B)-->
QUOTE(major B @ Mar 16 2006, 02:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hey every one. I graduated from the surry institute of art and design in the south of england in the summer. I speciallised in cinematography there. The are only around 4 film schools in england that allow us to learn 16/35mm practice and thats why I chose to go to surrey. It's a tiny art college really in the middle of the countryside, and I think thats why the people who go there push themselves so hard and gain success. Its all about being resourceful and making the best of things. Infact, we beat the national film and television school (the best in the country) many times in festivals, and I think this is down to creativity rather than big budgets.
Where you go makes little difference If you dont take anything too it. Be bold!
hey, this is my first post. just thought i'd share. i just went through the finalist interviews at UCLA and was turned down. And now I regret how i had listened to others who talked down about UCLA, because had i been accepted under better circumstances, i have to say, UCLA is probably the best you can get for the money. Hands down, a remarkable school.
Coincidentally, for a very long time, since high school, i had looked at Chapman. its good to hear it is coming along so well. as for USC, i know quite a few that have gone through the program and are currently in it. From what i gather, and many posts above illuminate the fact much better, it is good for undergrad if you have the money, but has more appeal because of its ties to the industry.
i for one, now wishing i had the choice again, would choose UCLA. so wish i had the oppurtunity back...