Columbia vs. Chapman MFA Film production

[wendja85]

IA and others,

I understand that the route to major film production is through independent features for a lot of Columbia grads. But where is it any different? I think its interesting that people make the distinction that Columbia is for students who want to work in the independent arena, but I don't think this is true. I think ultimately at Columbia you're probably prepared to work in any kind of film industry...but that most people start with at least an indie feature under their belt to move forward in the major Hollywood game. What major studio nowadays would risk given a big budget film to a non-experienced director?

What other schools are any different? Are there schools lately that have been successful in getting their students straight into directing big budget features in Hollywood? I suspect not.

To me all MFAs are pretty much the same, but maybe they focus on some different aspect of filmmaking: storytelling/writing, production, directing, etc.

Sorry just weird that i keep hearing that. Maybe Columbia is considered "indie" because it emphasizes individuality? I guess I'm only guessing lol.

 

[Icarus Ascending]

Wendja, please bear in mind my disclaimer: I really have no idea what the f*ck I'm talking about re: Columbia. I barely looked there, I didn't apply there, I'm not going there.

Oh, and I'm not a production type.

That said, I *do* know that the "Columbia is indie" thing is something the school itself promotes. So if you're wondering why you "keep hearing that," look no further than the school's website, its literature, etc.--everything references Columbia as a school for "tomorrow's independent filmmakers."

I agree that distinctions like "indie versus industry" are rarely neat. That said, it's clear that, generally/on balance/overall, Columbia thinks of itself as Art School whereas USC thinks of itself as Trade School. Columbia's overriding concern is to nurture and develop its students' cinematic visions and artistic voices. USC's overriding concern is that its production students learn the skills necessary to get decent jobs the day they graduate. (Which is not to say that Columbia doesn't have its practical side or that USC doesn't have its artsy side--I'm talking generalities here.)

In answer to your question as to whether graduates of all schools go the indie-feature-to-Hollywood-player route, I'm fairly certain that the answer is "no." Hollywood directors often come from advertising, from music videos, from executive suites, etc. There are many paths to enlightenment. The fact that most Columbia success stories involve an indie-to-Hollywood trajectory may or may not say something meaningful about the school. See disclaimer above.

 

[wendja85]

I guess ultimately you find your own identity in a program and its hard to speculate what it will be like for you on the individual basis. Its difficult to speak in generalities because it varies so much from person to person. I could be like Simon Kinberg and write some big budget features or other smaller scale projects that can be independently produced.

Still don't think any schools have had a lot of success getting their graduates straight into major Hollywood gigs though.

 

[BillyD]

IA is right on.

Don't come to Columbia expecting to leave a technical expert. That is decidedly not the program's strong point or focus.

And to answer Birdman, I think that might put CU grads at a disadvantage, since they come out of school with less marketable technical expertise. Probably harder for them to land trade jobs that pay the bills (and debts!).

To allay any concerns of future students, however, you definitely do quickly become competent with all aspects of production to where you'll feel comfortable crewing in all positions. But, again, that's not the focus of the program.

 

[birdman78]

hey all,

since i started this thread i figured i'll drop back and report that i just came back from Orange, and although was very impressed with Chapman - decided Columbia is the right place for me.
So the decision has been made. I feel better now, it was pretty stressful.

Thanks for everyone's advice.

I guess there is a spot opening up for Chapman directing. I hope this hooks up a wait lister.

cheers.

 

[Icarus Ascending]

Not for nothing:

I watched Columbia's Faculty Selects tonight. Uniformly excellent.

Believe the hype, film school cognoscenti. Columbia is producing easily the finest student films in the country.

Skol, Columbians.

--Icarus

 

[birdman78]

IA - we must have crossed paths as I was there as well!

My favorite I think was PAL/SECAM with LES Vulnerables at close second.
I agree - uniformly excellent though.

Can't wait to get started.

 

[Icarus Ascending]

If pressed, I guess I'd say I most admired PAL/SECAM and QUALITY TIME. The latter especially impressed me; it's always nice to see film students producing work in, you know, the native language of their intended audience.

(Subtitles are a great way to disguise stilted dialogue and mediocre performances. Gee, you think that explains why a preposterous percentage of American student films are shot in foreign languages?)

--IA

 

[birdman78]

That's an interesting point, though I don't think applies here. Columbia has a lot of Foreign students and most continue to direct in their home language and culture.
I think that's a smart thing to do, because as a rule of thumb the stories one tells best are the ones they truly know, especially early on in the career.

I beleive Dimitri was the name of PAL/SECAM director - so it's safe to assume he's russian and lived through the 80s there.

That said - I really dug Quality Time as well and think it stood out as the funniest most poignant comedy of the evening (I was surprised Assastant won best comedy).

Weird, this sounds like Oscar talk. Just another testimony to the quality of the work.

 

[Icarus Ascending]

You're right, Birdman; this wasn't a great example for me to use as a springboard onto my soapbox.

My real point is that there tend to be two types of student films: pieces where the performances and/or the dialogue are cringe-inducing and pieces in foreign languages. It's really, really nice to discover type C.

--IA

P.S. I agree that The Assasstant was one of the less-inspired pieces of the evening; still, it would have been among the very best work at most schools' student fests. Columbia's output really is that good.

 

[Bandar Albuliwi]

I'm really looking forward to see what you guys are going to produce @ Columbia!

Congrats on making your choice Birdman, I don't think you'll be dissapointed.

 

[birdman78]

thanks Bandar,

your support and advice were very valuable.
looking forward to sharing notes on what you will be doing @ AFI.

 

[Bandar Albuliwi]

If I may ask, what was it that made you finally choose Columbia over Chapman? Feel free to send me a message on facebook if you don't feel like discussing on the forum.

And of course, I would love to share notes while I'm @ AFI. I'm currently writing two short screenplays (for my Cycle 2 and 3 projects) that I will be directing at AFI during my first year. I am also working on a treatment for another screenplay that I will direct that a screenwriting fellow is required to write (for my Cycle one project).

It's going to be a busy summer!