- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
"I think directing is the most over-rated job in the world"
Posted on 2/6/19 at 3:10 pm
Posted on 2/6/19 at 3:10 pm
"it's the only one I really love in show business but I think it's tremendously over-rated." - Orson Welles
"Movie-directing, not stage-directing is the only profession in the world where you can go on being incompetent for 30 years with no one ever discovering it. I mean, utterly and truly incompetent."
Why is that?
"Because what a Director can do in a film of real value, is to do something more of what will happen automatically if the story is good and the actors are good and the cameraman, etc are good."
"If the director is actually a real cameraman, something of a cutter, something of an an actor, something of a writer, a real actor, a real writer and a real cameraman, then his contribution as a Director is a real one."
Fascinating interview:
Orson Welles, the Paris Interview 1960
It's no secret Welles perferred the stage and his work in being a theater producer/director/actor in London at such a young age in his early 20's - with Ceasar.
It's a famous interview but only really if you are in the mood for film historian insight and the time - it's an hour.
"Movie-directing, not stage-directing is the only profession in the world where you can go on being incompetent for 30 years with no one ever discovering it. I mean, utterly and truly incompetent."
Why is that?
"Because what a Director can do in a film of real value, is to do something more of what will happen automatically if the story is good and the actors are good and the cameraman, etc are good."
"If the director is actually a real cameraman, something of a cutter, something of an an actor, something of a writer, a real actor, a real writer and a real cameraman, then his contribution as a Director is a real one."
Fascinating interview:
Orson Welles, the Paris Interview 1960
It's no secret Welles perferred the stage and his work in being a theater producer/director/actor in London at such a young age in his early 20's - with Ceasar.
It's a famous interview but only really if you are in the mood for film historian insight and the time - it's an hour.
9
Posted on 2/6/19 at 4:35 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
The doc on Netflix about his unfinished “The Other Side of the Wind” movie is damned good.
Best tidbit: Welles stepped in to edit a porno so that his cameraman could wrap the gig and get back to Orson’s movie.
Best tidbit: Welles stepped in to edit a porno so that his cameraman could wrap the gig and get back to Orson’s movie.
Posted on 2/6/19 at 5:25 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
You can say this about nearly any CEO-type position. The director is the unifying vision of a film. Like nearly any organization, most of your true artists/experts are running the departments and day-to-day operations. It's a misleadingly "overrated" position.
Posted on 2/6/19 at 5:55 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Outside of the top tier directors, I think that’s an fair assessment
This post was edited on 2/6/19 at 5:56 pm
Posted on 2/6/19 at 6:01 pm to shutterspeed
quote:
You can say this about nearly any CEO-type position. The director is the unifying vision of a film. Like nearly any organization, most of your true artists/experts are running the departments and day-to-day operations. It's a misleadingly "overrated" position.
Wait are you saying it is overrated, or that it seems overrated but isn't?
Good companies (and good films) are like 99% ran by someone who either 1) Was an expert, and has the skills 2) Is intelligent enough to understand good decision making to not need to have the hands on experience 3) Is a leader who understands people, vision, and how to produce great products, film or not, with a set of talented people.
Good CEO's/Leaders/Directors often have a unique drive and set of talents that most people don't necessarily "see," but those talents are there.
Posted on 2/6/19 at 6:10 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
Best tidbit: Welles stepped in to edit a porno so that his cameraman could wrap the gig and get back to Orson’s movie.
I would like to see a film of him doing that.
Posted on 2/6/19 at 6:17 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
it seems overrated but isn't
Posted on 2/6/19 at 6:34 pm to shutterspeed
quote:
it seems overrated but isn't
Posted on 2/6/19 at 6:40 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Good companies (and good films) are like 99% ran by someone who either 1) Was an expert, and has the skills 2) Is intelligent enough to understand good decision making to not need to have the hands on experience 3) Is a leader who understands people, vision, and how to produce great products, film or not, with a set of talented people.
Good CEO's/Leaders/Directors often have a unique drive and set of talents that most people don't necessarily "see," but those talents are there.
Definitely agree with all of that
Posted on 2/6/19 at 6:40 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
The Steven Spielberg doc on HBO is really interesting to watch. He didn't just have the vision, he would literally look at a scripted scene and say eh I don't like the way this looks and come up with the shot as well as the lighting on the spot. A lot of the handheld shooting on Schindler's List was he himself running around with a camera telling people what to do in the shot. The specific shot in Saving Private Ryan of them charging up the hill at the sniper (when Giovanni Ribisi dies) was come up with on the spot because they expected the sun to be in a different location at that time of day. Spielberg said OK well let's just shoot the whole thing in the opposite direction
This post was edited on 2/6/19 at 6:41 pm
Posted on 2/6/19 at 7:19 pm to EyeTwentyNole
quote:
The Steven Spielberg doc on HBO is really interesting to watch. He didn't just have the vision, he would literally look at a scripted scene and say eh I don't like the way this looks and come up with the shot as well as the lighting on the spot.
Welles was accused of spreading himself too thin...he believed in doing everything...and he disdained Directors who would sit in a chair and yell action.
He also lost all funding from Hollywood. I don't think he thought just being a Director was terribly challenging because he had done everything personally on his stage plays in London at such an early age.
He said he loved being a Director because he could be creative but it wasn't challenging enough by itself.
We use the word auteur now. Welles was it...writing, directing, cinematography, etc. He thought Directors should have the technical skills to film a movie and should be able to put on the whole production themselves like a stage play - wear all the hats...not just direct cinematographers where to point the camera and let assistants coach the actors.
I think his point was, we think Directors do way more than they really do. As if they made the entire movie without assistants, editors, accomplished cinematographers who have their own vision, story-board men, etc.
I think Welles was so smart he wanted to dabble in everything and when Hollywood turned their back on him, he turned his back on Hollywood.
Still the best long take in movie history and he did it 60 years ago.
People would think it was awesome now if it just came out...like, how did they do that? Without computers?
Posted on 2/6/19 at 7:55 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
most good directors have a strong early grasp of their vision (storyboards, references, look books) that guides their department heads (costumes, art direction and lighting). they are decisive yet can be flexible based on budgetary, location or schedule considerations.
Directors lean heavily on the DP and a good shot list is a must .... too many times a director can come in unprepared and you don't make your shooting days. Budget issues start to creep in and it becomes a mess.
A good producing team generally can wrangle some of this, but if a director comes in unprepared they can lose the actors and crew quickly.
Directors lean heavily on the DP and a good shot list is a must .... too many times a director can come in unprepared and you don't make your shooting days. Budget issues start to creep in and it becomes a mess.
A good producing team generally can wrangle some of this, but if a director comes in unprepared they can lose the actors and crew quickly.
Posted on 2/6/19 at 10:18 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
He was most active during the 1930's and 1940's and those statements would certainly be accurate for that era. Not so much in present day.
Posted on 2/6/19 at 11:05 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Actors literally run these films and will always do so and always have. Top a listers will always have the most impact in every way and that’s what you need to pay attention to.
Posted on 2/6/19 at 11:24 pm to kale
quote:
Actors literally run these films and will always do so and always have. Top a listers will always have the most impact in every way and that’s what you need to pay attention to.
Well that depends on who the director is. If it’s some slapstick director then I’m sure they can get their way if they want
You think Leo and Samuel L were telling Tarantino how to shoot a scene or how to say the dialogue in Django? Nah
You think Downey Jr and Gylenhaal were telling Fincher “I think that’s enough takes, we don’t need to do take 37” while making Zodiac? Nah
Posted on 2/7/19 at 12:16 am to McChowder
quote:
He was most active during the 1930's and 1940's and those statements would certainly be accurate for that era. Not so much in present day.
That's what I was thinking.
But he said in 1960.
He controlled everything in his films and stage productions.
Is that true today for simply Directors? He was specifically talking about Directors that get all the credit but studios have their say, Directors aren't cinematophers...some write, some don't. They aren't acting nowadays. Some edit, most have studio editors.
But there's this perception from beginning concept to end the Director is everything...did everything. Can't mess with his vision, right?
Studios always mess with someone's vision and hire professionals change things. The studio wouldn't let Welles into the editing room to finish his movie the Magnificent Ambersons.
I think he's right when he says you only maKe a difference when you do something that wouldn't naturally occur with good actors, good script and your cinematographer.
I don't know if things are that different now.
Posted on 2/7/19 at 5:01 am to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
Actors literally run these films and will always do so and always have. Top a listers will always have the most impact in every way and that’s what you need to pay attention to.
not true on most levels .... they will certainly have input, but rarely try and take over. i worked on a terrible movie called "Dirty Grandpa" with a very nice, but not a super experienced or powerful director. De Niro and Efron took the direction as needed and didn't pull their weight. Have seen this in many other scenarios with big stars and new directors.
Posted on 2/7/19 at 12:27 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Orson Welles telling everyone he is the greatest director in a not so subtle way?
:youdontsay:
:youdontsay:
Posted on 2/7/19 at 12:29 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Orson, the trickster and contrarian.
Posted on 2/7/19 at 12:31 pm to Dr RC
quote:
Orson Welles telling everyone he is the greatest director in a not so subtle way?
ya think?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News