<p>I am graduating this year from high school and I really love film, and want to be a director or producer or something along the lines of that. I recently got into the USC Film and Television Production major and I was incredibly excited, and I interviewed for a half tuition scholarship. Although I was downgraded to a smaller merit scholarship, they let me into an alternative general ed thing called the Thematic Option. Their film program is amazing and is known worldwide, but the film business is still a risky place nonetheless. When I visited I really loved USC, the campus is gorgeous despite the location in a somewhat bad neighborhood and I loved the spirit of the kids. However, I was just accepted into Harvard as well. Harvard does have a film studies major within a section called VES( Visual and Environmental Studies), but it is much more theory based than USC's film and television. To get production experience I would need internships outside of Harvard, which may or may not be easy to get, and I would probably need a few years of grad school in film if I don't decide to change directions. There is a strong connection between both schools and Hollywood, Harvard has grads including Darren Aronofsky, the director of Black Swan, Conan O'Brien and Matt Damon. Plus, its Harvard. I'm not saying USC isn't an excellent school, but Harvard is in a category of its own (though USC is pretty much the same for film, although in film its connections and not so much the name of the college). Anyways, does anyone have any thoughts on the issue? Has anyone else applied or gotten into both?</p>
<p>Really really tough choice. Maybe you can go to Harvard, get that great undergraduate education (more well rounded), then go to graduate school at USC for film studies.</p>
<p>the best of both worlds</p>
<p>You will need internships outside of school no matter which one you choose. I think you’re likely to become a better filmmaker with more interesting things to say by becoming a broadly and deeply educated person… But if what you really want from college is professional training in your chosen field, USC is where it’s at.</p>
<p>If you have not already done so, check out [url=<a href=“http://www.harvardwood.org/]Harvardwood[/url”>http://www.harvardwood.org/]Harvardwood[/url</a>] and consider contacting some LA chapter members for advice.</p>
<p>Go to Harvard, and don’t major in film (study things like English, History, Philosophy, etc.), then go to film grad school at USC.</p>
<p>If you truly want a job in the film industry, go to USC. Internships are myriad and practically everyone who graduates from the USC School of Cinematic Arts gets a job right out of college. Okay, you won’t start out alongside George Lucus, but graduating from USC opens lots of doors. As you most likely know, the film industry is very inbred and who you know is extremely helpful in obtaining work. USC is tops in that regard.</p>
<p>One of the great things about USC is the emphasis on combining your major with a disparate minor, like film crit and physics. You can have as much breadth at USC as you are willing to pursue.</p>
<p>USC. Hands down. Harvard is lacking undergrad imo.</p>
<p>If you really want to work in the film industry, Harvard cannot compete with USC.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree completely with Hanna. Regardless of where you attend, you will need to obtain significant work experience/internship experience to break into the industry. There are many people in the industry who did not attend USC, nor Harvard, but who worked there way up, just like you will have to, regardless if you attend USC or Harvard. Just like in other industries that revolve around creating a product, unless you are financially well off, or have your own financial backers, the opportunity of directing or producing are slim to none. Just because you attend the number 1 school, or one of the best schools for directing or producing does not mean you will become one. It means that you will be taught the skills(technical training) on how to direct and produce. That’s it. Just because X director or producer attended X school, does not mean it will happen to you. There are other factors that could have lead to their success (that has nothing to do with what school they attended) including their family’s wealth, their family’s connections, being at the right place at the right time(in their career/job), being very social and having the ability to network with powerful people, etc.</p>
<p>Although film is not fashion design, I imagine both industries to be the same. In NYC, Parsons is considered one of the best, if not the best for fashion design. Marc Jacobs, Donna Karen, Tom Ford, etc. have all attended the school. Every year, hundreds of kids attend Parsons thinking they will eventually be the next X designer. Once you’re actually attending a school like Parsons, and are receiving the “technical training” to do the job of designing, you realize how the industry really works and how unrealistic it is to think that one will be an over night success, or will have the opportunity to put their work out there and somehow have everyone praise it to lead you to become a big time director/producer. Just like Parsons, USC will graduate hundreds of director/producing majors, not EVERYONE will get to do direct or produce in their lifetime, only a select few might(and probably at their own expense). What I am basically trying to say is there is an illusion to industries like film, including attending the best schools to study it. The one benefit to attending a school like USC or Parsons, is the school’s resources in their respective cities. If you attend USC, you will be in LA/Hollywood, which will be to your advantage in finding internships/networking with classmates/alumni. However, with that said, Hanna did bring up a good point about having something “interesting” to say and Harvard. Just like with art history and art, knowing art history before creating or thinking of creating any “art” can only benefit you. But again, just like with USC, just because you attend Harvard, does not mean you will be an overnight success, nor does it mean that people will throw money at you just to see your ideas on film.</p>
<p>If I were you, I’d personally get on line and start looking up random students/alumni from both schools who majored in X major, and asks them for their advice, and ask them what they are doing now, and how realistic some of your goals may or may not be. I did this back when myspace was still popular(the search fields made it easy to just go onto X school’s and look at peoples profiles for a given major) and got great advise from current and past students of schools I was thinking of attending.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Raiderade, you were an undergrad at Harvard before you applied to the Swarthmore Class of '15? 
Life for the 6600 undergrads at Harvard is vibrant, distinctive, and conducted among the most amazing collection of talent on the planet. I don’t think that life for 22,000 undergrads at USC could compare,</p>
<p>^The USC film school has an excellent student-faculty ratio with only ~865 undergraduate students, however. I don’t believe most ordinary private university programs (Harvard’s included) can compare.</p>
<p>If your dream is to work in films then I would choose USC.</p>
<p>I think Harvard has more to offer you in terms of an overall education. It would be rigorous, broad and challenging. The problem is that you might get sidetracked from your dream and you might never find your way back to it.</p>
<p>If you aren’t completely sure that you want to go into films then I would choose Harvard. You’re very young to make a choice that narrows your focus so much. But if you think that filmmaking is your calling then go for it.</p>
<p>Gadad:</p>
<p>17,500 undergrads at USC not 22,000.
[About</a> USC - USC at a Glance - USC by the Numbers](<a href=“http://www.usc.edu/about/ataglance/bythenumbers.html]About”>http://www.usc.edu/about/ataglance/bythenumbers.html).</p>
<p>Based on my son’s experience at USC’s SCA, I think it is a mistake to say that Harvard somehow has a more vibrant undergraduate student life than USC.</p>
<p>USC, definitely. When you take location into account, yeah USC is in South-Central, but it’s location also offers more internships and job opportunities for your chosen field. I mean, the Los Angeles/Hollywood area is the central hub for the film industry in the United States. Massachusetts? Not so much.</p>
<p>If film has been your dream since you were five, and you’ve never wavered, then another vote for USC. And buy a REALLY nice frame for your Harvard acceptance letter! 
But if you aren’t totally convinced you want film, then Harvard. When you make your choice, don’t look back. Grab what you chose and make a great life for yourself! Good luck.</p>
<p>USC is not in South Central. It is in West Adams. The surrounding area is composed of students and working class, mostly Hispanic, families. As with any University, urban or rural, young people shouldn’t feel that because they are 19 they are invulnerable.</p>
<p>I agree with Hanna. You have your lifetime to pursue film or whatever you eventually decide to do. A career in film will mean working your way up or down a path with either school you choose. Going to USC will not make you a director or assure a career in film. Go to Harvard!</p>
<p>Harvard>USC. I don’t care what you major in, it’s HARVARD!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>sorry, but for a while the single most dangerous neighborhoods in the country (except for the South Bronx and East Harlem) were within blocks of the USC campus. Even now you wouldn’t find me any where near the campus late at night - even if DRIVING in a car.</p>
<p>if by some chance film isn’t where you end up, Harvard is the place to start. As someone who has lived all over the country, Harvard is the name brings attention. I don’t know the film industry, so I don’t know if USC will be as prominent (or more so) than Harvard.</p>
<p>Somewhere, on one of these boards, there was a salient comment about getting funding for your projects from the contacts you make at Harvard. Quip or not, it seemed worth considering.</p>
<p>A few posters have suggested that USC’s undergraduate education in the School of Cinematic Arts lacks depth and breadth or isn’t “well rounded.” Students in SCA must complete a general education curriculum, and the OP notes that he/she has been accepted to the amazing Thematic Option general education curriculum. In classes ranging from fewer than 10 students to about 24, students experience an in-depth education that is second to none. One-on-one tutorials with USC best faculty are an integral part. It is VERY challenging, but those who complete the program certainly have received a well-rounded education.</p>
<p>Oh, and SCA is AMAZING.</p>