When I am older, I want to be an astronaut.

Ambiroa
Ambiroa Website User Posts: 180 Just Starting Out
edited June 2013 in General
Or a fireman; race car driver; jet fighter pilot.
Usually (I think), asking this question to someone already doing something with motion pictures, it results in director or producer or...why not just both. What about the other roles, are they not as interesting or prestigious sounding, or do most simply have insufficient knowledge about what those do?
Previs, colorist, editor, compositor, technical fd to name a few.
Let's be real here, many want to be a director dreaming of a career such as those like JJ Abrams, Nolan, Kubrick and even an Eastwood there. But I have never heard someone saying that he/she like to be a darn good colorist. Why is that?
How about you? If you could pick any of the roles in film making, what would you pick and why?

Comments

  • Robin
    Robin Website User Posts: 1,671 Enthusiast
    For me, I would pick director, and that's not because I don't know of the other jobs - currently I'm doing them all by myself for my films. And because of that I clearly know that of them all, director is what I'm having most fun doing. He's the one who has the creative vision, is in control of how the film will look. Working together with all the people on set, giving the actors directions etc. In the end, the director is the one who makes the movie, it is sort of HIS movie. And when I make a movie, I want it to be mine. I want to be in control of the outcome  :D 
    I do enjoy doing most other jobs too, though - writing, operating the camera, editing, compositing, for the most part they're fun. But way less than directing, for me personally.
    Oh, but I would certainly rather not want to be the producer - way too much organisational and financial stuff for my taste  :D And sound design, that's another thing I do not like doing. I'm more of a visual one.
  • Ambiroa
    Ambiroa Website User Posts: 180 Just Starting Out
    Having overall control is certainly a valid point, often the most valid point in many cases. I read a fair amount of interviews on people in motion pictures, and I noticed that most directors did't become directors but were already directing when producing super 8 or alike movies when they were a child. On the other hand, except of producing, those who are doing those other roles seems to have sort rolled into it, coming from a runner position and the department of that role happens to have an opening.
    I really like those kinds of careers, they seemed to be asked to fill in the role and became really good at it and enjoy it at the same time. Someone who has the opportunity do any role he/she wishes, interested in them all, makes it way harder to excel. While someone who, let's say doesn't have a clue and just chose one, turns out to be either hating and resign, or love it and become one of the best. I am curious about the thoughts of young film makers how they see their opportunities. Software these days is very affordable and nobody is telling you what role you should do, yet everyone seems to focus on the directing part (plus everything else when working alone), but in a team, nobody seems to be interested to do previs or grading.
    Thanks for sharing Robin. Anybody else who like to chime in? :)
  • DanielMorgan
    DanielMorgan Website User Posts: 324 Just Starting Out
    The problem I feel, is that people assume that Film Makers are only directors. People never consider producers and editors. Charles Steel, one of the producer's on 'The Last King Of Scotland' is convinced that It's 'his' film. It's his baby. Well, who are we to say other wise? He backed the project, arranged the crew, assisted in the development of the script etc. People assume the director is the main figure, when actually, the director is just filling a role. 
    Walter Murch was a KEY proponent to the creative success that was 'Cold Mountain'. That would have been a totally different film without his talent. 
    A good editor can make ALL the difference to a film. A good colorist is as much of a story teller as a director and a sound designer. It's telling story through specific facets. Editors tell story through the connection of images, sound designers through audio, colorists by Hue, Light and Saturation. 
    I don't necessarily say I want to be a director, I want to tell good story's, which I, at-least attempt to do, by working on and directing films. 
  • Andrew
    Andrew Website User Posts: 379 Enthusiast
    Because even a colorist really wants to be an editor. An AD really wants to be a director. A camera operator wants to be a DP. That's the nature of the beast, and what makes people good and hard-working at their jobs.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!