I was asked to be co-director on a feature film being produced by another producer/director. However, I feel that he is making a lot of the decisions, and that I am not a co-director, but more like a script supervisor , in terms of job title.

My friend says maybe this will turn out well, as I am getting a co-director credit, without really having to make a lot of directorial decisions, but maybe that is a bad thing to though, and I should try to get in on more of the director decision making process. What do you think?

This is an excellent opportunity to learn. Take it and be as helpful as you can.

Andrew

The important thing Ryan is to analyse the decisions the other person makes, decide if they were good decisions and consider if you would have done it this way or differently. You can learn from both good and bad ones.

We already told you that co-directing is fraught with problems, and you've spotted the one we pointed out before - he's making decisions without asking or consulting you. Ask yourself why you didn't make these decisions first?

The co-Directing credit is nice when it sounds like you're really assistant to, not co-director. Many assistants learn lots and then get directing jobs.

You really should have considered this when you agreed the split, the responsibilities and the roles.

There are no rules on what a co-director does. Some co-directors are experienced editors, like David Lean or DPs such as Nicolas Roeg. who bring their skills to the other, less experienced in film, director. Or, it's part of a long standing creative relationship, which may only involve one of them directing the actors, while the other is involved in other aspects that cross over. .

In this case, it sounds more like trainee/director understudy/assisting (not assistant director, that's different), how well that works depends on how good the other director is and if you're going to learn new skills. You have to think how this is going to work in the long term and what is your relationship with the other director.

Whenever I hear these situations I can only think of the comic possibilities. I can't imagine anyone enjoying someone hovering and looking over their shoulder.

Well I don't have to hover over his shoulder but I feel like I am being left out of a lot of the creative input so far, and I am not sure what my role is expected of me therefore.

Is this the one youre funding as well? If not then it may one of those perfect learning opportunities we’ve been talking about (provided the production is “legit” and not another amateur backyard jamboree).

No, the other co-director who is also the producer is funding it himself. However, one actor I worked with before in other projects, said I should put my funding it into it as well, since I have been wanting to fund a feature of my own anyway, and it's a good script to fund. I will see if he cannot fund it himself first maybe though, before making any type of decision to put my money in.

If you're funding a film you should ensure that you have a robust legal contract drawn up by an entertainment lawyer.

As a co-director will the two of you have regular meetings to discuss the work ahead, the schedule, budget, goals, potential problems and solutions? It is important to be on the same sheet of music. A day-to-day work plan about how the two of you will interact and stay congenial will be important to avoid becoming related to go-fer status.

The reason I mention this is I’m reading a book about the early years in Northwest America and circa 1770, when two Spaniards were given responsibility for the California area: Lieutenant Pedro Fages and Father Junipero Serra. Due to their competition and in-fighting for who had the ultimate authority there was a domino effect where Spain essentially lost out on a potential claim of the coast from Monterey up to where the Russians were in Sitka.

Being a director is a huge workload and responsibility with a lot of moving parts so there is no shortage of things to do. What about some sort of job description, like any agreed upon areas of responsibility or who does what? Who will track the schedule and costs (Planned vs actual)? If there is overlap responsibility the Government Salute (crossed arms with index finger pointed in opposite directions) needs to be avoided at all cost. Keep a good notebook with a binding, not a tear-out pages type.

Besides doing the work, one personal goal would be to to have a good rapport with all the others involved (or as many as possible) for good references later on.

Edit: Just read Brian's comment and really agree. Plus, your time is worth something. As a co-director, a copyright lawsuit can come after your money. How are you two taking care of all the legal aspects? If there isn't anyone I'd jump on that part.

Okay thanks. Well did have an agreement before that he would direct the actors, since he has more of a background in theater, and that I would the more technical decisions, such as the shots, storyboards, blocking, choice of focal lengths, etc. But now I feel he is doing all of that, and already has the storyboards done and decided himself, so not sure what I am doing anymore.

I feel like many folks advised you here that that might happen...

Yep I know it might happen, but I figure if I am offered a job on a feature film I should take it, even if it has problems later, rather to have just said no, just to avoid any problems along the way that might come with it.

I'm surpised you didn't think back to this forum when it was offered? We've told you this would happen many times before. I don't see why you're surpsied? Clearly the guy is able to do the things you thought you would do, so he's doing the normal director's role - you've just become his assistant as he clearly doesn't need your input. Or you could have a private chat and tell him you are not happy with his expansion into your agreed area. Mind you, if you're sharing the credit 50-50, and he's doing a good job, let him carry on and take the credit! Co-Director of a success is always more useful than a flop.

I'm not surprised, since it was said on here, before, but I only mentioned it on here after I took the job, so it wasn't offered me to after I asked about it on here. But now that it has happened, I am just wondering what to do more specifically. I can take the credit if it's going on well on his decision, making, but if it is not later on, say when shooting starts, should I have any plans in place?

You can ask to have your credit removed or to be called "Alan Smithee” in the credits. This was the DGA credit if a director wants to disown a film, it was retired in 2000, but is still used in TV etc.

BTW The director dealing with the actors will want to block their action.

Oh okay thanks. I thought about that too, but wasn't sure who should block the action, since I am coming up with the storyboards and shots.

That sounds more like storyboard artist than co director, but since there is no job description for a co-director it can cover a number of things and will vary from film to film.

Just bear in mind that the DP will also have input during the shoot, so the final piece may not be precisely the same as the storyboard. This can change due to a number if factors, including coming up with something better on the day.

Oh ok thanks. But i still have to tell the storyboard artist what to storyboard, don't I? I also don't like changing the storyboards on the shoot day cause in past experience, the new shots weren't as well thought out, cause i got too excited and came up with them spur the moment, rather than going with the original better thought out plan.

You've got fixated again on titles. In your scale of production, titles are often totally meaningless - far more important is what the individuals bring to the story. The script/screenplay is what really matters, and once read, the Director decides how too shoot it - commissioning professionally produced storyboards, or rough sketches on a pad with stick people. The problem is simply deciding how best to shoot it - and there it sounds like your co-director has it organised. You're wanting him to fit into your carefully thought through set of little boxes. The best thing about being director is simply saying - no, I don't like that, we'll dob it this way.

If you push this, one of you will win, the other lose. If you lose, everyone will follow the winner from then on. You will be clearly demoted to 'assistant to.." and lose the credibility you perhaps have now - although yet again it sounds like a repeat of past problems. You want order, planning, absolute decisions that can then be followed, but he sounds like a shoot from the hip kind of Director.

Yeah. Ryan, here’s how I think this is going to go. Right now you think have certain responsibilities; I think you will end up not even having those. You already said the agreement you came to previously isnt being respected. I foresee your boards and shot ideas etc. being overridden to the point where you really won’t have a creative hand in this project at all. You can let this happen, and go along for the ride and hope to learn things from it you can take to future projects, fight it and end up with the same result with the added bonus of humiliation, or have a real ultimatum kind of talk with this other director and bow out completely if it doesnt go your way.

Perhaps I am wrong about all of this but from what youve said, I dont think so.

You've got fixated again on titles. In your scale of production, titles are often totally meaningless - far more important is what the individuals bring to the story. The script/screenplay is what really matters, and once read, the Director decides how too shoot it - commissioning professionally produced storyboards, or rough sketches on a pad with stick people. The problem is simply deciding how best to shoot it - and there it sounds like your co-director has it organised. You're wanting him to fit into your carefully thought through set of little boxes. The best thing about being director is simply saying - no, I don't like that, we'll dob it this way.

If you push this, one of you will win, the other lose. If you lose, everyone will follow the winner from then on. You will be clearly demoted to 'assistant to.." and lose the credibility you perhaps have now - although yet again it sounds like a repeat of past problems. You want order, planning, absolute decisions that can then be followed, but he sounds like a shoot from the hip kind of Director.

Oh well what makes him sound like a shoot from the hip director compared to me. Doesn't he, like me, plan everything out as well, at least so far?

Yeah. Ryan, here’s how I think this is going to go. Right now you think have certain responsibilities; I think you will end up not even having those. You already said the agreement you came to previously isnt being respected. I foresee your boards and shot ideas etc. being overridden to the point where you really won’t have a creative hand in this project at all. You can let this happen, and go along for the ride and hope to learn things from it you can take to future projects, fight it and end up with the same result with the added bonus of humiliation, or have a real ultimatum kind of talk with this other director and bow out completely if it doesnt go your way.

Perhaps I am wrong about all of this but from what youve said, I dont think so.

Well I could go along for the ride and maybe it will turn out good, and I get a co-director credit anyway, and maybe that's good, as pointed out before. But of course I don't want any humiliation either.

It really depends on what happens on the set, some directors just use storyboards as the starting point or a fall back in case they can't come up with anything better on the day.

I've had storyboards that were shown to me, which didn't bear any relationship to the final scene as we shot it

You shouldn't blindly follow the storyboard. because you can get flaws like crossing the line in them, which can catch you out.

Oh okay, I just so far have always thought that the boards had the best ideas on cause I had more time to think of them. As for crossing the line, this always happened when I deviated from the boards, cause the boards, followed the 180 degree rule. Then I would come up with new ideas, on set, and the line then gets crossed accidentally.

But I can try to keep that in mind more if coming up with new ideas on set.

Noting which way people are facing might assist you with not crossing the line.

Yep for sure thanks. On the subject, this script has quite a bit of fight scenes in, and you see in movies that crossing the line happens more in fights, but are there guidelines there of when to cross the line, or only when it feels right?

Fight scenes are usually choreographed, so if you regard them the same as dialogue, it means that blows will appear to connect like dialogue. Unless there are multiple characters in a complex fight, with the action switching around, there's no reason to cross the line.

Since you've already got an old thread on crossing the line, there's no reason to go over old ground.

Okay thanks, it's just with fight scenes they are different cause they cross the line more though, and with different rules it seems, compared to dialogue. One person told me the reason why 24 gets away with breaking it, is because the action is always going in the same direction, if that is the key.

No they don't, you want the fight's geography to hold together so that the action makes sense. Fight scenes are often shot with multiple cameras and as the action moves around, where the line lies can change, so you may find that they use a camera which intended for one part of the scene is actually edited into another part.

There's also the mistake aspect of crossing the line, which also happens. If you've noticed them crossing the line perhaps it was a mistake or them not having any other option.

What was discussed in the other thread still holds. Unless you know how to switch the direction of the line, don't do it.

Okay thanks, it's just the last time I shot a fight scene, I found it difficult to stay on the line because of the location, and sometimes the shape of the location seems to dictate it. But there other movies that do it during action like Total Recall (1990), The Bourne movies, Terminator 2, or the TV show 24, so I can't figure out what they are doing differently to warrant it...

But let's say I keep following the rule. One time during a fight scene in a previous project, I kept knocking out all the action shots on the storyboards, but one of them had I had to cross the line on cause of how the room was shaped. I was told I shouldn't hae crossed the line there later. So should I rehearse every shot in the locations, to see if every one of them is possible with the 180 rule, then if not, back to the drawing back on each one as we go?

It's impossible to say what your issue was without knowing the details and how the shape of the room "forced" you to cross the line, but Charles Papert (who used to post on here) talked about how on Scrubs (which he worked on) they would often cheat the actors in coverage to keep their backgrounds from being an ugly wall or if they were too close to a corner etc.

The audience only knows what you show them, and you can get away with quite a lot of cheating (turn somebody 30 degrees, move them 3 feet from where they're really supposed to be, etc.). If it sells on camera, it's valid, so you can often reposition people in ways that look ridiculous if you know where they actually are compared to objects of background, but sells on camera because of compression/lens choice/depth of field. That's the way *I* would go about solving those kinds of problems.

Oh well basically the problem was, one guy had to be kicked through a door by another character, and we had to go from one room then resume shooting in the next room, on the other side of the door.

One room we were forced to shoot on one side of the room because of where the door was, and how the room was shaped. We could not shoot on the other side, cause there was no room. Then in the other room, we were forced to shoot on the other side, cause we needed more room.

You can't really cheat the actors if the rooms are not big enough to cheat in though, if that makes sense?

There’s always a way. You could have had additional shots directly in line with the doorway, so youre not on either side of it, but centered. So the guy getting kicked comes straight toward the cam or the kicker moves straight away from cam as he kicks. These shots effectively neutralize screen direction and your next shot can be on either side of the line.

Same as using a moving cam to cross the line during a shot, and subsequent shots will now have opposite screen direction.

Or you reblock the action to avoid these issues in the first place, or any one of almost infinite solutions.

Just because you plan and storyboard doesnt mean you stick to it rigidly. the plan allows you to be prepared enough to improvise when needed and know what you can get away with because you know everything inside and out.

Yep that's true, it's just that I need more time to plan and cannot do it spur the moment while shooting. So should I test out every shot before hand, and the ones that don't work, then come back to the drawing board? Cause changing shots the day of shooting without having time to review and plan them better, is what causes things to be more wrong with those shots then.

I would get good at thinking on your feet. That's part of being a director. PLans go to hell all the time.

Yeah I can try to do that better. But still want to limit the number of shots that are changed to be safe, and maybe should I still go through every shot and try to rehearse it to see if they work? Like for example, the last short film I did the storyboards were not changed and followed down to a T, and no one said anything about the 180 degree rule being broken as a result.

One simple way is around some issues is to place the camera on the line. In a fight that can mean that the character will fall towards the camera, which usually looks good and then you can place where you want for rest of the scene.

You do need to be able to think on your feet, there are reasons why, you may need to drop shots that you've storyboarded, e.g you haven't enough time to shoot the shots and you can't go back to the location. Not being able to this is a serous weakness for a director, if you can't do it, the DP will offer suggestions that you may be forced to take, because the assistant director will put you under serious pressure.

Note that the assistant director is the producer's representative on the set.

People don't always mention when you break the 180 degree rule, sometimes you can get away with it if you may have accidentally, in the action or camera placement, allowed a switch across the line. It's better if you do so knowingly and planned for it.

The 180 Degree Rule in Film (and How to Break The Line) #180degreerule - YouTube

Ryan - sometimes you just have to have courage, and believe in yourself, and stop asking other people. After all, if their opinion counts more than yours, why are you the Director?

Some people have rules that are unbendable and rigid and MUST be followed. Others believe rules are just a framework and absolutes don't exist. I have some rules forced upon me that are ultra rigid. Union rules, for example. I must follow them - even if I disagree. The worst ones are clocks ticking and in the middle of something good, you know you may have to stop for a break, or other reason. You also know if this has to be to the minute, or a bit flexible so a 5 min over-run but a 30 minute extended break and acceptable compromise that won't cause grief. That shot that will look great, but perhaps break the visual rule? WILL it look so good it knocks the rule into the corner?

Ask yourself why these rules exist in the first time? What is it trying to prevent. When does breaking it not work. For me, it was football, where many years ago, one camera position was inaccessible so I found a better one on the other side of the pitch. Left to right suddenly reversed and it was horrible to watch. Grass is green, players run everywhere, but crossing that line wrecked it for the viewer, and of course me too in the edit. In other scenes if both participants are very clearly defined, it would work fine. Imagine two football players (real football, not that thing you do in the US you think is football) one in yellow one in green, and you've got a sequence of them close in, very fast, arms and legs thrashing wildly. You could intercut wrong way shots and it would look exciting, and maybe the subliminal jump you get would add to the action, not detract from it. You could do it with the Rocky style boxing movies, you could do it with the love scene dance in a soppy movie - because it works. In a period drama in a 'new' space that the viewer needs to assimilate, left becoming right will jar and annoy. All context driven stuff. Only a foolish director would train like, follow the storyboard tracks and ignore better shots that became obvious once shooting starts.

Classic Ryan thread. A couple pages in change to a completely different subject. Then re hash topics over and over... “Or but I thought, someone told me, that rule, maybe if I plan this out more...” Honestly it’s like mental quick sand. My head hurts just reading his posts.

Okay thanks for the advice, and sorry for changing the subject, just got worried about everything.

Back on the subject, I am just worried that if I don't have a lot of control, it may turn back on me in a bad way, especially since I brought in other crew that I have worked with before so far, and they know me, but do not know this director, who is new to them. Not sure if that makes me look bad, if he seems to be making all the decisions, but maybe it's okay?

Every Director is a new sheet of paper, and you can never guess how they will work. From experience some are total pains in the bum, others who are willing to listen and then if your idea is better, they'll happily run with yours and take the credit, or pass on the blame.

I'd rather be the co-director of a great success and glean the praise from it, that the one in charge of a disaster.

The reviews of the new Cats movie - for example. Universally dreadful and so many seem like elementary direction errors that they tried to fix right up to distribution and release. All the people who worked on that movie will be thinking about how it works for or against their careers. As somebody doing lights or looking after grip - they'll not worry. The artistic folk? Not so sure?

Yeah maybe it will be all good in the end... If he is making almost all the decisions then, should I just try to be in on as much input with him and be ready to go for anything, but just sit back and see what happens then?

In these relationships you just have to ensure that your end is covered by being proactive and play it by ear as the project progresses.

Okay thanks, I can do that. Thanks.

I have another question when it comes to co-directing. I didn't say anything before cause i felt the other director who is also the writer, perhaps gets to have final say over his script.

However, there are parts in the script when characters go through changes and make decisions that I don't buy at all, character wise. I feel like the characters sometimes make decisions that are in complete service of the plot. But does a co-director have any say in if the decisions should be changed?

Co-Director doesn't tell anyone about the two job roles, or the power split. If you were a co director of a business then you'd maybe have 49% and the other person 51% - meaning you cannot make any decisions.

In your version, what did you agree about decisions. Is he executive director to your associate director or are you equally partners? (always a bad move). If the characterisations cause script conflicts then one of you will need to capitulate. Your only way through is negotiation.