Some nice points towards the end. But I don't think you can teach creativity. Believe it or not, there are some people that are just naturally more creative than others. It sucks...but it's true. I think that's why there are only a few great directors and many more utility players in the industry like gaffers and editors. Creativity cannot be taught. It's innate and you either have it or you don't.
First off, editing is an incredibly creative field, don't let anyone tell you different, same for gaffing.
I think if you look into it even a little bit you'd find a whole host of people disagree with your blanket statement "creativity cannot be taught".
But that's not even what I was talking about. It's more that film is far more craft and far less art than people think. Execution is so much more important than genius
And there are bad editors and bad gaffers and bad directors and bad (fill in the role). Look, feel free to ask around, but there will be two camps. Those that feel (like I do) that there are just better artists who can do better work than you, period. And then those that insist it doesn't matter, it's a craft like anything else and be learned with enough practice. And that's fine. But this isn't trade school. It's not plumbing. It's film school and the playing field is not even in any way.
"...no smarter or any more creative than just your average everyday dude?" Are you proposing that creative artists are not in any way different than the normal "dude" who could just learn to do the same thing with practice? Is that what your saying? To diminish the accomplishments of a highly creative individual and propose that it is all somehow teachable? Am I getting this right?
Basically, yes. Most people here at film school are no smarter than any other random person I've run into.
Even the guys actually creating the movies and shows you love don't seem insanely smarter than other people. I think it's more that they've been doing it a long time.
I'm not willing to say there's no born talent to it. But I think I'd put the ratio far closer to 75/25 practice to talent.
But yeah, you could also be right. There's no good way to tell. I will ask some friends tho.
The notion that the playing field is even for everyone is absurd. If you don't have the creative capacity to make an interesting film using the tools you've been taught then it shows. It's boring. Everyone has to master the craft in order to expand on them in a creative way and that's where the difference is. Who can be more creative with the tools.
I never meant that the playing field was even. I'm just saying that if you're a reasonably intelligent person and you stick to it, you can probably become a pretty good director. The best? Probably not, but that's a high bar.
Also, I'd say just being a rich person in film school unevens the playing field. If you have the disposable income to just keep making films then you will have more chances to get better. To use your analogy, you can afford better tools and to use them more often.
Some nice points towards the end. But I don't think you can teach creativity. Believe it or not, there are some people that are just naturally more creative than others. It sucks...but it's true. I think that's why there are only a few great directors and many more utility players in the industry like gaffers and editors. Creativity cannot be taught. It's innate and you either have it or you don't.
jcg16 2 years ago
I really couldn't disagree more.
First off, editing is an incredibly creative field, don't let anyone tell you different, same for gaffing.
I think if you look into it even a little bit you'd find a whole host of people disagree with your blanket statement "creativity cannot be taught".
But that's not even what I was talking about. It's more that film is far more craft and far less art than people think. Execution is so much more important than genius
I'll ask someone next vlog about this k?
sdabrucelee 2 years ago
And there are bad editors and bad gaffers and bad directors and bad (fill in the role). Look, feel free to ask around, but there will be two camps. Those that feel (like I do) that there are just better artists who can do better work than you, period. And then those that insist it doesn't matter, it's a craft like anything else and be learned with enough practice. And that's fine. But this isn't trade school. It's not plumbing. It's film school and the playing field is not even in any way.
jcg16 2 years ago
"...no smarter or any more creative than just your average everyday dude?" Are you proposing that creative artists are not in any way different than the normal "dude" who could just learn to do the same thing with practice? Is that what your saying? To diminish the accomplishments of a highly creative individual and propose that it is all somehow teachable? Am I getting this right?
jcg16 2 years ago
Basically, yes. Most people here at film school are no smarter than any other random person I've run into.
Even the guys actually creating the movies and shows you love don't seem insanely smarter than other people. I think it's more that they've been doing it a long time.
I'm not willing to say there's no born talent to it. But I think I'd put the ratio far closer to 75/25 practice to talent.
But yeah, you could also be right. There's no good way to tell. I will ask some friends tho.
sdabrucelee 2 years ago
The notion that the playing field is even for everyone is absurd. If you don't have the creative capacity to make an interesting film using the tools you've been taught then it shows. It's boring. Everyone has to master the craft in order to expand on them in a creative way and that's where the difference is. Who can be more creative with the tools.
jcg16 2 years ago
I never meant that the playing field was even. I'm just saying that if you're a reasonably intelligent person and you stick to it, you can probably become a pretty good director. The best? Probably not, but that's a high bar.
Also, I'd say just being a rich person in film school unevens the playing field. If you have the disposable income to just keep making films then you will have more chances to get better. To use your analogy, you can afford better tools and to use them more often.
sdabrucelee 2 years ago
wow lucky to have met him :)
RardenArch 2 years ago