Some thoughts on producing indie shorts

And I'm not talking about boxers or briefs. I'm talking about people who produce short films. And more specifically, the directors they have to work with.

I teach at the world's largest film school... per capita, that is. We've a long way to go to actually compete with the talent output by the likes of AFI, USC, or UCLA; but that's a matter for another bloggy. Anyway, one of the things I've learned in my 7+ years teaching at this school is that we have been training directors that they are auteurs.  And the sad fact of life is, in any generation, you can usually count off the number of auteurs - real, live auteurs actually getting people to fund their films auteurs - on one hand.  If you're lucky, you might have to borrow a couple of digits from the other hand.

Now, it's true that on set, during production, the director is supposed to be in charge. But filmmaking is a business just as much as it is an art.  And if the director does not accept the producer as their partner in the business of their art, then the project is going to go straight to hell. See, in the real world the producer has been with the project before the director came along and most often hires the director. And once the director's job is done, the producer will continue to see the project to completion, then to sale and distribution and exhibition. The director might show up for a screening or two, but probably won't spend one quarter of their time on this project the way the producer will. Why? Because most of the time the producer owns the project. The director has done a work for hire and they must move on to the next job. Fact of life in the real world and as far from reality as can be when compared to what we teach.

Over the past three years I've made four short films while at my school. In that time I produced three of them and co-produced and directed the fourth. The directors for the other three films were all students from my school, and for two of those films the directors were screenwriting majors while the third was a directing major. Can you guess whose project I'm having to re-shoot this Spring?

In this case, more than the other two, the director shunned the producer's help or advice, all along the way. They put very little effort into the project and, without communicating this, expected the producer to do all their usual business as well as quite a bit of the director's business.  The result was a disaster and a number of very unhappy participants.

The fact is, the producer is the director's best friend. The cinematographer takes care of the picture, the gaffer takes care of the lighting, the production designer takes care of the set and props, and the actors do their part. But if the director does not communicate with the producer, does not work with them as a partner, then the project will exist only within that short bubble of time in which production occurs, and the result on film will be something quite different than what was planned all those months earlier during development and pre-production.

There's an old Irish saying: "A good beginning is half the work." Aye, 'tis truth.