DSLRS allow myriad folks to make pretty little pictures that are all style, no substance, shaky cam, shallow DoF. I see the incompetent filmmaking of the mumblecore generation, of Swanberg and the likes, and how they have achieved success without any demonstrable skill or desire to attain it. The cinema I loved, the craftsmen I admired are all dying off. DPs today bitch and moan about bulky cameras, yet know nothing of the hardships of using blimped Technicolor cams, or the original Super Panavision 70.

 

I have tried to learn my craft, learn the old fashioned way shooting film and digital alike, but I wonder if all that skill even matters?

 

The growing egalitarianism of the cinema, the cheap gear and software means there is no longer the weeding out process, the trial by fire that scares away the meek, the dilettantes, the self-entitled. Now everyone can make a movie with a little camera and a macbook.

 

It is the idea of the million monkey's at typewriters in action. Someone's bound to make a masterpiece, but it won't be by intent, it'll be because of the Law of Large Numbers.

[Brian Rose]

And for what it's worth, there are absolutely gifted filmmakers. One need only look at P.T. Anderson. That dude seemed fully formed and in full possession and confidence of his abilities from the start. He's clearly gifted.

 

And there are others who aren't. Me for example. I'm convinced I haven't an ounce of talent or ability. Blessed with desire, but denied the talent, to paraphrase Salieri in "Amadeus."

 

I'm probably kidding myself by even pursuing this work, yet I do, because I feel, deep down, that I have something inside me that is worth getting out, that could be my gift to the world (Since I've never had a girlfriend, and probably there is no woman out there for me). One great film to justify my existence, and I'll make it, or destroy myself trying. In the end all my work will probably be thrown on the rubbish heap, and I'll never be seen as much as the idiots on youtube who score millions of views because they filmed some skateboarder crashing.

 

But at least I'll have tried.

[James Steven Beverly]

My fear is that soon being gifted or a skilled craftsman will soon no longer matter, as equipment gets cheaper and in the hands of more and more aspirants. HD DSLRS allow myriad folks to make pretty little pictures that are all style, no substance, shaky cam, shallow DoF. I see the incompetent filmmaking of the mumblecore generation, of Swanberg and the likes, and how they have achieved success without any demonstrable skill or desire to attain it. The cinema I loved, the craftsmen I admired are all dying off. DPs today bitch and moan about bulky cameras, yet know nothing of the hardships of using blimped Technicolor cams, or the original Super Panavision 70.

 

I have tried to learn my craft, learn the old fashioned way shooting film and digital alike, but I wonder if all that skill even matters?

 

The growing egalitarianism of the cinema, the cheap gear and software means there is no longer the weeding out process, the trial by fire that scares away the meek, the dilettantes, the self-entitled. Now everyone can make a movie with a little camera and a macbook.

 

It is the idea of the million monkey's at typewriters in action. Someone's bound to make a masterpiece, but it won't be by intent, it'll be because of the Law of Large Numbers.

 

Anyone can can go down to a hobby shop and buy a paint box. That don't make 'em Rembrandt. The cream will always rise and after a little shake out time, the romantic idea of making a million off your movie for the average Joe will loose it's luster pretty damn quick.

 

I used to worry that everyone was writing scripts until I started READING some of these scripts and it always comes down to the script. A lot of people think they can write a script. Very few people can. A lot of people think they can make a feature film. Even fewer will ever succeed.

 

I wouldn't loose too much sleep about whether or not talented, driven people will have a place in the future of film, they will. Whether of not it's you, who knows. The odds are against you but that doesn't mean you shouldn't keep trying because if you don't, you will most definitely fail, so why worry about it? Just do your best and hope fore the best. That's about all you can do. Your audience will let you whether or not you're talented, then you'll know. B)

[Pat Murray]

Anyone can can go down to a hobby shop and buy a paint box. That don't make 'em Rembrandt. The cream will always rise and after a little shake out time, the romantic idea of making a million off your movie for the average Joe will loose it's luster pretty damn quick.

 

Exactly. I think it was John Waters, but to be honest have forgotten who made this point, but he said that a pencil and paper is the cheapest means of production for art out there and the 20th century didn't produce a bunch of Shakespeares.

 

I also think it's a bit of a myth driven by those who profit from digital that filmmaking is more egalitarian or democratic now. Cheap cameras and equipment have always been available to aspiring filmmakers. No, it wasn't as easy as shooting on your camcorder and then downloading to your computer, but really, how much more difficult was it for Spielberg to shoot a short on a Super 8 one day, pick it up from the developer the next day and then spend the evening with his little hand cranked Super 8 editor that night cutting and splicing his final piece together? Just go to You Tube and check out all those old 70s and 80s home movies made on Super 8 and 16mm that people like to post. Some pretty impressive stuff there.

 

I'm not trying to start a film vs digital argument here, what I'm saying is that the ability for anybody to make a film on the cheap has been around for decades. For filmmaking to be truly egalitarian or democratized, it has to happen in distribution. So long as major Hollywood studios control 97% of the screens, the mumblecore folks et al can make as many films as they like, very few people are going to see their films outside of film schools and fringe film festivals. Where there is an argument that movie making is democratized is in the internet where the mumblecore people and other independant filmmakers can create a website and dvd copies of their movies on the cheap and self-distribute. It's also easier to send out your film to film festivals around the world when all it costs you is a stamp as dvds/blu-rays don't weigh the much.

 

Production isn't easier or cheaper, really, IMO, it's the distribution of films.