Is hiring a second unit director a bad idea?

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, well I could use the money to make the shorts instead, it's just I will not have any left for a feature after. So I felt like I had to just accept the hand I was dealt, and go for the feature, since I don't have money to try to practice beforehand. What do other filmmakers do when they run out of money to make more shorts, and they are forced to move towards the feature, or what do they when they are in that situation?

[Paul R Johnson]

The idea is to make products that cover costs, plus a surplus. You are looking at film making like an amateur. Nothing wrong with that but you need money. You make shorts that have some earning potential or you fund them yourself, to get the experience. There is a cost involved in getting more skilled. Alternatively you operate as crew for others. A person for hire and get better that way. It still costs you to some degree, but many do that. At some point, you move to being in charge, and you have to have budget.

Nobody is forcing you to head to the feature, but your feature is just a longer short. You struggle already. You may find a full length feature impossible.

Let’s be honest. All the grief you have had with cast, crew, locations, set, lighting, sound, vision, makeup, editing and post processes will grow exponentially and surely you appreciate you are badly prepared to cope with this. If you are beginning to realise you need help from good people, you will become a producer not a creative, your project will be distanced from you and leak away. You cannot have what you want with your ability, funds and confusion.

I’ve never met a film maker able to go from nothing to full feature without some successful smaller projects. All your projects so far have been flawed, you’ve detailed the problems here. You’ve not fixed them that we are aware. Make an advertorial for a carpet cleaning firm. It can have a story, the day in the life of the cleaner. You can use all your ideas. The job coming in, the office discussion, the travel, the clients home, the dialogue between them and the resolution. Make a mini feature they can put on their website. If it’s good you will learn from interacting with strangers and will learn from the rigidity of a client which will help your planning and product handling.

If you spend a grand on a poor short it’s better losing that than losing ten grand on a feature.

Last thing. I’m not sure you really know what a feature movie involves. Most of your comments suggest you don’t.

[Brian Drysdale]

Everything expands on a feature, it's more like an expedition into unknown mountains and everything just piles up on you everyday.. Invariably there will be re-shoots, because things don't work the way you expected, that happens with experienced crews and directors, so it's more likely on the type of film making you're involved with.

As I said, you can regard the feature as a practice piece, or even a Duke of Edinburgh award type project, just don't expect to sell the final product.

[Ryan Elder]

Originally Posted by Paul R Johnson

The idea is to make products that cover costs, plus a surplus. You are looking at film making like an amateur. Nothing wrong with that but you need money. You make shorts that have some earning potential or you fund them yourself, to get the experience. There is a cost involved in getting more skilled. Alternatively you operate as crew for others. A person for hire and get better that way. It still costs you to some degree, but many do that. At some point, you move to being in charge, and you have to have budget.

Nobody is forcing you to head to the feature, but your feature is just a longer short. You struggle already. You may find a full length feature impossible.

Let’s be honest. All the grief you have had with cast, crew, locations, set, lighting, sound, vision, makeup, editing and post processes will grow exponentially and surely you appreciate you are badly prepared to cope with this. If you are beginning to realise you need help from good people, you will become a producer not a creative, your project will be distanced from you and leak away. You cannot have what you want with your ability, funds and confusion.

I’ve never met a film maker able to go from nothing to full feature without some successful smaller projects. All your projects so far have been flawed, you’ve detailed the problems here. You’ve not fixed them that we are aware. Make an advertorial for a carpet cleaning firm. It can have a story, the day in the life of the cleaner. You can use all your ideas. The job coming in, the office discussion, the travel, the clients home, the dialogue between them and the resolution. Make a mini feature they can put on their website. If it’s good you will learn from interacting with strangers and will learn from the rigidity of a client which will help your planning and product handling.

If you spend a grand on a poor short it’s better losing that than losing ten grand on a feature.

Last thing. I’m not sure you really know what a feature movie involves. Most of your comments suggest you don’t.

Oh okay, but don't all directors need help from good people? Are you saying I should fill more of the duties myself? I thought that needing help with a collaborative process of others was normal.

[Brian Drysdale]

Directors have their collaborators, but they also have to live with the resources that they have available. You currently don't seem to have the skills required for the package as a director, The job requires that you have the vision to tell story, yet use the knowledge of their crew to fulfill this and that can involve letting these people take you to places that you never thought of.

This involves more than just selecting the camera angles, a good DP can probably do that better than you at the moment. .

Unfortunately, you don't seem to understand what people are telling you. There are pretty of examples of this in your threads here. Being able to do this and being quick on the uptake is a key skill for a director.

[Ryan Elder]

I see what you mean. Is the director allowed to get other opinions from the crew though, on if something is good, or if they feel the take is good as well and if it's working, or is the director pretty much only allowed to hear their own opinion?

[Brian Drysdale]

What you think?

The crew won't tell you directly that it's bad, but that will quietly make suggestions or how about.. The director will have the final say, but as one cameraman said to a director, "unless you're careful, I might do exactly as you say"

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay. Well it was suggested before that I should produce and let someone else direct it, but then it was now said that if I do that it'll slip away from me in a bad way.

but should I take the prior advice on that and let someone else direct if that's better for now?

[Brian Drysdale]

That decision is up to you,

Making decisions is part of a director's job. If you have difficulty with this, perhaps it's something you should factor into your decision.

[Paul R Johnson]

I'm not sure if you can watch the BBC where you live Ryan, but maybe with a VPN you could watch a TV drama - Line of Duty. It's an exceptional drama and is on I think series 5. It's got all the things you need for your feature. It also has lots of YouTube videos covering how it expands episode by episode - and the fans pick up on really tiny details - things I totally miss, so it's a real drama that has loads of discussion on the script, the action, the acting and the linking. It's a police procedural so your snags about meeting rooms are dealt with almost every episode. I learn all sorts of little tricks on better ways to do things from it. I suggest if you can do the VPN to start with series one and watch each episode a couple of times at least. It uses feature film techniques and is compulsive how to do it well production. It's actually made in Belfast and the areas in Northern Ireland, but this is very cleverly hidden in the shooting and editing. Only the locals would spot it. I didn't, and I spend lots of time there.

I'd watch it as an example of production excellence. It's the sort of programme that shows every discipline how it should be done. I'm mega impressed with everything in it. Not a weak idea or poor performance from anyone. Especially the script - it is so clever and detailed. Almost every line the actors deliver has a real purpose. Every shot is the same. If there is a cutaway, it's for an important reason, and afterwards you realise you knew, but it didn't register.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

He should hire someone who makes his decisions for him. Otherwise a coin might do.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh I didn't think that making decisions was my main problem. I have as much of the shoot planned out as could be right now, and I know a lot of what I want decision wise. My biggest worry was not being able to pull the performances from the actors and wanted someone to help with that, if possible. It wasn't a decision making problem I thought I had, it was just getting the best performances, or so I thought.

I can also live with the realistic locations even if they look bad or not very cinematic. I feel that perhaps if I can direct the performances right, then the lack of cinematography may not matter so much, hopefully.

[Paul R Johnson]

Your problem with the actors is that they are all amateurs. All the ones we’ve ever seen range from poor to simply terrible. You have a pool of incompetents. On the location issue, it’s one area that would take the heat off the poor acting and terrible script?

[Brian Drysdale]

If you want good performances casting is key, You need to invest a lot of time doing auditions to find the right actors, especially if you're using non actors.

If you're using non actors, allow more time for the filming. You seem to be shooting at a soap opera speed, which doesn't allow inexperienced actors a chance to give a performance. Soap operas are demanding on experienced professional actors and if you're working at speed you may not get the best from them,

You may have had a Marilyn Monroe in your cast, but you wouldn't have got much out of her at your shooting rate.

[Ryan Elder]

Well in the past only a few actors would show up so I would just cast the best of those to get the movie made. But how many actors should I expect to audition in order to go ahead with the rest of the movie? Do I have to have a good feeling about the actors? For example, there are stories from directors about how they were forced to work with an actor they didn't feel was right for the part at all, but still had to do it anway, and the actors still did a good job.

So could I pull a performance that is good out of an actor who you don't think is right for the role anyway, if that is what you end up having to do, if other directors have done it?