<p>I have a lot of questions regarding a career in the film/television industry (mainly film), as I'm still trying to decide where I'm headed (regardless of which school I applied to to NYU or any other schools). I'm only 17, a senior in high school, and honest to say, naiive. It is ridiculous that some people already know they want to head into Business (Stern) and do that for the rest of their lives or Education (steinhardt) and do that for the rest of their lives. Personally, I believe exploration is the best. We arent exposed to enough to know exactly what we want to do. Thats the situation I'm in. So back to the topic, as I'm exploring, I've some interest in the film direction. I have a few questions:</p>
<p>1) Do most successful filmmakers (George Lucas, Ang Le, etc) jump right into film/cinema major their first year (aka apply under that major for undergrad)?
2) If I've applied under another major, is there ANY way (I'm well aware that transferring into Tisch is hard) but is there ANY way this can be done, lets say I decide I want to head into that direction?
3) Do most filmmakers go to grad school?
4) How hard is it to catch up, lets say I applied under another major, and decided to switch?
5) What is the most popular job/career that most Tischies obtain upon graduation (i know this is a silly question...duh, film... but I was wondering not ALL filmmakers are successful thus only those in that hit it big in Hollywood are known and those are the ones who profit, but where do other filmmakers who don't strike gold end up?)</p>
<p>thats it for now. i'd realllly appreciate it if current Tisch Film students can answer these questions. Thanks a lot!</p>
<p>I am going into film production next year (entering as a freshman, not sure which school yet though) and here are my two cents (from what I've read and picked up).
The truth is, many famous filmmakers did not major in film or even go to college as an undergrad. Instead, they just started making films and worked their way up through the business. On the other hand, if you look at any of the top film schools (USC, NYU, Emerson, UCLA, etc.) there is a long list of successful and many times famous filmmaker alumni. There is an ongoing debate between filmmakers whether it is necessary to attend any sort of school or training or not, and many take the stance that you either have talent or you do not, and film school will not change this. Personally, I really enjoy film and interested to learn as much as possible about it. My parents, and their values and the values they have instilled upon me make it impossible for me to even fathom the idea of not going to college and simply working my way up through the business. This is true for many people as well. In my mind, majoring in undergrad fiilm gives you time to screw up and learn from your mistakes, figure out which aspect of the business you most like, make connections (EXTREMELY important in this business) and obtain skills and a degree that hopefully someone will one day look at and be impressed. In addition, internships and job line ups can be obtained from a good school.</p>
<p>In short, film school is a debatable topic, and in my mind it is a good path to take, but not necessarily the only one.</p>
<p>As for your NYU specific questions, no idea.</p>
<p>I agree with Dawn (sort of).
For a very long time, I was going to go completely pre-professional with my college list( NYU, USC, UCLA, Texas etc). But I personally decided to go with a liberal arts college (get a liberal arts background) and major in media studies. This is also partially because I have had a sudden interest in advertising and PR.
I still have Emerson and NYU on my list, just in case I have a change of heart over the spring.
So my advice is to make a decision or build a list around your indecision.</p>
<p>Many filmmakers never received any traditional schooling. Matter of fact, many of film's greatest filmmakers didn't have any prior formal training. I do agree that exploration is enough. Then again -- some people REALLY know what they want to do early in life. And no, most filmmakers do not go to grad school either. As far as careers, it really depends. Some go into music videos. Some go into TV networks. Others have to be patient and wait on some kind of big break. Some others branch out into other fields, even computer animation. Its really relative to the person, their talent, ambition, network, etc. </p>
<p>The other thing people tend to say about film school is that is stifles people's creativity. Meaning that, the more they learn/know, the less creative they tend to get. They can get tainted, becoming more of a film critic, than a creative and outstanding film producer. Those with no prior experience, their imaginations tend to be much more vivid.</p>
<p>A lot of what you learn in film school, you can learn it on your own honestly. Or through takin some cinematography classes at some sort of independent school or program. But you certainly dont need to be in a film program for like 4 years.</p>
<ol>
<li>George Lucas studied film at USC, both undergrad and grad. Ang Lee has a BA in Theatre from UI, and his MFA in Film is from Tisch. He and Spike Lee, who did his undergrad in film somewhere in Georgia (forget which school) were classmates at Tisch. Francis Ford Coppola studied Theatre at Hofstra then did grad work in film at UCLA. Martin Scorcese is another Tisch MFA film grad, after doing his undergrad in English, also at NYU. Brian DePalma studied theatre and film at Sarah Lawrence. M. Night Shyamalan is another Tisch film grad, as is Joel Coen. Ethan Coen went to Princeton. Ron Howard studied at USC (as did John Singleton) but I don't think he graduated. His daughter is a grad of Tisch in Drama. Atom Egoyan is a film grad from the University of Toronto. Neil LaBute is another who did grad work at Tisch, after doing his undergrad at BYU. </li>
</ol>
<p>That gives you an idea of what several successful and well-respected filmmakers have done. Some filmmakers don't go to college, some drop out, etc., such as Woody Allen, Michael Moore, Guy Ritchie, and Quentin Tarentino.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Internal transfers do happen, but rarely. It's also possible that you'd have to start as a freshman in the Film program if you did transfer internally. I know you have to do that with internal transfers to drama so you'd have to check that out.</p></li>
<li><p>I don't know that there's any way to answer that without researching every single filmmaker.</p></li>
<li><p>As I said, not sure if you could 'catch up'. You might have to start over. Check that out.</p></li>
<li><p>Have a look at the NYU and Tisch lj communities to talk to current students.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>"It is ridiculous that some people already know they want to head into Business (Stern) and do that for the rest of their lives or Education (steinhardt) and do that for the rest of their lives. Personally, I believe exploration is the best. We arent exposed to enough to know exactly what we want to do."</p>
<p>It is not a generalization. It is my opinion about people who already know, at the age of 17, what they want to do for the rest of their lives...</p>
<p>Then that's your opinion. You stated it more like it was objective fact. "It is ridiculous..." "We aren't supposed to..."</p>
<p>By the way, if you haven't guessed yet, i'm one of those people and always have been. So maybe i'm ridiculous. But then again, maybe i've found more inspiration and ambition in my life than you.</p>
<p>uh, yea...and i also stated "Personally, I believe exploration is the best." I don't see where this is going...why are you dissecting the syntax and diction, when i've already said it's my opinion. </p>
<p>and i don't mean this in a disrespectful way but it is ridiculous that you've always been "one of those people and always have been." because I highly doubt that what you aspired to be in the first grade is exactly the route you're pursuing now. And its not a matter of having more inspiration or ambition. Thats entirely a different subject. It's a matter of being exposed to enough subjects to determine that this is what you want to do, its a matter of immersing yourself in enough of it to say that you sincerely enjoy it, and a matter of having dichotomies and diverse interests in your life (an aspect that colleges highly look for). So, please don't take that tone with me. I only meant to share my opinions and make people aware of this...</p>
<p>Well then you believe exploration is best. I didnt like the objective tone of the other stuff; your opinions, i feel, are simply arrogance. I dont want to start a flame-war...all i want to say is, before you make statements like that, understand that some people ARE committed to something at this age, and these people may always have been. you dont know someone's background. you dont know what drives people. </p>
<p>and no, inspiration and ambition are not off-topic.</p>
<p>Lets leave it though, i dont want to fight cos that's lame and i dont want to ruin your thread. Good luck with finding yourself. Honestly.</p>
<p>I'm sincerely sorry that you didn't the tone of what I said, and that you've felt it was grounded with arrogance. I just so strongly mean what I say, and although you may not find that to be true, I might suggest considerable reflection on your part. And upon reading your comment, I find a gap between what I mean and what you thought i mean. You say "understand that some people ARE committed to something at this age, and these people may always have been"-- that is not what I'm denying. I understand people are committed (as am I to many things) but what I'm truly trying to get at is that I find it absurd that you, for only have been exposed to a limited amount of topics for seventeen years (I might add 12 years as when you were an infant I hardly doubt you had career goals at the time) already find yourself positive in strongly walking down that path. Don't get me wrong, I admire that; at the same time, I find it unwise. </p>
<p>Whatever it is that you want to pursue, I am in no position to judge for you. I was only offended by you jumping on my back-- "But then again, maybe i've found more inspiration and ambition in my life than you." and if i may say, I'm not trying to start anything, nevermind a "flame war." I had just found your hostility and initial starting point of this whole argument. I'll leave it that. </p>
<p>Thanks for your luck. I'm sure everyone will need this aforementioned luck as I highly doubt at seventeen years of age, we've all found ourselves already.</p>
<p>I agree with micheeatsfish...i have 4 siblings who have gone off to college and all of them thought they knew what they wanted to do with their lives in high school. When they got to college, they did a complete 360...We all still have a lot to experience in life. There's so much out there to be explored.</p>
<p>Ya, I agree, many times people think they know what it is they want to do, but when they are given the freedom to explore other things, they discover differently. The only way to make sure that what you think you want to do is what you want to do is for you to explore other things. You never know what you may fall in love with. I am not a strong believer in preprofessional programs, liberal arts is the way to go, IN MY OPINION, and then grad school for specialization.</p>
<p>And if you try everything and go back to what you were doing, good for you, now you can be fully sure of what you want to do. It's better to make sure than risk making a mistake. However, even if you do make that mistake, you can always go back and do it over.</p>
<p>Hi. Just some additional info on the whole grad school thing. I visited UCLA this summer and the guy I talked to there said that if you do film production for your undergrad you wouldn't do it in grad school too. It's not like English where you can do it for both your BA and MA (it would be repetitive).</p>