Last week I discovered Ben Hughes. For those of you who haven’t heard of Ben.. you soon will. Ben has been shooting music videos and youtube videos since he was 15 years old. The difference between most of the vids on youtube and Ben’s stuff is that when he shoots something… it looks GOOD. Like, really good.

Check out his 2010 reel, which was shot when he was just 16 years old:

This reel alone is exponentially more impressive than anything the typical film school grad is shopping around. And, of course, Ben never went to film school. He’s barely out of high school! He simply picked up cameras, accessories, and editing software and spent every waking moment making movies during his teen years.

Some people have called Ben a “prodigy” which I agree with; but I also don’t think he is alone. I just think there are a lot of talented kids out there with the same amount of potential who aren’t nourishing their creative obsession, or who falsely believe that film school is the place to learn how to become a filmmaker. Check out Ben’s website benhughesstudios.com or his youtube channel and see for yourself.

And if you want to know how to start shooting real movies and getting on real film sets without film school, make sure to check out Film School Secrets.

My 22 year old girlfriend wanted to see “The Hunger Games” last weekend, so we went. I am a fan of teen fiction ever since I was a teen. But the books that caught my imagination back in the day were things like “The Dark is Rising” by Susan Cooper, “A Wrinkle in Time” by Madeline L’Engle .

They were sweeping stories that stimulated the imagination. And from the success of the “Hunger Games” book series, I can only suppose that these books are the same. My gf read the first 3 books in 3 days and was psyched to see the movie. She loved it.

I did not.

“Lord of the Rings” is the benchmark for taking a 1000 page book and turning it into a rich stand alone cinematic experience. This movie had the feeling of a rush, compressed, let’s make some quick dough production. And it’s probably why Gary Ross, the director, isn’t coming back for the sequel.

The story, in case you’ve been living under a rock for the last 3 months, is about life in the former US after some kind of rebellion and war. There’s no food and as punishment for the uprising the government has an American Idol esque event where 2 young people from each district are offered as “tribute” to fight to the death in the “Hunger Games”.

The heroine is the pretty and strong Katness played by Jennifer Lawrence; who was plucked from obscurity to become a movie star. She’s great, much better than the material. (If you want to see her really acting in a similar tough young girl up against huge odds role, go see “Winter’s Bone”).

The movie starts with a lottery where all the starving ish people put their names in a raffle and get chosen.

Unfortunately, all of the extras in the movie look like people who live in LA, San Fernando, or Orange Country wearing some ratty clothes. They don’t look hungry, or starving. They look like the Assistant Diretor said “okay people, now look sad!”

Seriously. With all the CGI available today, they couldn’t make these people look a little hungrier? Even in a world with no food starving people in the US look fatter than their counterparts in Asia.

Then the raffle is conducted by a weirdo wearing whiteface and a wig. Watching Elizabeth Banks strut around in 19th century makeup brought of flashbacks of “The Running Man” with Arnie. Campiness and weirdness taking the place of good CGI or a real sense of the “future world”.

Even in Michael Bay’s “Armageddon” there is a sense of a BIG world. Shots of the whole planet, big crowds, but also nicely planned shots of families (some overly glossy shots of the American Flag, etc.) But it feels BIG. In “The Hunger Games” we get a few interiors of a game show set and then the spend the rest of the movie running through the woods.

There are a couple of wide shots of a parade, but during the games we don’t even get an “American Idol” sense of people watching the games with any kind of reaction.

After talking with my gf I learned about all the subtle nuances from the book missing in the movie. Like the fact that the people’s makeup in the future is supposed to be even more intense, full body tattoos..etc. not costumes from a bad musical. And more info on Lenny Kravtitz’s character, that Katness isn’t really into Peeta, and all sorts of other things that are the hallmark of Hollywood assufucking a good story.

I give Gary Ross for dropping out of #2 not because the books are bad, but because they clearly are rushing things to ride a wave of popular indulgence. “Lord of the Rings” had years of tender care and pre production before filming. This did not.

I’m not a hater of teen hits. I actually enjoyed the first “Twilight” movie very much. Same with most of the “Harry Potter” movies. Jennifer Lawrence could probably act in a toothpaste commercial and make it engaging; but this movie doesn’t do justice to the book it came from.

If you want to see some really good book adaptations into movies check out “Jaws”, “Fried Green Tomatoes”, “Die Hard”, or “Out of Sight.”

One of the most hilarious reasons why film school is such a retarded idea has to do with the process through which “thesis” films are selected.

At most of the 4 year film schools, from NYU to USC, UCLA, and even smaller colleges, students are still subject to a mind boggling process of “selection” in order to shoot a simple short film. What does this mean? It means that even though students are paying up to $42,000 a year in tuition they still may not be “allowed” to shoot a short film during their time at film school.

In these upper level classes students must “pitch” their projects to the professors. Out of perhaps 30 students in a classroom, only a handful get to direct. The others have to find roles on the movie, like being the DP or a sound guy or even a PA. Which means many film students end up paying a small fortune to hold a boom pole on someone else’s project.

This isn’t an embellishment; ask the professors at USC or NYU about this process and you will see it still happens. But few people think about this when applying. “Why wouldn’t they choose my film?” most people think.

But no matter how talented or driven film students are, there are still plenty that go all the way through school without being able to make the movies they want to make.

A talented friend of mine at a lesser known film school had a casting director, script, aerial shots, storyboards and a budget for his short film.. but it was not “approved” by his professors so he couldn’t shoot it. It’s a goddamned shame. This happens all the time.

Soon after graduation you’ll have plenty of chances to get rejected, turned down, and told you can’t make a movie. But why the hell are you paying $42K to have some film geek in a suit tell you that your short film script isn’t worthy of shooting?

It’s absurd.

Even in classes where everyone gets to shoot, the professor’s “instruction” can actually be more harmful than helpful. At a place like NYU, where I went, most professors haven’t earned a living making movies for years since they got tenure. Hence, their advice on what makes a good film is not something I would trust.

I just received an email from the mother of a student who is getting her MFA in film at UCLA.  The student is from Italy and being in college allows her to stay in the states for a long period of time, so dropping out isn’t really an option.

Her Mother purchased the course because the student was having arguments with her “Professors” about the kinds of films she wants to make.

The student’s mother wrote about her daughter:

“She found the emphasis of one type of character-driven film [at UCLA] very oppressive. Your assessment of the film school approach was heartening because it made her doubt the system instead of herself.  Since following your course, she has continued with her studies ……but she doesn’t take everything they tell her as the gospel truth anymore. Which is good, because she’s a visionary, and they would have quashed that in her. Thank you for giving her the confidence to trust her instincts.”

The Mother then said she is in the process of writing and promoting her scripts to agents… but lamented that her daughter has to spend so much time “advancing”.. in other words, taking bullshit college courses for credit instead of just making movies.

No matter what your passion.. don’t be suckered into believing you need a film “Professor’s” permission to make the movies that you want to make.

And if you are a current film student in a course where your thesis project has been rejected, I say: drop out immediately, get as much tuition back as possible, and make the movie yourself.

You’ll get a lot more respect and learn more if you do.

I was 17 and in in high school when “Pulp Fiction” came out in late 1994.

Holy crap.

I first saw the movie with my parents at an art house theater in Rochester. I will never forget watching my Mom, a small woman at 5’1″, curling up into a fetal position during the  infamous “needle scene”. Nor will I ever forget the shock and laughs of the audience when Vince (John Travolta) accidentally shoots Marvin in the face.

“Pulp Fiction” is the movie I generally credit with lighting the biggest fire under my ass to make movies. It wasn’t a loud big action movie, but it had something movies to that point did not: it was different. It got you going, it was just a few stories interwoven, but it was done so originally with such jarring and shockingly creative style that it opened up my mind and heart to what is possible when making a movie.

I loved “Pulp Fiction” so much I took 9 different friends to see it… just to watch their reactions during the needle scene, the rape scene, and the Marvin shooting scene. I’d never been to a movie that got those kinds of visceral reactions.

It inspired me to realize what makes for great movies: TOUCHING, moving, or PUNCHING your audience. Good comedies make you laugh, good action movies make you squeeze your knuckles, a good drama can make you cry. Bad movies may not be poorly lit or even have bad plots or acting… but they just don’t get through to the audience. That’s why there are so many lame indie dramas out there.

When I was 17, back in the 90s, long before texting… I assumed that Tarantino had gone to USC. I don’t know why I assumed this, I think it was because I heard he was from Los Angeles. Back then the net was just a baby and you really couldn’t find out that much about your favorite stars or filmmakers. When I went to NYU I somehow assumed they were going to teach me to make movies like he did… but they did not. In fact we spent the first two years rehashing all the stuff I’d already learned in high school.

When I get emails from young people asking for advice on making movies, I now say “Watch ‘Pulp Fiction’”. Then watch it again. That’s how Quentin learned to write; from watching a bazillion movies.

October 14, 2012 will be the movie’s official 18th birthday, making the movie legally old enough to see itself. (Actually, that’s 17 right?). I can’t believe that was almost 20 years ago. Makes me feel old; but when I watch the opening credits blast out with Misirlou, I feel young again, and inspired. Fast forward to 4:20 for the adrenaline rush:

When making a movie, which is more important: having brains or balls?

Clearly you don’t want to be a complete idiot when making a movie. But you don’t need to be all that smart either.

In fact, when I was a TA at NYU, I used to check out editing equipment to graduate students. Some of these folks were in the 5th, 6th, or even 7th year of graduate school.

And many of them were thousands of dollars deep in short films. Yes, short films that took many many years to complete.

These were people getting a Master’s Degree. Something that is supposed to represent intelligence. Right?

But does it?

To me, it seemed pretty stupid to blow a small fortune on a short film and spend years doing so, when other people were spending less money making longer movies with less school.

What about people like PT Anderson or Kevin Smith who dropped out of school, had no formal instruction and just said “Fuck it, I’m making a movie.”

Those guys might not even really be as “smart” as some of these grad students. They might have lower SAT scores and even lower grades.

But they had balls.

In fact, I’d take balls over brains any day of the week and twice on February. Wait, is that a day of the week or a month?

The point is, you don’t need to be terribly smart to make a movie. You’re better of being bold. It takes courage and a little nuttiness to want to make movies. But I know there are a lot of you out there who have the balls, but you’re cutting them off by thinking you need more brains.

You don’t.

You don’t need a degree, a grade, or any instruction from a so called “Professor” to make a movie. All of the great filmmakers we love from Cameron to Tarantino definitely had talent and smarts, but neither of those things define them as filmmakers. What defines them are their balls, their willingness to take action, take risks, and get shit done.

Look at James Cameron. Mofo just dove 7 miles into the ocean in a mini submarine. Sheeeeyiiit.

You don’t need to dive to the center of the Earth to make a movie. Just write a script, get a camera, inspire a crew, and shoot one. Film School Secrets will show you how. And we’ll even show you how to hire smarties with brains from film schools to work for you too.

Many film schools now offer visual effects degrees in addition to the standard film school degree. Technically, this is a much sounder investment than a film degree, as jobs in the VFX industry are ample and should continue to grow as 3D technology gets more popular and CGI becomes part of nearly every major movie made.

Consider that the original Total Recall made back in the 90s didn’t employ many computer based VFX pros. The explosions and effects from those days were mostly models and actual pyrotechnics. But now that the movie is being remade (unfortunately) you can bet your ass the payroll includes tons of VFX artists for explosions, gunfire, and backgrounds galore.

But once again, as with film, the internet and the availability of cheaper technology and training has turned things upside down.

Visual Effects Jobs: Degree or Reel?

When I first got to LA I had a temp job doing data entry at Activision (thanks to my prestigious film degree, I’m sure). Part of my job was to file and sort resumes from candidates for programming and, more importantly, 3D artist and VFX positions at the company.

Across the board, I was shocked by what I saw. (This was 6 years ago, before I realized what a waste college is). The incredible portfolios and resumes in front of me rarely included any formal training in After Effects, 3D Studio Max, Maya, or any of the other VFX software that was around back then. Sure there were some students who went to art schools, but many of the most in demand applicants were just kids who taught themselves how to do these things.

And I realized that many of these under 25 year old geeks were being pursued by major companies for 6 figure positions.

Once again, the main factor had nothing to do with the schooling itself, but rather the quality of the images, animations, and effects you could create.

Cut to 2012, where a few thousand dollars can buy you your own multimedia workstation with professional VFX software and training tutorials. The big question is: what’s the difference between training yourself on these platforms versus school?

The simple answer is: about $85,000.

Many sites offer online training and walkthroughs training you in about every geeky specialty you can imagine. Other software companies like RedGiant include detailed tutorials on how to use their software.

At the end of the day I believe that a driven, smart, creative young person with a thirst for VFX can teach themselves a lot faster and cheaper than attending any school.

HOWEVER, compared with film school it seems like a much better investment. It’s completely absurd to pay $40,000 a year to learn where to put lights in a scene or what an f stop does. But paying that much to get personalized instruction on these complex computer programs makes more sense. Additionally the job placement stats for these majors is pretty darn good with good reason, these jobs are in demand.

By the same token, you can always find experienced VFX artists who are offering their expertise up for much less online. Personally, when I see what some kids are able to do with just a little bit of toying around with After Effects, it blows my mind. Consider this video “Cardboard Warfare”:

These guys used some imagination and some simple After Effects techniques to create realistic gunfire and action. They also used social media to make the video viral and it has more than 5 million views, all with no film school.

This other video from some guys in Italy is inspired by Dragonball Z. Fast forward to 1 minute for the good action, but they combined some FX with some decent fight choreography. If they’d shot this on a higher res camera and actually had a story it would be a kick ass part of a movie… again with no film school:

And this is just from a couple of people who probably got free training off the internet.

I suggest checking out http://www.fxphd.com/, which only costs about $300 for 3 classes and compare their cirriculum to whatever is offered at the film schools that are charging $40,000 a year and see what you think.

And finally there is videocopilot.com which has one of the best free AE tutorials available. And I’m sure the same info they give away for free here costs a ton in film school.