Chapman University - Dodge College of Film and Media Arts Reviews & Admissions Statistics

First off, let's talk about the pros to attending Chapman. The weather is great all the time and if you come here, you avoid that good for nothin snow back east. Disneyland is just around the corner and if you're lookin for a little bit of expensive fun, it's got you covered. The campus is absolutely beautiful as well while you're being surrounded by students who also (hopefully) love film.

Now let's talk about the cons, and trust me, there's a lot in the editing program.

The editing program is taught by one professor, unlike other programs such as directing and screenwriting which tends to be taught by multiple professors. Not so bad to have one editing professor right?... right?... Well there's a lot of problems with him and the way he teaches his class so if you don't like him, you simply can't switch.

For example, when I was in undergrad learning editing, I had a bunch of computer classes that taught me various programs on how to become a better editor and when I went into Chapman, I expected that this program was going to be similar. However, the editing program isn't taught with computers. You just simply show up to class, sit on a couch, and watch movies while the editing professor tells you on how to edit better. There's no hands-on learning, no using a computer in his class, it's purely learning by auditory learning. However, you do get to edit student projects and he'll give you auditory feedback on how to make them better.

In terms of his personality, if neuroticism is on a scale of 1 to 100, he's at least an 80+, while his agreeableness is below a 30. This translates to a highly competitive guy with a bit of rough edge around him and the kind of guy where if you disappoint him, he will give you an earful of negative talk and is not the kind of guy to give second chances either. For example, after one student did bad on an editing assignment, the teacher called their work completely incompetent and told them to their face that they have no talent. That's the kind of guy this professor is.

This isn't really a pro or con but if you decide to attend Chapman, you should definitely have some experience with editing film. This really isn't a school to cater to beginners.

This review will specifically go over the MFA Editing Curriculum at Dodge

Editing Expectations at Chapman:​

If you decide to attend the editing program at Chapman, you are expected to already be proficient in either Adobe Premiere, DaVinci Resolve, or Avid. It is also strongly recommended that you have experience with editing film specifically because if you don't, you are more likely to struggle in this program, and the resources to help struggling students succeed is scarce (more on that later).

I know that you can get a masters in editing even if you didn't go to film-school as an undergrad, but the editing program isn't built to help students succeed if they don't have a lot of prior film experience. If you come to school here, you are expected to know what you're doing. Prior experience with editing film is strongly strongly recommended if you decide to attend Chapman.

The Editing Class Itself:​

The editing curriculum is specifically taught by one person who has been there for a long time and has edited various films, some of which you have heard of before. The best way I can describe him is that he’s basically a milder version of a drill sergeant. He’s high strung, old school, no-nonsense, and honest to a fault. If you’re late to his class, he will yell at you so you better show up on time. He’s not the accommodating type and not the kind of guy who’s going to spare you the rod, meaning if he thinks your film is bad, he’s going to tell you that your film is bad, and break it into detail on why he thinks your film is bad. The editing curriculum is very intense and competitive. If you do bad on an editing assignment, instead of getting a bad grade, the editing teacher will simply replace you with someone else.

In terms of teaching style, he’s pretty old school. For one thing, he doesn’t teach you through the use of a computer, in fact, he hardly teaches you any editing technical skills at all. How his class works is that he gives you editing footage that you must complete in a week, and then he watches everyone’s edit live in class on a big screen. While watching the edits, he will give feedback based on what he wants done differently in everyone’s edit. And then for the next two weeks, you must revise your edits based on what the teacher wants. Oh and by the way, anything he wants differently to another person’s edit, also applies to your edits as well so you better remember everything he said. If the teacher gives you feedback on how to change your film, and you don’t apply the changes in your next edit, then he will yell at you in class.

Now the problem with the teacher is that his teaching style caters more to students who are good at processing auditory information. Since he does NOT give written feedback and refuses to do it, anybody who primarily learns by written instruction or by hands on instruction, may struggle in his class and may not be able to process all of the information as easily. He is not a good fit for everyone, so if you’re an editor and you decide to attend Chapman, keep in mind the fact that there’s only one editing mentor as of 2025. A teacher can either make or break your experience at this school and if you’re in this curriculum and you're not a good fit for this particular teacher, then it’s going to be tougher to succeed.

The Resources To Help Students Succeed at Chapman:​

In terms of bigger schools, such as the University of Kansas where I'm from, there isn't a lot of resources to help struggling students succeed in their classes. But in order for you to better understand, i'll give a comparison between Kansas and Chapman.

• Kansas has a discord group where students who are struggling in their classes can go get help. The Chapman film school does not.
• Kansas has a tutoring center where students who are struggling in their classes can go get help. The Chapman film school does not.
• Both schools have computers that are dedicated to running various computer software including Premiere, Davinci Resolve, and many more.
• Both schools have teachers who are willing to help their students although in my opinion, teachers at Kansas have more dedicated office hours and are more willing to help you.
• Kansas has PLAs who are student assistants in the class who's job is to help students in the class and they even have dedicated office hours where struggling students can go get help. Chapman does not have PLA's.
• Both schools have disability services available.

Overall, Kansas has more resources to help struggling students succeed. If you are struggling at Chapman, you have to rely more on the optional good-will of others, rather than an obligation that dedicated school resources provide.

What if you're neurodivergent and/or have major learning disabilities?
Then stay away from the MFA editing program. At Dodge, only the strongest survive. The editing teacher isn't going to hold your hand and help struggling students out. He doesn't give a shit if you're disabled or you're going through mental problems, either you do a good job, or he's going to fail you. Like I said, the editing program is very competitive.

I studied in the MFA cine program for one year and deferred due to the corona virus, but decided not to return to the program, mainly due to disillusionment with the quality of the classes.
The first semester, everyone is required to take a class called "Story". To be blunt the class was kind of a joke. It involved reading stories like The Tell Tale Heart and the Oedipus myth, stories which basically every high school American is exposed to at some point. The homework was also pretty mind numbing and reminiscent of high school busy work, which makes you wonder why graduate students are being subjected to it. Furthermore, why are cine students forced to take an acting class their second year?

The only classes that I thought were useful were the ones specific to my discipline--cinematography. And that's the problem with Chapman's MFA program for production-- it should actually be a condensed two year degree like AFI. I would have loved to have taken all the cine classes, ignored the rest, and graduated much sooner and cheaper, but unfortunately that's the con of a curriculum that's predetermined.
Based on my experience of the program it's designed more for students who haven't had much prior production experience.

Unfortunately, I don't think Chapman does a very good job of preparing those students who do have less experience than others. The first semester cine students are required to make a project called a 3-2-1, yet are given pretty much zero instruction in the very basics of lighting. Two cine students dropped out right after the first semester because they realized it makes no sense to pay all that money for lessons that weren't even given. People go to film school to be taught and instructed in an organized way, not to figure everything out on their own. That's what YouTube is for. During the second semester, lighting was finally covered in more detail... after over 20K had already been spent by every student.

The philosophy at Chapman is actually that students are supposed to get most of their hands on practical knowledge by volunteering on student sets. Which is fine. That's why I dropped out. Because why pay money to work on sets when I can work on sets for free without paying? And that's the problem. The students I've worked under certainly know things that I've learned from, but there's no way of knowing what it is you don't know unless you actually have an experienced professor teaching you. Maybe more of that happens in the second year, but I didn't care to risk all that money to find out.

The second, and possibly most important, issue that I believe holds Chapman back is the quality of the students they admit. Networking is a huge part of film school, so if your classmates aren't that special, then you're in trouble. I'm not speaking about my fellow cine students, but mainly the quality of the directing students. Many seemed to have a working knowledge of cinema limited to Marvel and Christopher Nolan. Which I guess is fine if you want to try to make films like those. Others liked to spout trite and poorly reasoned regurgitations of the latest pop woke tropes, which I suppose is also fine if you want to direct Coke commercials. But if you want to make meaningful independent cinema... well, there weren't too many unique, truly authentic voices to be found in that bunch.

I know someone who attends AFI, and based on what I've heard the gulf between the quality of students at AFI and Chapman isn't very close. The resumes of the AFI students knock those of the Chapman students out of the park. Many have already shot, edited, or directed a feature, and many have legitimately impressive connections (connections are definitely not required to gain admission though). If you want to surround yourself with people very likely to be successful, you'll have a much better shot at AFI.

Demographically, most of the students in the whole graduate program (not just MFA cine) are white or international Chinese students. A very small percentage are black, and I'm not really sure what accounts for this disparity other than that Orange County itself has a very small black population, and black students probably prefer attending programs in LA where there is a much bigger local black population. The high number of international Chinese students makes networking somewhat difficult, as there can unfortunately be a bit of a language and cultural barrier. This group is kind of cliquey, probably because it streamlines things for them to work with those who speak the same native language. But they're also very good at connecting with fellow Chinese students at the other big schools like USC and AFI.
Honestly, I don't like referring to Chapman as a film school. They are currently phasing out all their film cameras, and much of the interest and excitement attending students have appears to be focused on digital TV production more than anything else. It is definitely not a cinema lover's school, although I was lucky to meet a few like minded people there. While I was disappointed overall, I'm glad I went for the one year I did. I learned some things I didn't know about cinematography before, and made some connections with people I will be working with in the future. But for those who want the best MFA experience, I suggest looking elsewhere.

I did my undergrad at Chapman, earning a BFA in film production. The MFA production program is also quite good, having pumped out some really prestigious award winning thesis films as of late (ITS JUST A GUN and ROCKET both won the student Academy Award), but the MFA students on average seem a little less committed compared to the undergrads: it really feels like a BFA school more than anything. The Film Studies program is pretty wonky to be completely honest. Many of my favorite teachers aren't there full-time or have been fired as of late. But regarding my BFA in production: It was a great experience overall, especially in my junior and senior year where my workload really picked up and I made a lot of amazing friends that I still creatively collaborate with to this day. Everyone is here to help you. Making art never feels like a sport here, which is great.

Having said that, if you aren't naturally predisposed to putting your blood, sweat and tears into your projects, THEY WILL SUCK. Your teachers can only help you so much (and some teachers are outright buzzkills). The resources are out-of-this-world good, but it's up to you to take advantage of them, learn them, and really be in the thick of it. Students very quickly rise to the the top, so if you aren't on set each weekend you probably won't learn the technical side of things all too well.

The biggest piece of advice I can give you is never to forget the importance of watching films. Just because you're in film school doesn't mean the only stuff you should be watching is what the curriculum assigns you. Chapman's biggest misstep is that it never teaches a course on MAKING/WRITING SHORT FILMS, something that's very different from feature films. I highly encourage all new students to an hour or two each day to watch a feature and a short film, it's the best way to learn after doing.

Note for Directing hopefuls: Making film's gets expensive, so obviously it's important to be smart about where and how you spend your money. Because directors usually fund their films entirely, DP's get greedy with fancy lenses and cameras, but don't let yourself be discouraged. Remember that what's in front of the camera is most important (especially your screenplay and the actors performing it). As such, it's essential that you watch films in order to learn how to do this well. Don't let that shiny ALEXA and those anamorphic lenses distract you.

Finally: Chapman has some phenomenal courses in film studies, but they aren't mandatory (teachers that stand out are Kelli Fuery, Ethan Thomas Harris, Andrew Erish, etc.) but many of them are adjunct. It's a shame that directors aren't forced to take these courses, because the thesis films are so aesthetically polished that they ought to be more conceptually daring.

Remember: there is no such thing as a perfect film school. Chapman teaches STYLE over SUBSTANCE so make sure to teach yourself what your classes aren't providing. At the end of the day, it's somewhat of a craft-school, but that's not a bad thing: if you're a director it means you'll work with the most talented DP's, editors, sound designers, etc. you'll ever meet, and if you're any of the aforementioned emphases you're likely to get really good at your job and will be in high-demand post-grad.

I attended Chapman's MFA Producing Program from 2010-2012, immediately after finishing undergrad. My experience was a good one overall. I produced several award-winning shorts and was taught by a lot of leading industry veterans. I met and collaborated with a lot of talented people and have kept in touch with many of them who are doing great things. I received a $4,000 per semester fellowship, which really helped with expenses.

I will say that grad school is sort of what you make it. You can just take the classes and go through the motions to get the degree, but to get hands-on experience, you'll need to put in the work. You'll need to have internships, develop side projects, shoot and edit non school-related projects, and build relationships with classmates that will turn into industry relationships in the future.

It's expensive, but it's one of the most highly-regarded film programs in the world. If you want to work in any facet of the industry, you'll be prepared. If you want to teach, you'll also be prepared. I would definitely recommend this program to anyone who isn't completely dead-set on attending one of the bigger name programs just because of the name. Chapman has the same level of faculty, better facilities, and is cheaper than the others, but is just as highly-regarded in the industry.

I had to limit my pros and cons in the above, so here are the rest of the:

PROS
-Great location (beautiful area with not too much congestion)
-Great guest lecturers and screening opportunities
-Chapman Filmed Entertainment
-Opportunity to work on as many student projects as you want
-Opportunity to take classes outside your chosen track
-Tuition in reference to comparable film schools (but still expensive)
-Fellowship opportunities to alleviate tuition costs
-Don't need to take the GRE (at least when I went)
-Small class sizes for grad programs
-Always at the top of the "nation's best film schools" lists
-Chapman, in general, has a great university reputation

CONS
-Not a ton of internship opportunities through the school (you have to go out and search on your own)

I graduated from Chapman's MFA program back in 2012 and I have to say that my experience was very positive.
I was specialized in Editing and the program was very robust.
Chapman's system is broken into a conservatory model (they kind of treat you as if you've never have any experience with film in general). Your first year is spent on the foundations/basics of film. Shooting, writing, editing, directing, etc. These are then supported by projects that you do that is meant to take you through the steps of an entire short film. You will also be taking your specialization specific courses this year as well, but at the basic level. During the first year, you are also required to assist the 2nd years in their cycle films on set and sometimes even in post. This is to help build your general knowledge of filmmaking so you don't go into the industry looking/sounding like a fool who has no idea how things are done.
your second year is the time in which you really go into the specialization of your choice (that you were accepted into). You will also be working on atleast 2 short films called Cycle Films. This is a collaboration between ALL the students from each department. At this point it really tests your ability to work in a team as well as being able to independently work and make decisions as needed.
Finally your 3rd year is all about your thesis film. All you do at this point is work on your thesis film.

Between all 3 years you have the choice to take as many classes as you want. There is an "Interterm" where you can take additional classes or just take time off, (although I would suggest you try to get into one of the filmmaking classes so you can build more experience. During summer you can also get yourself certified in programs like Avid Media Composer or ProTools.

In regards to professors, you're looking at current working professionals and also those who are very well known in the industry. Everyone that I had the pleasure of studying under have all been extremely helpful and it's entirely up to you to make use of these resources.
Equipment wise, it's very well maintained and you just need to make sure you make a request for specific cameras that might be in demand early.

In general, there is a lot of things you can learn from here, but it's up to you to go for it. I learned sound mixing and foley/adr in my free time and got certified in both Avid and ProTools, so it's just up to you on how pro-active you want to be to make use of the money you spend.