Left to Right: Kodak Deans Panel participants Bob Bassett, Bob Fisher, Carolyn Pfeiffer, Robert Rosen, Elizabeth Daley and Ray Fielding pose for a snapshot at the Sundance event.

Just as the future of moviemaking itself is in a perpetual state of flux, the methodology with which the craft is taught is constantly evolving. The rules of film school are changing, as students are getting easier access to the necessary instruction and equipment early on-often forgoing a dedicated film curriculum altogether. But as any successful film school grad will tell you, film school teaches you more than history, criticism and technical know-how. In fact, one of the most important lessons to be learned from a tutelage in film happens outside the classroom: personal connections with fellow students and faculty serve students well in their professional lives. In a conversation that began in Park City, UT, as part of the Kodak-sponsored Sundance Deans panel, and continued into the editorial offices of MM, the heads of some of the country's top film education programs came together to discuss the importance of an education in film and its relation to the state of cinema. Moderated by Bob Fisher, owner of CCS Communications, a public relations firm in Carlsbad, CA, and a freelance writer who has contributed over 1,000 articles on the art of cinematography over the past 25 years, the participants include: Elizabeth Daley, dean of USC's School of Cinema and Television; Bob Bassett, dean of Chapman University's School of Film and Television; Florida State University dean Raymond Fielding; AFI's vice-dean and master filmmaker-in-residence Carolyn Pfeiffer; UCLA School of Theater, Film and Television dean Robert Rosen; Dale Pollock, dean of the North Carolina School of the Arts' School of Filmmaking; David Lyman, founder of the International Film and Television Workshops in Rockport, ME; and David Pfeil and Jack Isgro, executive director and director, respectively, of the Motion Picture & Television program at San Francisco's Academy of Art College.

Bob Fisher (MM): Among your student bodies, are you seeing more diversity than we're actually seeing in the industry today?

Elizabeth Daley (ED): As a group, if we sat down as a faculty at USC and asked what we were most concerned about, it would be diversity because we have had 30 percent women for years and that is not enough. It should be 50 percent, and in some programs it is 50 percent.

Ray Fielding (RF): I don't think it's any secret that minorities and women have been systematically excluded from positions in the film industry for many years-and we have a long way to go to overcoming that. At Florida State, about 40 percent of our students are women and we're pleased with that.

Dale Pollock (DP): Our student body is 18 percent students of color, and 38 percent female. We have a much larger number of female students going into directing and cinematography than is the norm in the industry, and the same is true for our black and Asian students. Because we are a Southern school, we draw on a large African-American population in the Southeastern United States, and many of our graduates of color go on to work in the industry in far greater numbers than the actual percentage of minorities working in the film and television industries today.

MM: Are students today interested in learning about moviemaking as auteurs, or as a collaborative art?

Bob Bassett (BB): Students often come to film school thinking they are going to direct, but soon realize that they can't do too much by themselves. [They learn] that film is very collaborative and, perhaps more important than that, that there is an art to collaborating. If anything I think that what is good about film schools is they create a community. It's important that filmmakers be part of a community-that they rely on each other, get the best DP, sound designer, costume person and then rely on that person to get creative input.

North Carolina School of Arts’ School of Filmmaking Dean Dale Pollock looks on as his students work on a film.

RF: A lot of it too depends on the mission of the school and philosophy. Our school emphasizes teamwork. Our mission is to prepare people for careers in the professional industry, whether above the line or below. I guess the director will always be the star performer, like a quarterback, but what good is a film without artistry and cinematography and editing and writing and all the other specialties? Auteurism can only go so far without the support of other people.

Robert Rosen (RR): I was at a program with Quentin Tarantino who asked an older, wiser filmmaker 'How do I put my vision on the screen?' The filmmaker said 'You don't put your vision on the screen. You talk to and work with others who put your vision on the screen.' One of the important points is the ability to articulate what you are doing, what your vision is, and to communicate that to other people who may have their own vision and artistry and ultimately get something that is coherent and personal up there.

Carolyn Pfieffer (CP): AFI believes strongly in collaboration. Even though you choose your discipline when you come in, each thesis film goes with its full team into each discipline for a thorough discussion, both prior to production and after production-so that it's seen by the entire team. You can't make movies if you don't collaborate, period.

DP: Our program is based on collaboration, and we do not embrace the auteur theory. Students have to fill all production positions in the first two years of our program, and that builds a strong sense of collaboration. We also prohibit writer-directors from directing their own screenplays in years three and four of our program. In one of those years, they must direct someone else's work. We do not allow the 'film by' credit, and we insist that the producer, director, screenwriter and editor all have a strong say in the final cut of a student film.

David Lyman (DL): There is a lot of ignorance-and arrogance-among film students. They do not know how motion pictures are made, but think they do. Some of this is good, but it does lead to a lot of frustration on the part of these students when they cannot realize their vision because of a lack of technical know-how and awareness of methodology. Collaboration is certainly a part of it, and getting people to work together is always a challenge of any educational institution.

David Pfeil & Jack Isgro (AAC): We overwhelmingly stress collaboration in filmmaking. Each motion picture student is required to take a core curriculum of studies which will put them in specialized classes focusing instruction separately in producing, directing, cinematography, etc. However, they are encouraged from the beginning to approach filmmaking collaboratively-to form their teams and to work on their projects focusing on that skill which they perform best and to depend upon each other to hold the standard in each of their respective areas. By each team member focusing on a specialty and working collaboratively, the overall standard of work can be held much higher.

MM: On the subject of collaboration: the pressure for students to get into festivals like Sundance is high. How does this competitiveness between students affect whether or not they can work well with each other?

ED: What I hear a lot is 'You don't survive if you don't learn to collaborate,' so people tend to collaborate with each other if, for nothing else, enlightened self-interest.

RF: As far as the film schools are involved, someone once said there is more hype in running a film school than there is in running a studio. There is a good deal of competitiveness and sense of family amongst graduates; they do stick together. I recall when I was at USC and George Lucas was talking to a group of students. You don' t realize it, but the people that will be most important to you for the first year or two or three are sitting right next to you.

RR: There are two parts to the question. First, I think there is a certain reasoning that says if people are put into a highly competitive situation, it will replicate the experience they will have in the industry. I think that's bullshit. I think it stifles creativity and risk-taking. Basically, we try to minimize the competitive situation because everyone is going to make their own movies. They'll have other people that work with them and will work for other people, but everyone will make their own films. The goal here is to make people take risks. If you are going to fail, fail spectacularly and do it in film school. Move on and learn those lessons and continue to take risks-though with more intelligence-in the future as well.

The second issue is somewhat different and it is among the various areas of study. The biggest problem we have is that directors, producers and writers tend to operate within their own worlds. To get the producers to realize, when they are putting together scripts they're going to sell, that some of the best scripts are being written by our screenwriters. That 'a ha' experience has come to a few and they have had some amazing success. And later on people will tend to find one another, but actually getting people to work across those boundaries is a bigger challenge for us.

CP: Our Fellows put together their own crews, so they go through collaborative selection and we give seminars each semester on the importance of collaboration and we emphasize and emphasize it. But another thing we do is have a lot of visits and guest seminars from established alumni. They talk at length about how the film school experience was particularly important because they bonded with people that they have worked with their entire careers. It's really good for them to hear that and understand that they are probably going to meet the people they are going to work with their entire career at film school.

DP: Our program is designed to reduce competitiveness among students. We believe in a level playing field, which is why the School of Filmmaking pays for all production costs on all film and video projects made at the school. In addition to supplying all equipment and access to our three stages and location "house," we supply all tape and film and all processing costs. Additionally, we give each filmmaker a cash budget, which ranges from $250 for a 10-minute video production to $5,000 for the 20-minute senior thesis 16mm film. We also make all festival submissions and pay for them on behalf of our students. We believe these policies greatly reduce the rampant competitiveness I have observed at other film schools, and bonds our students more closely together.

MM: Who are the current or past moviemakers who are the role models for today's students?

DP: We teach the works of all the great filmmakers because we have an unparalleled motion picture archive, with 35,000 16mm and 35mm prints and 6,000 videos and DVDs. Orson Welles, Akira Kurosawa, John Ford and Howard Hawks are considered classic directors at our program, along with countless others. While Martin Scorsese, David Fincher, Baz Luhrmann, David Lynch and the Wachowski brothers are favorite contemporary directors.

ED: Our students would probably answer you that they look to a lot of filmmakers, depending on who they are. One of the things that happens at USC is that we make everyone-we don't care who it is-take a lot film history, international cinema, film theory and criticism. So I would say the students are enormous admirers of the great European filmmakers, the French New Wave and Italian cinema. We teach an entire course on Hitchcock, so they're all great admirers of Hitchcock. They're also admirers of younger filmmakers and some of the more radical filmmakers. I think what we're pushing is variety so students can look at lots and lots of models.

BB: I would say there are a mix of people that students admire. Alumni may say Clint Eastwood or Robert Redford, people who can get the picture made. It's interesting how their heroes change once they get out into the business.

Students at the International Film & Television Workshops collaborate on a project.

RF: Students are idiosyncratic. They will fasten individually upon someone that excites them, that has something to say to them and says it well. I'm not sure if there is a pack, an agreed upon collective on who is important to the film industry in the past or present. Also, film students being the arrogant carnivores that they are take a certain amount of pleasure in attacking and criticizing major filmmakers-that's part of their education. They'll get over it when they make films in the business.

AAC: Each of our students takes film history as part of their core requirements. They develop a respect for all the usual milestone filmmakers from the industry's inception to now. We hear a lot lately about Aronofsky, Fincher, Nolan, Ritchie, Boyle, Linklater, Jarmusch and the Coens, among others.

DL: That's difficult to say. There is still some "star power" and interest in listening to the older, more established filmmakers. But the students also want to listen to the new, younger filmmakers who are outlaws, and have succeeded by not following the rules.

MM: Can you talk about how you are trying to integrate your alumni into your program?

DP: Since our school has only graduated six classes (including this year's), we can keep close tabs on our relatively small number of alumni. We do an email newsletter twice a year, and host an alumni panel when we take our graduating seniors out to Los Angeles for an industry screening of their films and a week of panels and seminars each June immediately following commencement. We have an active and involved alumni group, which provides invaluable contacts for our new graduates each succeeding year.

DL: Many of our alumni are now teaching here. Others serve in support roles on campus, helping the newer film students make their own films.

AAC: Alumni are brought back each semester to speak to students about their post-graduate experiences-their successes and their difficulties. We do this in an event called "Career Seminar." We also have regular visits by graduates wanting to stay in touch with former classmates and us. Often, as well, they are in touch with each other, regularly working together on professional projects.

ED: USC is the alumni's school. I take care of it, but it's their school. It always has been and always will be. Major decisions about the school are made in concert with alumni. They come back and teach; they have an enormous sense of ownership, which we want them to have. We created a brand new Website for them, trying to help them stay in contact with each other? I can't conceive of the school without the alumni.

CP: We have a breakfast for each discipline and invite the alumni from that discipline to meet with the fellows so that they can talk of their experiences post-AFI and allow fellows to discuss their fears, desires, whatever they want. The best ally that any school has is a happy alumnus. There's no one that is going to sell your school better than someone who has had a good experience with your school.? MM